Rating: 
Summary: Useful but Overlong
Review: Friedman's book is interesting. Don't let the subtitle, "Understanding Globalization", cause your eyelids to droop. The thesis is that globalization is neither inherently good or bad, nor is it a murky notion that sprang from the minds of computer nerds and investment bankers. Instead, it is an organizing principle, a system and not just a phenomenon. In fact it is THE organizing principle of the now and future. A system spawned by the erosion of the political and technological walls of the Cold War. Unlike the wave of globalization a century ago that was predicated on improvements in transportation, this one is based on information technology. Computers and the internet revolutionize everything because decisions can be made at light speed, information is freely available to all, inefficiencies are exposed, and non-democratic systems are punished. In many ways, globalization is pure democracy. Friedman persuasively argues that democratization of information, technology, and investment capital destroyed all economic models save free market capitalism. The result is that countries find themselves in a 'golden straitjacket', where the must adhere to free market capitalism, and profit handsomely from it, or whither. Further, as more countries develop the capitalist structure, their points of competition will be their "software": effective political systems, judiciaries, schools, etc. The corollary is that states that fail to don the golden straitjacket are making decisions against their own self-interest, and in this unpredictability lies instability and danger from states that refuse to join. The book is interesting, it is certainly useful in organizing thoughts about globalization, but it is overlong. The 475 pages in this edition could easily have been trimmed by one-third. The problem is that Friedman's engaging anecdotal style makes the material accessible and boils complicated ideas down to simple examples; it makes the book easy to pick up and page through. But at the same time, the folksiness makes it run on and on. Sometimes one story blends into the next, without much thought given to the overall point of the chapter, and after a few hundred pages, the chapters seem all alike. I enjoyed it, but too often I found myself skimming to move on and get to the next topic.
Rating: 
Summary: Simplistic?
Review: This book is built upon an intriguing premise: that globalisation has taken the place of Cold War politics and that countries and companies must become more competitive and transparent or they will fail. But Freidman doesn't do much with this premise; he backs up the fairly obvious point of the book with nothing more than weightless anecdotes. What exactly is the reader supposed to learn from the fact that a waiter in Japan accidentally served Freidman orange juice when he asked for oranges, or from the fact that it was exciting to find a cell phone in a car ten years ago but that everyone has one now? Freidman seems to think that isolated examples of individuals' intelligence or stupidity are always indicators of a broader theme. For example, he "proves" that the world has changed beyond our wildest imaginations by mentioning the example of the Long-Term Capital Management Hedge Fund. Freidman says that the two Nobel prize-winning economists behind LTCM were victims of globalisation when their fund failed and had to be bailed out. The facts, as Freidman states them, are that the fund's managers decided to borrow reams of $$ to invest in Russian Treasury bonds that paid 40-70% interest based upon a statistical model,that they were under the impression that their model was fairly risk-free and that they were surprised when the bonds defaulted. Freidman thinks that this shows how vulnerable we are to global events. But Freidman doesn't seem to entertain the possibility that the fund managers, like many before them, simply made a colossal mistake by putting a lot of money into worthless investments, a mistake that didn't have much to do with globalisation. Freidman does this over and over. Freidman doesn't understand much below the surface of finance and thus is consistently overly impressed by what financial sources tell them; he can't really judge what executives and bankers are telling him below faced value. In another example, Freidman talks about how most businesses have been commoditised and how companies have thus decentralised all of their management capabilities in order to democratise the decisionmaking process and provide tailorised service to customers, something that he says can never be commoditised. Freidman obviously got this garbage from corporate executives (he mentions Cisco), and seems to believe it wholeheartedly. But hasn't he seen how much customer service has declined in the past decade, and how corporations have become so centralised, in fact, that nobody who runs a branch office of a bank or a hotel has any decision-making power at all? If you are looking for a short, happy political history of the world since the Cold War, this may be a good place to start. I would recommend this book to high school and college students or to people who don't have much experience in the marketplace who are looking for a head start. But if you have been in the work force for more than a couple of years and you know some things about finance, or if you just read the newspaper every day and know a little bit about what's been going on in the world, get another book, because this one just belabours the obvious. Freidman also never learned not to end his sentences with prepositions!
Rating: 
Summary: Brilliant but not Balanced
Review: I revere Tom Friedman, but not in this book. His "take" on the internet and globalization seems thin to this reader. He does come up with ingenius schemes, as is his wont, but they really don't fly here, don't capture the mulitude of realities about Either the internet Or Globalization. He's a genius, as most of us know, but he didn't dig deep enough in "The Lexus and the Olive Tree" to win me over. He's gotten too "cute" which belittles his many talents and his subject as well.
Rating: 
Summary: Well, he's no MILTON Friedman
Review: While primarily about world economics, Thomas Friedman's book also portrays globalization as the "democratization" of information and technology. In the current PC trend against patriotism he proudly proclaims himself to be a "Globalist." Regarding economics: Sweeping theories for world wealth building are brought to us by one who, bought Russian T-bills and "got creamed." His view of global democracy is equally idealistic. He believes the internet has made information available to even the lowest on the socio-economic ladder and, "...what it means is that the days when governments could isolate their people from understanding what life was like beyond their borders or even their village are over." (pg. 67) I'm sure he means well, but let's not pave the information highway with good intentions... we know where that leads. In my view, globalization is only a new term with the oldest of motives... greed! With the replacing of nationalism by one-worldism we can cloak exploitation of cheap labor with the ultimate "trickle-down" and feel good about the "shareholder value being created." A century ago immigrant labor worked on the railroads and in our sweatshops, now we have sent our shops where the labor is. Who cares that rice paddies are polluted with plating solution - a pack of screws is several cents cheaper and besides , eventually they will have an OSHA of their own. As for knowing through the internet - this assumes people can read, can read multiple languages (at least English) and that the information is truthful. Moveable type may have been touted in the same way and we know that didn't solve much where money and power are at stake. As for truth, the author used to report the weather from Beirut by asking down the hall, "Hey, Ahmed, how does it feel out there today?" From The Wall Street Journal (June 9, 2001), In Asia, It's Not a Wide-Open Web, The Big Internet Companies Often Censor Their Sites To Please Local Officials. The article concerns reports that China is, "...harvesting organs from Chinese prisoners who had been executed, including some not quite dead." "Yahoo didn't carry the story: in China itself." "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" T.S. Eliot, 'Choruses from "The Rock". Globalization may be inevitable, so is death, but most of us would like to put it off as long as possible rather than invite into our homes. T. Davison
Rating:
Summary: Lexus & the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization
Review: My copy was the updated 2000 version. I thought the book was very well-researched, funny, full of fitting anectdotes, and a surprisingly quick read. My only complaint is re: the last chapter. It was incredibly partisan, finger-pointing, and otherwise left a bad taste in my mouth. I was so disappointed and shocked at Friedman's specific "last minute jabs" to those of different political beliefs and his egregious display of partisan politics...that I had to reread a prior chapter just to get the good feeling back. He would've done well to have just left the last chapter completely off. Instead, it immediately made me question his integrity as a reporter and wonder about his hidden political agenda.
Rating:
Summary: Apologist for Globalization
Review: Friedman is perhaps the foremost apologist for globalization. He believes that the spread of American-style "free trade" and state capitalism is inevitable and desirable. But he completely ignores the human consquences of corporate globalization - for example, he declares that NAFTA was a "win-win-win" arrangement, despite the fact that after its passage, 8 million Mexicans fell from middle-class to poverty status, and 1 million more Mexicans were working at below-minimum-wage levels. He also claims that America should be the "role model" for the rest of the world. Really? Let's remember that America has one of the worst child poverty rates among comparable nations, and exhibits the greatest disparity between the rich and the poor. Yet we are supposed to be proud of our economic state, so proud that we want to force it onto developing countries. How noble. If you want a realistic, powerful assessment of globalization - if you want to know what the real consequences are for the working people of the world, I suggest Noam Chomsky's "Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order."
Rating:
Summary: Intelligent, somewhat opinionated
Review: A well researched and definitely a thinking man's book. Addresses key issues sorrounding globalization, advances in information technology and our shrinking planet. Although the writer definitely appears to have a pro-capitalist bias, his concise and intelligent style provides one with a well-thought out and enjoyable read.
Rating:
Summary: A mostly accurate portrayal of the modern world system
Review: In The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Thomas L. Friedman gives us a mainly accurate portrayal of today's global system, backed up by considerable personal experience. This book is certainly interesting, and I agree with Friedman's assertion that the individual has become much more important in today's post-Cold War world. However, I think he glorifies the Internet as the end-all-be-all of today's world. As the recent downturn of the .com industry has shown, the Internet has not come to dominate how people communicate or do business but simply provided them with another means of doing so. Also, I think Friedman criticizes those countries that have chosen to limit the power of the Internet a little too harshly. After all, economic well-being is not all that matters in life, and some leaders and citizens may feel that the Internet is not yet regulated enough. Still, I think Friedman is pretty realistic in his views, and for the most part he tries to strike a balance between economic openness (The Lexus) and cultural preservation (The Olive Tree). I would recommend this book, especially to those interested in today's international business world.
Rating:
Summary: a trippy read that encompasses wit and knowledge
Review: I picked up the book when someone made me read a section of it while sitting in starbucks (hehe...he) It was the portion of a rather serious political satire involving Mahatir (prime minister of malaysia) i thought it was, to say the least engaging, even somewhat hilarious. I lived in Kuala Lumpur 7 years of my life and it just added more dimension to an otherwise really trippy read. Despite the globalization theme looming over the book, which I've always been wary off, i think it actually hit the mark for conveying something substantial with added humour to keep you going, overall a very interesting read that conveys substance of world history, political undertones, economic issues and financial trends that influence us as a whole from the macro to the micro level. Not quite nerdy... at all hehe
Rating:
Summary: An Elitists view of Globaization
Review: Perhaps the most provocative and disturbing concept that sprang out at me while reading this book was the sentiments of our global neighbors. Friend and foe alike see the United States as the "center of global arrogance". That is, when America projects its huge presence it does not go forth humbly. Reading this book will do nothing to assuage that notion. In fact, I would be first to nominate Friedman as Emperor of the United States of Arrogance. In short, like most of the decidedly elite circles he travels in he simply knows what's best for everyone. And true to form he offers numerous contradictory assessments of the role government should play in every aspect of human interaction. He also seems to be oblivious to the fact that people around the world define themselves by more than just the size of their portfolios and investments. Amazingly he all but ignores the spiritual aspect of the human condition. The spread of religion could easily be looked upon as the original globalization, yet it doesn't seem to factor in for Mr. Friedman. In the last section of the book Friedman chooses to lecture the reader rather than present more than one viewpoint on how we'll get to the promised land of Global Utopia. It backfilled the entire book with one contradiction after another. In defining the role the United States should take in leading the world into this new era of globalization Friedman asks us to listen to him think out loud. His idea of a Rapid Change Protection Plan or whatever he calls it makes the New Deal seem trifling by comparison. You might as well call it the Big Deal. He goes on to complain about the Clinton Administration getting off track with its power grab of the America's health care system as though there were nothing wrong with the plan itself but just in the way the debate was framed. In other words, if it had only been justified as necessary for America to integrate into the globalized, interconnected world then it would've been all too obvious. With that argument almost any power grab could be justified. How long before the airline business is declared vital to global integration and needs to be controlled by the government. Then what? How long before all the airlines are controlled by one global authority to ensure successful global integration. One World isn't inevitable; it may not even be possible, but there are a lot of people trying to push us there. Is Friedman one of them? I would have to say yes. He speaks nothing of the American constitution or of national sovereignty. He clearly believes that the free market model of the United States is the inevitable winner of the ideology wars, but he sees it as a global model, fully supporting the World Bank, the IMF, the WTO and a world tribunal. He states that it is time to put down the Green Berets and pick up the blue helmets. The people standing in front of this speeding train oppose it vehemently but for widely divergent reasons. Violent protests are carried out whenever the WTO meets. Anarchists and environmentalists see consumption driven capitalism as the root of all evil. Big American labor, suppliers of the consumption fodder want protection from the cheap labor in the world's poor countries. Big business wants cheap labor and less government interference, seeing a borderless world as a plus. The markets just want profit. The walls have come down, the floodgates opened and the world gets a little smaller everyday. If there is one point Friedman makes exceeding well is that the world is changing at a mind numbing pace. Some level of globalization is inevitable and even desirable. I just think we ought to reserve our sovereignty, honor our constitution and keep our guard up. Just like the fifty United States that serve as small experiments of democracy, so too are the nation states of the world small experiments of competing governing strategies. And just like Americans who enjoy the benefit of common standards and practices so too should the rest of the world. We may all be Americans but we are still Texans and Virginians, Minnesotans and Arizonans. The United States is not by any means a perfect nation; but we learn from our mistakes and have the ability to correct injustices. Despite the scorn from our friends and enemies as well as our own schizophrenic self-loathing America still serves as the beacon of freedom and liberty for the rest of the world. Tolerance of all cultures and religions is a must. I cannot imagine a One-World government dominated by the most populous (and murderous) nation on Earth adhering to the principles of freedom of speech and religion. China is as dangerous to freedom and liberty as anything we have ever seen since the birth of our nation. As Paul Harvey says, it is not one world.
| 
