Re: Friedman's world system

I found the following links using "world system" via a Yahoo! search.  Thought they may be of interest to look at and analyse.  It looks like the term is bc more widespread. There's actually a bunch of material out there besides just this; but an advanced search on any of the search engines (Yahoo, Google, etc.) & using other terms in conjunction with "world system" ends up with more results than just using just the two words themselves; it's neat to see where the term pops up. (Note that the Mises article uses the hyphen.)

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/abeltd/critique.htm

http://www.etherzone.com/2002/raim061402.shtml

http://www.mises.org/tradcycl/monbuscy.asp

Best!

Luke

 Boris Stremlin wrote:

> There is nothing particularly interesting about the Friedman Op/Ed piece
> cited below - it is the typically insipid message one has come to expect
> from him. If interested, the link is provided below.
>
> I bring it up here only to focus attention on the last paragraph, where
> Friedman refers to the "world system". I wonder what inspired him to use
> such terminology. Actually, it is interesting that he brings it up in the
> context of defending globalization. I do not mean to raise a debate as to
> whether Friedman's point about globalization continuing post 9/11 is
> correct; what seems less doubtful is that the term "globalization" itself
> is likely to decline in the post 9/11 era, because there is now so little
> agreement about what it actually refers to. And it is precisely in this
> context that the appearance of "world system" in a New York Times Op/Ed
> piece is interesting. Does it entering the lexicon of the mass media?
>
> A few years ago, on a bus ride from Binghamton to New York, I heard the
> driver discussing "God's world system" with one of the passengers. I
> won't hazard a guess as to where he may have heard this term, but there is
> every indication that it is well suited for popular usage.
>
> At last year's 25th anniversary conference at the Braudel Center,
> Wallerstein delivered a paper in which he argued that social-scientific
> terms tend to have a shelf-life of around 30 years. He singled out
> "globalization" for particular attention. If "world system" (hyphenated
> or not) succeeds in emerging into the mainstream, it may be wise to
> remember when its was first articulated as a concept.
>
> The quote from Friedman's article follows:
>
> "But the point is this: The debate about globalization
> before 9/11 got really stupid. Two simple truths got
> lost: One, globalization has its upsides and
> downsides, but countries that come at it with the
> right institutions and governance can get the best out
> of it and cushion the worst. Two, countries that are
> globalizing sensibly but steadily are also the ones
> that are becoming politically more open, with more
> opportunities for their people, and with a young
> generation more interested in joining the world system
> than blowing it up."
>
> Link:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/22/opinion/22FRIE.html

---

Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!