Chomsky vs. Friedman

Chomsky:
Chomsky describes the harsh realities of the negative aspects of globalization.  He bases his arguments off of the idea that globalization aids the rich and hurts the poor.  With the plethora of loopholes available for the wealthy to prosper, it is exceedingly easy for the poor, like farmers, to be exploited and left behind.

Friedman:
Friedman focuses on the optimistic aspects of globalization, stating that "whatever can be done will be done," and it is vital to take advantage of opportunities that are presented to you before someone else does.  He then goes on to discuss the 3 great era of globalization in which the world gross progressively smaller as it becomes more interconnected.

I tend to agree with Friedman.