What are the similarities and differences between the concept of "globalization" we discuss today and "Globalization 3.0" as described by Friedman in his book?

Hello! That's a great question. Many people have probably read or heard of Thomas Friedman's The World Is Flat, but it feels like the "flat" world he described isn't quite the same as the one we're experiencing now.

As someone who has also read the book and follows this topic closely, let me outline my understanding for you. You can think of Friedman's "Globalization 3.0" as an idealized blueprint. What we find ourselves in today, however, is the "construction site" where this blueprint is being built in the real world – bearing similarities, but also encountering various new complexities.

First, What Was Friedman's "Globalization 3.0"?

To understand it easily, let's use an analogy.

• Globalization 1.0 (Columbus Era): Nations were the main actors, exploring the world in large ships. Like village chiefs taking their residents to "visit" other villages.
• Globalization 2.0 (Post-Industrial Revolution): Companies were the main actors, building multinational corporations. Like village factories setting up branches in other villages.
• Globalization 3.0 (Around 2000): Individuals became the main actors. Due to the proliferation of technologies like personal computers, the internet, and fiber optics, the world was "flattened." An engineer in Bangalore, India could collaborate with a small company in Indiana, USA. The core idea in one sentence: Technology empowered every individual to compete and cooperate on the global stage.

In Friedman's view, this 3.0 world was open, connected, and efficient. Like a vast, flat playground with no barriers; if you had the ability, you could join in.

---

How Our Current Globalization Matches 3.0

We can say we still live on the extended trajectory of "Globalization 3.0." The underlying logic it described still holds true.

• The Core Driver Remains: Still Technology The fiber optics and networks Friedman talked about back then have now evolved into 5G, cloud computing, and mobile internet. Today, we use Zoom for cross-border meetings, find designers on Fiverr internationally, and consume global content on YouTube/TikTok – this is the continuation and an amplified version of individual empowerment from the 3.0 era. You could say the technological "bulldozer" is still flattening the world further.

• Broader and Deeper Individual Participation Previously, participation might have been felt mainly by corporate white-collar workers involved in global collaboration. Now, an independent developer, a video blogger, or a small e-commerce seller can easily participate in globalization. You don't even need to leave your country to work remotely for an overseas company. This is more common than even Friedman might have anticipated.

---

So, Where are the Differences? This is What We Feel Most Deeply

If Friedman painted an optimistic, smooth "flat world," what we encounter now is a world that's bumpy, fractured, and even building high walls.

1. From “Flat” to “Conflict and Barriers” (The world is not flat, it's bumpy)

   • Friedman's 3.0 Era: The dominant theme was win-win cooperation, especially after the Cold War, with the belief that political friction would diminish.
   • Today's Reality: Geopolitical conflicts have taken center stage. The US-China trade war, tech wars – nations no longer embrace each other without reservation. Instead, they emphasize "national security" and "supply chain security." In this large global playground, the ground hasn't grown flatter; instead, numerous "walls" (like tariff barriers, technology blockades) have been artificially erected, and many "potholes" have been dug.

2. From “Connection” to “Data and Algorithms” (The world is driven by data)

   • Friedman's 3.0 Era: The core was the free flow of information; you could find anything on Google.
   • Today's Reality: Mere connection isn't enough anymore. Data and AI (Artificial Intelligence) have become the new masters. Globalization is no longer just about connecting people; it's a global game of algorithms and data. For instance, TikTok's algorithm precisely pushes content to global users, and Amazon's AI predicts global demand to manage inventory. This represents a significant step beyond simple information connection, but it also brings new challenges like data sovereignty and privacy protection.

3. From “Cooperation” to “The Walled Gardens of Platform Giants” (The world is not open, it's walled gardens)

   • Friedman's 3.0 Era: The internet was imagined as an open, decentralized space.
   • Today's Reality: We live within "walled gardens" built by a few tech giants (Google, Apple, Meta, Amazon, Tencent, Alibaba). Your digital life is almost inseparable from these platforms. They are both tools of globalization and have themselves become new "territories" with their own rules and boundaries. The world is not as decentralized as once imagined.

4. From “Optimism” to “Reflection and Fragmentation” (The backlash against globalization)

   • Friedman's 3.0 Era: Held an overwhelmingly optimistic view that globalization would bring universal prosperity.
   • Today's Reality: The negative effects of globalization have been fully exposed. Job losses in traditional manufacturing in some countries and widening wealth gaps have led to strong social backlash. Brexit and Trump's "America First" are manifestations of this sentiment. People are starting to reflect: for whom is this "flat" world truly fairer?

Summary

So, in simple terms: Friedman was right about the trend of the world "flattening," and the underlying technological logic of this trend is still deepening. However, he likely underestimated the power of political, social, and capital forces. These forces make this "flat" world extraordinarily complex, no longer the imagined frictionless utopia. We are now in a new phase of globalization – one that is more tangled, contradictory, and harder to predict.