Comments on "Globalization: the Super-Story"

Perhaps I misunderstand the text, but I believe Friedman contradicts himself, specifically when he declares that the US is the ultimate super power in the current time period of globalization. As part of his contrast between the cold war and the globalization systems, he states that even though the world was divided in the cold war era, the leaders of the US and the Soviet Union remained in charge while in the globalization system, the world is interconnected by the Internet and “nobody is quite in charge” (473). When Friedman delves more in the globalization system, he proceeds to directly state that “the US is now the sole and dominant superpower and all nations are subordinate to it” (473). This is a clear contradiction since he first states no real authority exists in the current times and then declares that America is the dominant global power.

 I also don’t understand what Friedman means by basically saying that the US is the ultimate superpower above all others in the world. If this were indeed the case, America would be in a much more progressive and positive state. I understand that he wrote this document shortly after the tragic 9/11, when the US was in much better economic standing than it is currently in 2013; however, even then the US was falling behind in world-wide educational rankings. A superior power should have not been slipping in this area, since educational quality usually predicts the kinds of leaders the country will have in the future. Also, the US was outsourcing industry then and is still doing so now, which also contradicts the idea of it being the most powerful global nation, since it should pursue innovative industry within the country instead of relying on other countries. By no means is the US NOT a dominant global entity; however, until improvements are made, it is not THE central power. Additionally, a so-called top power does not necessarily exist; it merely depends on perspective.