Analysis of The Changes in Global Society in The World is Flat

In Thomas Friedman’s “The World is Flat 3.0,” the author discusses the changing in global society from a disunited world to one which is more interconnected. Through careful analysis on the top global issues, Friedman has distilled the most potent “flatteners” that cause our world to connect on a global level, making our planet a more level society. He talks about the ten flatteners of the world: the forces of our changing society that contribute to the shrinking of global society. Some such forces are Netscape, insourcing, outsourcing, supply-chaining, and others.

Friedman has many valid points in regards to Globilization. He talks about a “flat society,” meaning that all people live on a more equal playing field. Forces such as Informing, The Steroids, and Netscape bring people in third world countries or the impoverished in the first world information and connectivity to the rest of the world. However, despite the benefits, the downside is that it can be expensive to keep up to date with technology, and some areas of the world do not have reliable broadband access, which restricts the lowest class from the ability to keep up with the rest of the world as it advances. Outsourcing is also a great way to expand commerce into the third world.

A common opposing view is that outsourcing cuts jobs from American citizens, although this may really be part of a larger issue of overpopulation. Lastly, I would not agree with Friedman on his first flattener, the destruction of the Berlin Wall. While I agree that this was a symbol of the world uniting after a century of world wars, I don’t think it can qualify as a flattener for a more technical reason. The other nine flatteners are constantly ongoing forces that continue to develop and bring the world closer together, whereas the destruction of the Berlin Wall was a one time event that functioned more of a launchpad than a continual force.

The Millennium Project defines fifteen global challenges which are the top threats to global society. This provides a plan for governments, private sectors, and NGOs to attack the top global issues in order to create a better world. The list is, in order of most to least critical: Sustainable Development and Climate Change, Clean Water, Population and Resources, Democratization, Global Foresight and Decision Making, Global Convergence of IT, Rich - Poor Gap, Health Issues, Education and Learning, Peace and Conflict, Status of Women, Transnational Organized Crime, Energy, Science and Technology, and Global Ethics. This is a very good guideline for the world’s top challenges, and covers nearly all of the bases. That being said, I would group some of these items differently, and re-order them based on my own personal beliefs.

I agree that “Sustainable Development and Climate Change” should be first on the list. While there are many other imperative challenges facing the world, climate change affects all of us. Though this may come across as selfish, it is an important factor that while millions of people have little to no access to clean water or food, not all people are affected by poverty. However, all seven billion people on the planet are affected by climate change, which makes it a more pressing issue. Furthermore, climate change affects the future of humanity as well, and will only get worse if the current situation does not change. I am glad the the Millennium Project included sustainable development in this category, but I may argue that clean water and energy should be included as well, making the list item a more broad entry of environmentalism. Environmentalism not only combating climate change, but also taking into account the developments in clean and sustainable energy, pollution in air and water, and access to clean water. My next list item would be Education.

I believe that most political conflict and discrimination can be solved with proper education. Many terrorist organizations and dictatorships rely on brainwashing and hate preaching, and many conflicts between ethnic groups, such as the Israeli/Palestinian conflict stem from improper education about the opposition. My third list item would roll poverty, the rich-poor gap, health issues and hunger into a single challenge. Food and health are both on the bottom tier of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, meaning that they are physiological human needs that must be satisfied for basic human survival. If the world can focus on these three challenges, a significant betterment in the world would occur.

Globalization is the tendency for governments, multinational corporations, and other organizations to increase connectivity on a transnational level. Governmental forms of globalization include collaborating and forming relationships with each other. The United Nations create international laws so that governments can protect the fundamental human rights of people in other countries. Businesses expand to a multinational level by opening franchises worldwide and outsourcing branches of the company to other parts of the world. Individuals contribute to globalization by becoming more connected with other parts of the world. Technology makes communication, news, and travel between foreign nations much easier, which makes the world seem smaller. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) make the world a more level playing field by providing humanitarian services to all parts of the world. For example, Doctors Without Borders brings advanced medical technology to impoverished third world countries without access to safe medical treatments. This helps poorer parts of the world develop to a more sustainable level in line with the rest of the world.

Globalization is neither a positive nor negative force in today’s society, but rather a tool of our modern age that could be used for both good and bad. My examples above are mostly positive practices of globalization. While many people and organizations use the tool of globalization to do good, there will always be greedy and selfish entities that use the same technology to put themselves higher on the food chain. For example, cyberterrorism, sweatshop labor, and military industrial complexes are all outcomes of globalization. There are also many unintended consequences of globalization. Some civilizations can’t compete with the progress of the rest of society, and fall even further behind.

In this golden age of technology, it often seems as though technology is the be-all and end-all. However, it is important to realize the downsides of technology. Some harmful byproducts of the information age include environmental abuse, safety concerns, and justness. The constant use of electricity has had a severely detrimental effects on the environment. More energy is being consumed and there currently is no efficient sustainable source of clean energy. Another environmental issue caused by globalization is extreme environmental issue in concentrated areas. For example, industrialism in China has lead to severe pollution at record levels. This is a direct result of globalization, as production from many other countries has moved to China. Given enough work and cooperation, it could be possible to create an environmentally sustainable society even despite the level of energy consumption and toxic byproducts in today’s tech-infused world. However, this would require global cooperation, which is very hard to come by in a world rife with political conflict. Even in the United States, it is remarkably difficult to garner bipartisan support on environmental issues. Another hurdle to overcome is the cost of implementing clean energy sources, cleaning existing pollution, and curbing toxic factory byproducts. While I believe that we have the technology to combat environmental issues, it is not feasible until political issues are solved or set aside so that the world can unite.

Globalization has done a lot to help justness and safeness of the world. Our world has a long history of degradation against minorities, women, and the lower class. In the past decade, the progressive movement has enforced fair treatment both legally and socially of all people regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. With more global media coverage, people know more about unjust conditions around the world. Technology gives individuals and governments more reach to support the discriminated classes of other nations. For the same reasons, it is easier to make the world a safer place. As mentioned before, Doctors Without Borders helps treat people of third world, and western medicine can eradicate deadly diseases. During the ebola epidemic, patients were transported to the United States for treatment. Other unsafe conditions concerning war and violence may take longer to make safer. As globalization continues to bring the world together, violent conflict may be lessened. The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention, which will be discussed more later, says that war and global conflict may be reduced as countries become more economically interdependent.

The essence of the Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention, as explained by Friedman, is that no two countries would declare war on one another if doing so would be mutually detrimental. More specifically, the countries’ economic systems are interconnected through the same supply chain, such that the destruction of one’s economy would lead to a slump in the other’s. To further explore this theory, let us take into consideration the relationship between the United States of America and China. China, a communist country, could be considered a political enemy of the United States. Recent hostility between the two nations, such as the hack on government personnel databases, further proves this point. However, despite the animosity, it is unlikely that America and China will go to war due to their level of interdependence. America relies on China to produce goods, and China relies on America for commerce. A war between the two nations would but such an extreme damper on the other’s economy that engaging in such a war would be comparable to mutually assured destruction.

In theory, this concept makes a lot of sense. A government generally will only enact on operations in its own best interest. That being said, there are some extreme examples in which it may be more logical to go to war or take other offensive measures against a foreign nation. For example, in the year of 2015, the United States has imported approximately 2.5 billion USD worth of goods (presumably composed primarily of oil) from Iraq . This is a drop from 2014 in which we imported nearly 14 billion USD, with similar figures appearing for the past ten years. While 2015 is not yet over, which may account for the significantly lower figure, the monthly average of 2015 is $309 million, which is astoundingly lower than $1.2 billion monthly average of 2014. This timeline coincides with the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). These figures signify a current example of the United States sacrificing trade and commerce when a more perilous global issue arises.