the.world.is.flat-第51部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

word　of　the　contract　was　made　public；　Republicans　made　it　a　campaign　issue。　It　became　
such　a　political　hot　potato　that　Governor　Joe　Kernan；　a　Democrat　who　had　succeeded　
O'Bannon；　ordered　the　state　agency；　which　helps　out…of…work　Indiana　residents；　to　
cancel　the　contract…and　also　to　put　up　some　legal　barriers　and　friction　to　prevent　
such　a　thing　from　happening　again。　He　also　ordered　that　the　contract　be　broken　up　
into　smaller　bites　that　Indiana　firms　could　bid　for…good　for　Indiana　firms　but　very　
costly　and　inefficient　for　the　state。　The　Indianapolis　Star　reported　that　a　check　
for　993；587　was　sent　to　pay　off　Tata　for　eight　weeks　of　work；　during　which　it　had　
trained　forty…five　state　programmers　in　the　development　and　engineering　of　up…to…date　
software：　〃'The　company　was　great　to　work　with；'　said　Alan　Degner；　Indiana's　
commissioner　of　workforce　development。〃　
So　now　I　have　just　one　simple　question：　Who　is　the　exploiter　and　who　is　the　exploited　
in　this　India…Indiana　story？　The　American　arm　of　an　Indian　consulting　firm　proposes　
to　save　the　taxpayers　of　Indiana　8。1　mil207　
lion　by　revamping　their　computers　…using　both　its　Indian　employees　and　local　hires　
from　Indiana。　The　deal　would　greatly　benefit　the　American　arm　of　the　Indian　
consultancy；　it　would　benefit　some　Indiana　tech　workers；　and　it　would　save　Indiana　
state　residents　precious　tax　dollars　that　could　be　deployed　to　hire　more　state　workers　
somewhere　else；　or　build　new　schools　that　would　permanently　shrink　its　roles　of　
unemployed。　And　yet　the　whole　contract；　which　was　signed　by　pro…labor　Democrats；　got　
torn　up　under　pressure　from　free…trade　Republicans。　
Sort　that　out。　
In　the　old　world；　where　value　was　largely　being　created　vertically；　usually　within　


a　single　company　and　from　the　top　down；　it　was　very　easy　to　see　who　was　on　the　top　
and　who　was　on　the　bottom；　who　was　exploiting　and　who　was　being　exploited。　But　when　
the　world　starts　to　flatten　out　and　value　increasingly　gets　created　horizontally　
（through　multiple　forms　of　collaboration；　in　which　individuals　and　little　guys　have　
much　more　power）；　who　is　on　the　top　and　who　is　on　the　bottom；　who　is　exploiter　and　
who　is　exploited；　gets　very　complicated。　Some　of　our　old　political　reflexes　no　longer　
apply。　Were　the　Indian　engineers　not　being　〃exploited〃　when　their　government　educated　
them　in　some　of　the　best　technical　institutes　in　the　world　inside　India；　but　then　
that　same　Indian　government　pursued　a　socialist　economic　policy　that　could　not　provide　
those　engineers　with　work　in　India；　so　that　those　who　could　not　get　out　of　India　had　
to　drive　taxis　to　eat？　Are　those　same　engineers　now　being　exploited　when　they　join　
the　biggest　consulting　company　in　India；　are　paid　a　very　comfortable　wage　in　Indian　
terms；　and；　thanks　to　the　flat　world；　can　now　apply　their　skills　globally？　Or　are　
those　Indian　engineers　now　exploiting　the　people　of　Indiana　by　offering　to　revamp　
their　state　unemployment　system　for　much　less　money　than　an　American　consulting　firm？　
Or　were　the　people　of　Indiana　exploiting　those　cheaper　Indian　engineers？　Someone　
please　tell　me：　Who　is　exploiting　whom　in　this　story？　With　whom　does　the　traditional　
Left　stand　in　this　story？　With　the　knowledge　workers　from　the　developing　world；　being　
paid　a　decent　wage；　who　are　trying　to　use　their　hard…won　talents　in　the　developed　
world？　Or　with　the　politicians　of　Indiana；　who　wanted　to　deprive　these　Indian　
engineers　of　work　so　that　it　could　be　done；　more　expensively；　by　their　constituents？　

And　with　whom　does　the　traditional　Right　stand　in　this　story？　With　those　who　want　
to　hold　down　taxes　and　shrink　the　state　budget　of　Indiana　by　outsourcing　some　work；　
or　with　those　who　say；　〃Let's　raise　taxes　more　in　order　to　reserve　the　work　here　and　
reserve　it　just　for　people　from　Indiana〃？　With　those　who　want　to　keep　some　friction　
in　the　system；　even　though　that　goes　against　every　Republican　instinct　on　free　trade；　
just　to　help　people　from　Indiana？　If　you　are　against　globalization　because　you　think　
it　harms　people　in　developing　countries；　whose　side　are　you　on　in　this　story：　India's　
or　Indiana's？　
The　India　versus　Indiana　dispute　highlights　the　difficulties　in　drawing　lines　between　
the　interests　of　two　communities　that　never　before　imagined　they　were　connected；　much　
less　collaborators。　But　suddenly　they　each　woke　up　anddiscovered　thatin　a　flat　world；　
where　work　increasingly　becomes　a　horizontal　collaboration；　they　were　not　only　
connected　and　collaborating　but　badly　in　need　of　a　social　contract　to　govern　their　
relations。　
The　larger　point　here　is　this：　Whether　we　are　talking　about　management　science　or　
political　science；　manufacturing　or　research　and　development；　many；　many　players　and　
processes　are　going　to　have　to　come　to　grips　with　〃horizontalization。〃　And　it　is　going　
to　take　a　lot　of　sorting　out。　
Where　Do　Companies　Stop　and　Start？　
Tust　as　the　relationship　between　different　groups　of　workers　will　have　to　I　be　sorted　
out　in　a　flat　world；　so　too　will　the　relationship　between　companies　and　the　communities　
in　which　they　operate。　Whose　values　will　govern　a　particular　company　and　whose　


interests　will　that　company　respect　and　promote？　It　used　to　be　said　that　as　General　
Motors　goes；　so　goes　America。　But　today　it　would　be　said；　〃As　Dell　goes；　so　goes　
Malaysia；　Taiwan；　China；　Ireland；　India　。　。　。〃　HP　today　has　142；000　employees　in　178　
countries。　It　is　not　only　the　largest　consumer　technology　company　in　the　world；　it　
is　the　largest　IT　company　in　Europe；　the　largest　
209　
IT　company　in　Russia；　the　largest　IT　company　in　the　Middle　East；　and　the　largest　IT　
company　in　South　Africa。　Is　HP　an　American　company　if　a　majority　of　its　employees　
and　customers　are　outside　of　America；　even　though　it　is　headquartered　in　Palo　Alto？　
Corporations　cannot　survive　today　as　entities　bounded　by　any　single　nation…state；　
not　even　one　as　big　as　the　United　States。　So　the　current　keep…you…awake…at…night　issue　
for　nation…states　and　their　citizens　is　how　to　deal　with　corporations　that　are　no　
longer　bounded　by　a　thing　called　the　nation…state。　To　whom　are　they　loyal？　
〃Corporate　America　has　done　very　well；　and　there　is　nothing　wrong　with　that；　but　it　
has　done　well　by　aligning　itself　with　the　flat　world；〃　said　Dinakar　Singh；　the　hedge　
fund　manager。　〃It　has　done　that　by　outsourcing　as　many　components　as　possible　to　the　
cheapest；　most　efficient　suppliers。　If　Dell　can　build　every　component　ofits　computers　
in　coastal　China　and　sell　them　in　coastal　America；　Dell　benefits；　and　American　
consumers　benefit；　but　it　is　hard　to　make　the　case　that　American　labor　benefits。〃　
So　Dell　wants　as　flat　a　world　as　possible；　with　as　little　friction　and　as　few　barriers　
as　possible。　So　do　most　other　corporations　today；　because　this　allows　them　to　build　
things　in　the　most　low…cost；　efficient　markets　and　sell　in　the　most　lucrative　markets。　
There　is　almost　nothing　about　Globalization　3。0　that　is　not　good　for　capital。　
Capitalists　can　sit　back；　buy　up　any　innovation；　and　then　hire　the　best；　cheapest　
labor　input　from　anywhere　into　the　world　to　research　it；　develop　it；　produce　it；　and　
distribute　it。　Dell　stock　does　well；　Dell　shareholders　do　well；　Dell　customers　do　
well；　and　the　Nasdaq　does　well。　All　the　things　related　to　capital　do　fine。　But　only　
some　American　workers　will　benefit；　and　only　some　communities。　Others　will　feel　the　
pain　that　the　flattening　of　the　world　brings　about。　
Since　multinationals　first　started　scouring　the　earth　for　labor　and　markets；　their　
interests　have　always　gone　beyond　those　of　the　nation…state　in　which　they　were　
headquartered。　But　what　is　going　on　today；　on　the　flat　earth；　is　such　a　difference　
of　degree　that　it　amounts　to　a　difference　in　kind。　Companies　have　never　had　more　
freedom；　and　less　friction；　in　the　way　of　assigning　research；　low…end　manufacturing；　
and　high…end　manufacturing　anywhere　in　the　world。　What　this　will　mean　for　the　
long…term　
210　
relationship　between　companies　and　the　country　in　which　they　are　headquartered　is　
simply　unclear。　
Consider　this　vivid　example：　On　December　7；　2004；　IBM　announced　that　it　was　selling　
its　whole　Personal　Computing　Division　to　the　Chinese　computer　company　Lenovo　to　create　
a　new　worldwide　PC　company…the　globe's　third　largest…with　approximately　12　billion　
in　annual　revenue。　Simultaneously；　though；　IBM　said　that　it　would　be　taking　an　18。9　
percent　equity　stake　in　Lenovo；　creating　a　strategic　alliance　between　IBM　and　Lenovo　


in　PC　sales；　financing；　and　service　worldwide。　The　new　combined　company's　worldwide　
headquarters；　it　was　announced；　would　be　in　New　York；　but　its　principal　manufacturing　
operations　would　be　in　Beijing　and　Raleigh；　North　Carolina；　research　centers　would　
be　in　China；　the　United　States；　and　Japan；　and　sales　offices　would　be　around　the　world。　
The　new　Lenovo　will　be　the　preferred　supplier　of　PCs　to　IBM；　and　IBM　will　also　be　
the　new　Lenovo's　preferred　supplier　of　services　and　financing。　
Are　you　still　with　me？　About　ten　thousand　people　will　move　from　IBM　to　Lenovo；　which　
was　created　in　1984　and　was　the　first　company　to　introduce　the　home　computer　concept　
in　China。　Since　1997；　L