The term "Third World" originally referred to countries that did not align with either the capitalist or communist camps during the Cold War, but has since evolved to represent social and political aspirations as well.
The concept of the Third World is a manifestation of colonialism's long shadow and global race relations, dividing the world into "First," "Second," and "Third."
The fading relevance of the Third World concept has given way to new global realities, such as the rise of India, China, and other emerging powers, as well as the West co-opting anti-racist politics for its soft power.
The term "Third World" is problematic and outdated, as it perpetuates stereotypes and hierarchy between nations.
No single label can perfectly capture the complexities of the world's nations, and it is better to be specific or refer to countries by their individual names.
The term “Third World” was originally used to describe countries that did not align with either the capitalist or communist camps during the Cold War.
It was embraced by many African, Asian, and Latin American nations due to its revolutionary connotations.
The term was eventually replaced by the equally vague “Global South,” which highlights the divide between the victims of colonialism and their past tormentors, now known as the “Global North.”
The Third World countries had diverse colonial experiences, which led to varying levels of hostility towards the West.
Additionally, many of these countries were firmly allied with either Washington or Moscow during the Cold War.
The War on Terror created further tensions between Muslim-majority members of the bloc and the United States and Europe. As a result, the so-called Third World rarely acted collectively.
The term “Third World” represents not only a geographical concept but also social and political aspirations.
Since the 1955 Afro-Asian Conference in Bandung and the Tricontinental Conference in Havana in 1966, formerly colonized peoples have worked to transcend imperial power dynamics and forge new relationships with one another.
The term “Third World” encompasses various political ideologies, including the autocratic “Third Worldisms” of figures like Muammar Gaddafi and the Marcoses.
The concept of the Third World can be seen as a manifestation of colonialism’s long shadow, reflecting global race relations and the caste system that divided the world into “First,” “Second,” and “Third.”
The idea of a lesser non-European world enabled both the victors and the vanquished of the Second World War to remain reassured of their centrality in global politics.
The concept of the Third World has faded in recent decades, giving way to new global realities.
The rise of India, China, and other emerging powers like Turkey, Brazil, Egypt, and Indonesia has led to a new global multipolarity.
This has been accompanied by the emergence of the “Indo-Pacific” concept, which aims to manage this new reality in line with the West’s new priorities, such as balancing China.
Another development is the co-opting of anti-racist politics under the rubric of “diversity” as the West seeks to refresh its soft power after the War on Terror.
Third World diasporas’ calls for racial equality are now channeled into elite-led diversity initiatives that speak of “social license.”
Diaspora successes are used to demonstrate that Western societies are now multicultural utopias, no longer posing predatory threats to the world they once colonized.
When an armed mob took over the U.S. Capitol building, many people, including TV journalists and social media users, compared the event to something that might happen in a “Third World” country.
This term, however, is problematic as it often connotes a sense of superiority and inferiority between nations.
Ngozi Erondu, a senior scholar at the O’Neill Institute at Georgetown University, argues that the term “Third World” assumes that people from non-“First World” countries live vastly different, impoverished lives, with less inherent value as humans.
Dr. Abraar Karan, a Harvard Medical School staff member, emphasizes that there is no “Third World,” only the oppressed and the oppressors.
“Developing countries” is a term that might seem like a better choice than “Third World.”
The concept of a world split into three domains emerged in the 1950s during the early stages of the Cold War. French demographer Alfred Sauvy wrote about “Three worlds, one planet” in a 1952 article for the French newspaper L’Observateur.
The “First World” consisted of the U.S., Western Europe, and their allies; the “Second World” was the communist bloc, including the Soviet Union, China, and Cuba; and the “Third World” included nations that aligned with neither group.
The “Third World” term became synonymous with countries facing poverty, inadequate healthcare, and weak democracies.
In the 21st century, however, many scholars and citizens from these nations argue that the term is outdated, insulting, and confusing.
“Developing countries” is a term that might seem like a better choice than “Third World.”
However, some argue that this term also assumes a hierarchy between nations, and perpetuates stereotypes about people from these countries as backward, lazy, or ignorant.
Geographic labeling, such as “global south” and “global north,” is another option, but this classification is also flawed due to the presence of impoverished countries in the north and wealthy countries in the south.
The World Health Organization uses the term “low- and lower-middle-income countries” (LMIC) to categorize nations based on World Bank statistics.
However, this classification also has its shortcomings, as income levels only provide partial insight into a country’s situation. Some experts propose classifications based on a combination of income and equality.
The truth is that no single label can perfectly capture the complexities of the world’s nations.
Elsa D’Silva, founder and CEO of the Red Dot Foundation, suggests being specific when describing a country’s situation.
For example, if a nation lacks a robust healthcare system, simply say so.
D’Silva also mentions that the late Hans Rosling, a professor of global health, referred to countries not yet in the upper-income category as “the rest of the world.”
Ultimately, it may be best to refer to countries by their individual names.
Back to previous
James Madison was initially against a bill of rights, but political pressure led him to change his stance and write one, resulting in the inclusion of the Second Amendment in the U.S. Constitution.
The Second Amendment is rooted in concerns about national defense and the type of military force needed for the nation's security, as early Americans viewed standing armies as tools of tyranny.
Alexander Hamilton's arguments in the Federalist Papers about arming and equipping the general population laid the groundwork for the Second Amendment.
The final version of the Second Amendment has been the subject of extensive debate and confusion due to the removal of crucial phrases and punctuation.
The true intent of the Second Amendment was not about individual gun ownership or personal protection but rather to ensure that a standing army or specially chosen militia would not pose a threat to liberty.
Madame Restell, also known as Caroline Ann Trow Lohman, was a 19th-century midwife and abortion provider who defied societal norms to help women make choices about their bodies.
Restell faced numerous legal battles throughout her career, including charges of administering noxious medicine and procuring miscarriages. She was often portrayed as a cold-hearted murderer, but also had an elaborate network of midwives, doctors, and other professionals who helped her provide safe and affordable reproductive health care to women.
Restell's legacy is complex and controversial. On one hand, she provided crucial reproductive health services to women who had few options for safe and affordable care. On the other hand, her methods were often unsafe, and her business practices were often unethical. Her advocacy for women's rights was also tempered by her belief that women should only have access to reproductive health services if they were married and financially stable.
Restell's story is a reminder of the ongoing struggle for reproductive rights and the complex history of reproductive health care in the United States.
The current debates around reproductive rights, especially in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, make Restell's story and legacy all the more relevant today.
Sinrock Mary was a successful entrepreneur and leader in her community, defying traditional gender roles and maintaining control over her own life and property.
She played a significant role in the reindeer industry in Alaska, helping to broker a deal to bring reindeer from Siberia and becoming the first Alaska Native couple to have their own herd.
Mary faced numerous challenges, including the tragic loss of her husband and legal battles to protect her ownership of the herd.
The reindeer industry in Alaska experienced a decline due to the Depression and mysteriously crashing herds between the 1930s and '50s, but it remains an important part of Alaska's cultural heritage.
Mary's legacy serves as a testament to her tenacity and strength, and her story highlights the resilience of Alaska Native communities.
