Hot, Flat, and Friedman

 

Like much of the developed world, I've read several Thomas Friedman books and many of his editorials for the New York Times. This is actually quite remarkable, because most of the time I would say I have only a mediocre at best opinion of the man's writings. This is largely due to the sheer number of stupid questions from intelligent people asking about my opinions on From Beirut to Jerusalem, and how I feel about that book and his attitude towards the Middle East in general.

Don't get me wrong, I think Friedman is an excellent writer, and probably does the best editorials on the widest range of subjects that I've ever read. His books regularly discuss the most complex issues of the day, and remarkably are still easy to read and understand. I generally read his works in order to assess where mainstream America is or is going to be soon on major issues including trade, globalization, environmentalism, and Middle Eastern Politics.

However, that's not why I read his new book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded. I got is as a gift from a friend, and didn't have much going on. I can now say, that Friedman's transition from reporter to self-proclaimed national cheerleader is complete. Once you accept this, and the fact that Friedman regularly simplifies complex ideas for mass consumption, and that he often casually takes ownership of these ideas, it's a great book and I highly recommend it. Let me explain:

Friedman is open and honest about the book being an outline for why a green revolution is necessary and how to go about creating one. I think he fully succeeds in this, namely in his opposition to passive environmentalism and poor policies by the US government. It has excellent advice on how to change America's policies to favor green development.

Friedman casually coins new terms that already exist: A good example of this is Friedman's "First Law of Petropolitics": This states that "as the price of oil goes up, the pace of freedom goes down". While I think there is an important message here, it is by no means a law, and Friedman is by no means the person who originally came up with it. It also is not unique to oil. This law is basically a corollary to the idea of "Rentier States". A staple of Middle Eastern politics, it basically flips the American rally cry of "No taxation without representation" on its head and says OK, we'll give you health care, schools, sometimes houses, and business advantages, and you let us do what we want." My beef with Friedman isn't that I think he's wrong, it is that he "created" a theory that already exists in a better form.

Finally, Bahrain: I have lived in this country. It's nice, and I'm sure the ruling family is very nice as well. When Friedman spoke ravingly about the enlightened Royal Family of Bahrain and their strides towards democracy, however, I took offence. Check out Freedom House's assessment of Bahrain. In short it describes the 100% government owned press, the discrimination of the majority Shiite population by the Sunni ruling family, and my favorite part: the regular crackdown of civil protests (Shiite of course) by the majority foreign security forces. Yup. That's right, they have a mercenary police force and yet the Shiites aren't able to get even low ranking government jobs.

In short, Friedman annoys me at times in this book, particularly his assessment of Petropolitics and Bahrain. However, I would still recommend this book to a friend. It's packed with information that is generally correct about the complexities of the world regarding global warming and the changes that America needs to make right now. His ability to explain and simplify is truly a gift, if one that needs a little more tweaking.