The world is not flat

Well, as many NineShift fans also like and compare the book to Thomas Friedman's The World is Flat, this is hard to write.  Keep in mind that pilots don't like flying jokes. And authors- -  like cooks, relatives and competitive people in general - - find it hard to be compared to other cooks, relatives and authors.

So, here's where I disagree with Friedman.

* The world is not flat.
Not literally, figuratively, nor economically.  Global economics came into being in the 1880s, according to British historian E.J. Hobsbawm, and much of the world, including Africa, Latin America, the Mideast, and much of Asia, is not competing directly nor indirectly with America.

* America did not invent the 21st century.
Ameri-centrism is neither reality, nor is it helpful to mislead a nation into thinking it created the most important forces impacting the world.  Oddly, his "the ten forces that flattened the world" were all created by Americans.  In reality, the single most important force that has changed the world is the WorldWideWeb, invented by a Brit. The web is not even on Friedman's list.  Sorry, but UPS fixing laptops doesn't come close to being one of the ten most important forces. This lack of perspective is what doomed the British Empire 100 years ago.

* An oil based auto economy is neither possible nor beneficial for the U.S.
   "Give me $10 a barrel oil," he says on page 462. But America and post-industrial countries can neither can run on wasteful oil consumption, nor should they.  This is part of the last century, not this one. $10 a barrel oil would destroy humanity in about 65 years. This perspective also has unavoidable undesirable human and political consequences, like invading countries to get their oil, which unfortunately Mr. Friedman supports.

* "We get our share" (page 469).
"Our share" currently is having 4% of the world's population getting and using, by whatever means necessary, 35% of the world's resources.  Somehow Americans have to understand that the other 96% of the world does not think we have an inherit right to a disproportionate share of the world's resources.

Those are some of the main differences between NineShift and World is Flat.
How do you compare the two books?

Comments

[thebizofknowledge.com]

This was quite illuminating, considering how we tend to rather arrogantly feel that global economics only came into being with the advent of air travel! Yet, in actuality, we have had world trade going on for many years before that!

[William Draves]

Cem (and Harold and others too), great comments. Since you asked:
"You don't think India and China are competing with U.S." My response: correct, they are NOT competing with the U.S. In manufacturing, they have already won the game. U.S. has no chance of trying to compete with them in manufacturing sector. And as far as technology goes, I agree with Friedman (!) that India and China actually open up markets for us.

"Are you saying global economics is not a new concept?" Yes, although this is not an original idea with me. Again, the British historian says that global economics emerged around 1880. My take on World War I and World War II is that they were both about global economics and the fight for global resources. Thanks for asking Cem. On to lunch!

[Cem Erdem]

Oh, by the way, if anybody would like to see Tom Friedman's speech at MIT, here is the link.

http://mitworld.mit.edu/play/264

Thanks to Maria Phillips from Polaris Career Center for sharing this link with me.

[Cem Erdem]

Bill, despite your warning I read your last comment and yes we are still on for lunch next week :-).

I don’t think we are far apart in our thinking. I agree with your comment that our Ameri-centric view of the world has to change. We need to raise not Americans but world citizens. The moment we start feeling entitled is the moment we start our demise. We have a lot of examples from history; Romans, Ottomans, British Empire.

Asking for $10 a barrel oil is quite arrogant of us, isn't it? Especially when we use 40% of world's oil, 23% of world's natural gas, 23% of world's coal even though we constitute only 5% of the world's population. Considering that there are still 2 billion people with no electricity, it is not hard to comprehend the third world anger and envy of US.

Yes, give us $10 a barrel oil so we can continue to drive our Hummers to grocery stores. Let us influence you make that decision with our military budget which is as much as the REST OF THE WORLD's total military budgets combined. Even if you add Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, N Korea, Sudan, Syria, China and Russia together, their total military budget is only 1/3 of US.

Well I can go on and on on this subject. I need some clarification on your first point though. You don't think that India or China is not competing with US? Are you saying that global economics is not a new concept?

[Harold Jarche]

How do I compare the books? I actually purchased Nine Shift :-)