On Monday, July 02, 2001 8:42 AM, Peter Alling [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> Your assumption is wrong, it's cold war terminology.
>
> First World Western European/North American( US Canada )/Asian (Japan
> Korea Taiwan) block allied against...
>
> Second World (Industrialized Communist Countries) Soviet Union,
> Peoples Republic of China, Most Eastern
> European Countries, Cuba.
>
> Which leaves the third world, Mostly unindustrialized countries who
> either didn't or pretended not to
> take sides.
>
> This classification system stopped being useful almost immediately,
> and was misused from the start. (It's always fun to realize that Sweden
> under this system is a Third World Power, not what one would usually think).
>
Can't let this one go without comment!
My feeling is that this terminology derives from the Euro-centric education
that many of us had, where the Americas were the 'New World' for many
centuries: thus, when one wished to describe non-European and non-American
countries, the term 'Third World' was the only viable usage. My dictionary
gives the origin as, and I quote:
'1950's, translating tiers monde: first used to distinguish the developing
African, Asian and Latin American countries from the capitalist and Communist
blocs.'
Certainly modern usage has the sense attached of 'under-privileged' or
'under-developed', particularly in an economic sense. Many countries of the
former Communist bloc can certainly never be called under-developed -
over-developed and over-exploited is more like it, I think!
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
