4 ms·

> 3rd world tier corruption and fraud. The use of "3rd world" term makes me cringe a little even in this context. Isn't it more comparable to Boeing Conspiracy

> 3rd world tier corruption and fraud. The use of "3rd world" term makes me cringe a little even in this context. Isn't it more comparable to Boeing Conspiracy and Corruption [1] or even the Fat Leornard US Navy corruption [2] - which are indeed first-world corruptions? Definition of 3rd world has changed overtime - but overall we can agree that; it now means developing countries with (1) high rates of poverty, (2) economic and/or political instability, and (3) high mortality rates. Yes, above factors are indeed very conducive for corruption and fraud, but does it imply there's no corruption in "First-world"? I think the difference is it’s hidden (not as consequential) and some accountability come about sometimes... e.g MDHS Welfare fraud [3] [4], not to mention Covid related frauds. To me the term has aged and similar to saying to someone "that is so ghetto"... which its use has declined considerably as a regular American vernacular. Another intersting term often used wily-nily with negative connotation of otherness is "Banana Republic" - which is very interesting when you consider the origin and who brought such conditions that led to the term being coined. I didn't mean to inject "wokeness" to the discussion; for one I was born is so called 3rd world country (so perhaps a little sensitive?), and more importantly I'm obsessed with origin and use of words and phrases overtime as contemporary vernacular. [1] - https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/boeing-charged-737-max-fraud-conspiracy-and-agrees-pay-over-25-billion https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/boeing-charged-737-max-fraud-... [2] = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Leonard_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Leonard_scandal [3] - https://www.npr.org/2020/02/06/803399172/mississippis-ex-welfare-director-5-others-arrested-in-massive-fraud https://www.npr.org/2020/02/06/803399172/mississippis-ex-wel... [4] - https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/14/us/brett-favre-mississippi-governor-texts/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/14/us/brett-favre-mississippi-go...

jonhohle 4y ago
I’ve always found the evolution of third world very odd. How does something go from countries that are not Cold War participants to developing countries? I tend to thinking it in the original context and often find myself misunderstanding people when they use the term. I know definitions change, but it seems like an odd transition.
- brezelgoring 4y ago
  I considered this for a while, being from Uruguay (a member of that great category of countries) and for me, it generally means geopolitically and even economically weightless countries. It might be pessimistic but it -feels- like whatever happens here, be it coups, economics experiments, great innovations and the like - does not impact or even reach the rest of the world. One (mildly) rich Californian has more potential impact on the world than all of Latin America could ever have in the best of days.
- jhbadger 4y ago
  While I agree that the term is outdated and should just be replaced with "developing", "third world" always had the economic side to it. "First World" countries not only were the major Western powers in the Cold War, they also had the best standards of living. "Second World" countries, despite meaning the Soviet side, also meant countries with a lesser quality of life, where store shelves were constantly empty and people often had to wait hours in line to buy even basic staples like bread and meat. And yet for the most part people weren't starving (except for the Soviet famines in the 1930s or the Chinese one in the late 1950s). This wasn't the case for the "third world" countries not part of either bloc (mostly countries just achieving independence from colonialism) which often had the worst standards of living (largely because their economies, developed under colonialism, never developed a consumer economy as they were primarily geared towards export to the country that colonized them)
  - qqtt 4y ago
    Thrid world didn't always have an economic side to it. Third world was coined as a delineation of cold war participation status - it had nothing to do with economics. Switzerland, Austria, Ireland, and Finland were all included in the original definition of third world, but now no longer fit the modern definition of developing nation.
    - kergonath 4y ago
      There always was the notion that first-world countries tended to be economically liberal with market economies, whilst second-world ones had controlled economies. High living standards were associated with the first group, for good and bad reasons (and propaganda). And then there are always outliers. Though your example all have moved firmly to the first world since the 1950s.
seer-zig 4y ago
The phrase "3rd world" was invented to continue the status quo of Western colonization of said "3rd world" countries.
banannaise 4y ago
This is a common refrain of the American exceptionalism narrative. The implication is pretty clear: anything bad must necessarily be un-American, and the solution is to be more American (whatever that means).

jonhohle 4y ago

I’ve always found the evolution of third world very odd. How does something go from countries that are not Cold War participants to developing countries? I tend to thinking it in the original context and often find myself misunderstanding people when they use the term. I know definitions change, but it seems like an odd transition.

brezelgoring 4y ago
I considered this for a while, being from Uruguay (a member of that great category of countries) and for me, it generally means geopolitically and even economically weightless countries. It might be pessimistic but it -feels- like whatever happens here, be it coups, economics experiments, great innovations and the like - does not impact or even reach the rest of the world. One (mildly) rich Californian has more potential impact on the world than all of Latin America could ever have in the best of days.
jhbadger 4y ago
While I agree that the term is outdated and should just be replaced with "developing", "third world" always had the economic side to it. "First World" countries not only were the major Western powers in the Cold War, they also had the best standards of living. "Second World" countries, despite meaning the Soviet side, also meant countries with a lesser quality of life, where store shelves were constantly empty and people often had to wait hours in line to buy even basic staples like bread and meat. And yet for the most part people weren't starving (except for the Soviet famines in the 1930s or the Chinese one in the late 1950s). This wasn't the case for the "third world" countries not part of either bloc (mostly countries just achieving independence from colonialism) which often had the worst standards of living (largely because their economies, developed under colonialism, never developed a consumer economy as they were primarily geared towards export to the country that colonized them)
- qqtt 4y ago
  Thrid world didn't always have an economic side to it. Third world was coined as a delineation of cold war participation status - it had nothing to do with economics. Switzerland, Austria, Ireland, and Finland were all included in the original definition of third world, but now no longer fit the modern definition of developing nation.
  - kergonath 4y ago
    There always was the notion that first-world countries tended to be economically liberal with market economies, whilst second-world ones had controlled economies. High living standards were associated with the first group, for good and bad reasons (and propaganda). And then there are always outliers. Though your example all have moved firmly to the first world since the 1950s.

seer-zig 4y ago

The phrase "3rd world" was invented to continue the status quo of Western colonization of said "3rd world" countries.

banannaise 4y ago

This is a common refrain of the American exceptionalism narrative. The implication is pretty clear: anything bad must necessarily be un-American, and the solution is to be more American (whatever that means).