Friedman also added that most of the countries which are least globalized don't trade in goods and services, pluralism or tolerance and ideas with other countries since they have no chance to interact freely or move freely without restrictions nor move their goods and services freely without being charged.

Friedman also argues that globalization has its advantages and disadvantages but for a country to succeed, it should approach it with the right institutions and governance so that it can get the best out of it .He also adds that those countries which have succeeded have globalized sensibly but steadily and they have ended up to open politically .

Friedman also added that in those countries that have globalized, some people prefer to go faster while some prefer to phase out currency controls and subsidize gradually leaving behind the west countries where some college students and academicians are still debating whether they should globalize or not.

Friedman argues that globalization should be made fairly by convincing the rich western countries to open their markets of goods and services that the poor countries are best able to sell for example, food and textiles since most poor countries have inadequate food supply.

Persuasive arguments

I find Friedman's argument persuasive since globalization has so many effects on the countries and the people of the world. Globalization is important for a country since goods from one part of the country are able to move to the other part of the world at a high speed due to lack of tariff barriers which can slow down the movement of goods and services at the borders and also the export fee is not charged.

The biggest countries in the world such as India and China have globalised and since globalization leads to economic interdependence, the rate of war in those countries have reduced since they are able to interact with different people...

People living in the global village choose where they wish to live with no fear of political consequences and more freedom is granted to the consumer and local goods can be transported to remote areas. In global village understanding and tolerance are highly valued since people get to know each other without interferences.
On the other hand I also find Jayan's argument persuasive in such a way that in this world people live differently whereby others live in world of legal tests in which the academic reformers, politicians, gather to promise equality, justice, prosperity and security for all people while others live in the world of realities where minority of people take powers in their hands whereby they implement there on visions which inflict violence, humiliation and death upon majorities who are weak and have no power to fight for there rights.

References

Thomas .L. Friedman, (2002). Globalization, Alive and Well. Retrieved November 8, 2011 from http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/22/opinion/globalization-alive-and-well.html.

Jayan Nayar, (2007). People's Law: Decolonizing Legal Imagination. Retrieved November 8,

2011 from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/lgd/2007_1/nayar/

Stephen M. Walt (2010). Hawks, Doves and Realists. Retrieved November 8, 2011 from http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/07/28/hawks_doves_and_realists