Jeff Jeremiah
Geog 100
March 6, 2003
Summary of the Lexus and the Olive Tree
In Thomas L. Friedman’s article, “The Lexus and the Olive Tree”, Friedman says
that world affairs today are what come out new, and what has been around for what
seems like forever. He compares the two things with a new Internet Web site, and an old
tree that sits on the banks of the Jordan River. The reason that Friedman uses these
examples is because he believes that after the cold war, there were two types of people
that emerged. The first type of person was the one that wants to improve on what is
already there, hence the Lexus. These people want to make what they have better so they
can benefit in a world dominated by globalization. The person that is symbolized by the
olive tree is the one that is intriguing, because instead of worrying about what is going on
now, how to change with the world and benefit from it, they are more worried about who
owns the olive tree.
One thing that Freidman also touches on is the always-changing system that we
use today, called the globalization system. He points out that the globalization system is a
dynamic ongoing process. “Globalization involves the inexorable integration of markets,
nation-states, and technologies to a degree never witnessed before—in a way that is
enabling individuals, corporations, and nation-states to reach around the world farther,
faster, deeper, and cheaper than ever before, and in a way that is also producing a
powerful backlash from those brutalized or left behind by this new system.” This means
that because of the changing technology, people can communicate easier, which is
basically making the world one, big communication market. Globalization has its own
defining technologies: computerization, miniaturization, digitization, satellite
communications, fiber optics and the Internet. He contrasts the cold war period and the
globalization period by using words that may best describe them. For the cold war, he
uses the word division, but for globalization he says that the keyword is integration. He
also says that the defining measurement of the globalization system is speed, citing
commerce, travel, communication and innovation.
Another thing that Freidman touches on was the ever-changing times. He points
out that the past is replaced by the present, and sometimes the future. We are a society
that is tuned into what happens next, that we will sometimes forget to focus on the good
things that we have now. Another comparison that Freidman draws is the fear between
the cold-war era and the period of globalization. He says that the defining anxiety of the
Cold War was fear of annihilation from an enemy you knew all too well, while the
defining anxiety in globalization is fear of rapid change from an enemy you can't see,
touch or feel. Also, unlike the cold war era, there is a sense that your job, community or
workplace can be changed at any moment, which is a lot different than the stability of the
cold war era.
Next, Freidman addresses the three different balances of power within the
globalization era. First, there is the traditional balance between nation-states, which has
to do with the relationship between the United States, or any nation, and other nations.
Second, there is the relationship between nation-states and global markets. This has to do
with the economy of a country and how it interacts with other, global markets. Last, the
third is individuals and nation-states. This is an interesting one, which discusses the
power that an individual has by the changing technology.
Friedman goes on to talk more about the olive tree and its importance to mankind.
Friedman states, “Olive trees are what give us the warmth of family, the joy of
individuality, the intimacy of person rituals, the depth of private relationships, as well as
the confidence and security to reach out and encounter others”. He says that the olive tree
is whom we belong to, and that will never die. Another thing that he refers to is the battle
between the Palestinians and the Jews. He uses the Olive Tree to say that the battle isn’t
really about the actual tree, but about the symbolic significance of the tree.
Friedman believes that what lies behind this analogy is the reason that we need to
look at things, to examine them and realize why we are looking, and what we are looking
for. By looking at our economy and our countries through a new light, we are actually
looking at things as the olive tree vs. the Lexus. Many examples can go along hand in
hand with these two things. For instance, with leadership styles, the Lexus is more like a
capitalist economy while an olive tree is more like a communist country.
As an olive tree, you will most likely be threatened from people who are Lexus’,
who want to make things better and more technological for the globalizing economic
system. While the Lexus can e something that is so powerful is destroys the olive trees, it
can also be beneficial by helping smaller, less economical countries grow to have a
healthier, better economy.
The thing that most countries, as well as people deal with is finding some medium
between the olive tree and the Lexus. Without one of them, a countries economy will be
dreadful. No olive tree will means that you have no roots, nothing to be proud of, and
may not explore the opportunities that they can because they have no pride, and are afraid
of rejection. The lack of a Lexus will cause an economy to be stagnant and stay the same.
It will have no motivation to get better, and therefore won’t. Both of these symbolic
examples, the olive tree and the Lexus, need to be present for a countries economy and
overall well being to prosper.
Freidman proposes an interesting new “disease” that has developed after the coldwar area, entitling it “MIDS”. MIDS stand for the Microchip Immune Deficiency, which
basically means that if you don’t have the technology, you will not survive as well in the
globalization period, like you have a disease or something. Freidman talks about what the
Information Revolution and the three different democracies, or powers as referred to
earlier, did to the market. “For me it comes down to two simple concepts: First, it
generally lowered the barriers to entry into almost every business by radically lowering
the costs for new entrants. And, by doing so, it radically increased competition and the
speed by which a product moved from being an innovation to being a commodity.
Second, by lowering the barriers around companies, the Information Revolution also
brought them closer to their customers, giving consumers much greater power to
communicate their choices and to move quickly from companies that won’t deliver them
to companies that will,” Freidman states. This means that capitalism has increased, and
that it has become easier for a person to go into a business. In turn, this has increased
competition and helped consumers be able to decide faster, and make better decisions.
What market system works the best? What one is the most successful for a
consumer and for the supplier? According to Freidman, the long term debate is over. The
answer is free-market capitalism. “If you want higher standards of living in a world
without walls, the free market is the only ideological alternative left.”
Freidman’s next point talks about how a nation’s prosperity and wealth no longer
depends on the things that it used to, like location and natural resources. With the
globalization period, you can get natural resources and can service different areas way
faster, which makes the old necessary things like nothing. A nation is no longer limited,
but its economy is established by its own decisions. He also talks about how a household
is no longer judged by the number of televisions, but by the number of PCs. This is a
definite example of the changing times.
There are nine habits to “Highly Effective Countries”. Though Freidman says that
there are nine habits, there are two very important ones, which we will cover here. The
first is how fast your company/country is. Freidman talks about going to different
countries, and asking, “How quickly does your government and society evaluate,
innovate, decision-make, deregulate and adapt?” By looking at these things, you can tell
which countries are highly effective. Second, does your company/country dare to be open
on the outside? Freidman cites that one reason the internet is such a popular thing, is that
it is open to everyone. He shows that by keeping your economy open, your possibilities
will grow, but if you close your country off in any way to either the best brains in the
world or the best technologies in the world, you will fall behind faster and faster. He
states that, the people that are, “most open-minded, tolerant, creative and diverse
societies” will have an easier time with globalization than traditional companies and
countries, which can’t be open because they aren’t comfortable with it.
There is also a theory that Freidman brings up, called the Golden Arches theory.
This theory affects geopolitics the most by raising the cost of warfare through economic
integration. Globalization influences geopolitics in many ways. It creates new sources of
power, beyond the classic military measures of tanks, planes and missiles, and it creates
new sources of pressure on countries to change how they organize themselves.
Freidman starts to wrap up his piece by talking about what really makes
globalization work. Though technology and finance help, the real coal that is powering
the steam engine has been the hard-working people, no matter where they stand in the
financial status of the economy. It’s the people that want to make things better that run
the show of the globalization process, and Freidman is quick to point this out. “This
explains why, along with the backlash against the brutalities, pressures and challenges of
globalization, there is a groundswell of people demanding the benefits of globalization.”
Freidman ends his essay by talking about globalization and particularly the United
States. He points out that a lot of people think that other countries of the world hate the
US for sending its troops everywhere. This is true, but is missing the point. What people
hate is not the actual troops, but the values and morals that the American soldiers bring to
that country. He also states that the only real threat to globalization is globalization itself.
Freidman believes that those who are lazy and don’t want to change with the times will
get passed up, be upset, and cause riots, with the hope of taking things back to the way
they were before.
What I got out of this article is a better understanding of globalization. I learned
that it is something that is rapid, and can’t really be stopped, because our economy, state,
and country are run with the ideals and values of the globalization era. The best thing to
do would be to heed Freidman’s advice, and do the best you can to prepare yourself for
the rapid changing, technology increasing, information bursting, world that will
accompany the next couple of years. That is what the globalization process is.