Is the world we live on flat? According to Thomas L. Friedman, it is. In his book ironically titled, "The World is Flat" he discusses his reasoning. He refers to the different contributors as flatteners. It makes you wonder if he picked that title because he knew it would draw attention to it and spark people's curiosity. Like many others that have reviewed the book, I don't like how he goes through such a huge explanation as to why the world is flat. It proves that the title was not generated creatively, but purely to draw attention. Aside from the title I have really enjoyed the book and the stories are very interesting that he shares. In the first section he introduces three different levels of Globalization, the Berlin Wall, and Netscape.
A large part of the first part of this book is the discussion of the different phases of globalization that the world has gone through, in Friedman's eyes. The first, entitled Globalization 1.0 spans from 1492 to the year 1800 when Christopher Columbus discovered the American continent. The second phase was then called globalization 2.0 spanned from 1800 to the year 2000. Lastly, globalization 3.0 began in 2000 and continues today.
During the first era of globalization it wasn't businesses but it was countries and governments. The fall of the Berlin Wall was a large event that opened up the area economically. This definitely was a flattener, in a very literal sense. Many things changed after this event that have shaped the world as a whole.
The timeline of each phase makes sense to to me. The year 2000 was a big turning point with a lot of things with the Internet and technology in-general. I think that in the last few years it has escalated even faster than it did in 2000 with the advancement of smart phones and portable tablets. So many things have played a huge role in getting us to where we are today that it's hard to pin point one specific thing. All in all, every new discovery of technology has somehow contributed to put us where we are today.
One other flattener to getting us where we are at today has been the creation of the world wide web (WWW). The WWW has changed us in ways that we never could have imagined. Shopping can be done in the comfort of your home, with the product being processed through another end of the country, while the product gets shipped from overseas. Definitely a flattener that continues to flatten our world and make us feel like the water and mountains no longer separate us.
The beginning of this whirlwind called the Internet started with a simple browser called Netscape. This browser brought the Internet to a wider audience, which made people realize the power that it contained. Netscape was closely followed by Windows 95, which brought native support to the world and made getting online even easier. From that point on the sky has been the limit as to where it will go next. With faster computers and faster connections we have the world at our finger tips.
Because of this advancement alone the world as we know it (and as Friedman knows it) has become flat. We are closer then we ever have been before. Businesses can outsource work much easier, and communication is a click away. Sometimes I wonder if the sky is even the limit to what will be coming next.
2 comments:
I think that the title is not merely for attention, but making a clear statement about world affairs. The world being flattened means that we as individuals now have an ever increasingly level playing field with which to play on. The world is no longer being changed by kingdoms and the super rich. We can now individually have an impact on world events. We can now broadcast atrocities inflicted on us by our governments, without journalists, thus changing world opinion/actions. We can now raise money through websites to make a better life for those we have never met. The world being physically round never really inhibited any of these things, but our ability to do things with other nations thousands of miles away instantly, has "leveled" our abilities on a planetary scale.
Thanks for your comment. I guess I didn't quite understand the opening of this book as much I would've liked to. Your comment has helped me see that and helped me along the way.
Post a Comment