What would a 4th world country be like?
CharlotteMaria
21-11-2003, 20:46
We use the terms 1st world and 3rd world to describe different levels of wealth in countries, but the terms 2nd world and 4th world are never used.
The SLAGLands
21-11-2003, 20:47
It would smell really, REALLY badly.
1st: North America, Western Europe.
2nd: Eastren Europe, Western Asia
3rd: Most of Africa
4th: Never heard of it.
It would smell really, REALLY badly.That it would...
Philopolis
21-11-2003, 20:49
4th world: if hitler conquered the world :twisted:
Underaloz
21-11-2003, 20:50
I've heard "4th world" used as a general term for people with no resources. It's like a world within the others if you wish. The poorest people on Earth.
Elektronia
21-11-2003, 20:50
This term has been used to described "failed" nations such as Somalia and Afghanistan where there is really no government or industry to meet the needs of the people. Horrid places.
4th world: if hitler conquered the world :twisted:Actually, he would have created a second world empire. Maybe even first world, after a while...
Philopolis
21-11-2003, 20:52
4th world: if hitler conquered the world :twisted:Actually, he would have created a second world empire. Maybe even first world, after a while...
yeah, after reducing the human population by 2/3
Mapalgetia
21-11-2003, 20:54
These are old terms.
First World: NATO (as during Cold War, without the new nations)
Second World: Warsaw Pact
Third World: Unaligned
Fourth World: Realistic micronation (this one's new; a made-up/not recognized country that wants independence)
As such, there is no longer a Second World. However, the system of 3rd World countries being poor/weak/in Africa is stupid, as technically Switzerland is 3rd world.
there was a second world, it was the CMEA, aka the Soviet Bloc.
the West: 1st world
the Soviet Bloc: 2nd world
the non-aligned nations: 3rd world
the third world did not begin as a term to describe poor nations, but rather as an alternative for those nations that did not want to side with the USA or the USSR. there is no fourth world; i've never heard the term used and i just spent six years hanging around some very respectable political scientists.
edit: damn Mapalgetia, one minute. nice.
Pablicosta
21-11-2003, 20:57
It couldn't happen.
In 3rd world Nations, the population is constantly dented by disease and lack of resources.
A fourth world nation would have no resources, no industry, no government and huge disease problems. Eventually the nation would be plagued so badly that it would simply dissapear.
1st: North America, Western Europe.
2nd: Eastren Europe, Western Asia
3rd: Most of Africa
4th: Never heard of it.
In your world:
1.- Latin America doesn't exist?
2.- Eastern Asia doesn't exist?
3.- The Third World is composed only by Africa?
4.- Where is the Middle East?
Mapalgetia
21-11-2003, 20:59
Why, Seocc, I believe we posted at almost the same time.
Indeed, here's a thought (not what I believe, but hey!) based on economy:
1st: Powerful
2nd: Weaker
3rd: Poverty
4th: Non-existent (not a real country)
Why, Seocc, I believe we posted at almost the same time.
check my edit.
Indeed, here's a thought (not what I believe, but hey!) based on economy:
1st: Powerful
2nd: Weaker
3rd: Poverty
4th: Non-existent (not a real country)
i humbly disagree. mine would look like
1st world <---> 2nd world (both in conflict over global hegemony): Powerful
3rd world: Unwilling to become an ideological, economic or military battleground.
4th: dream of some nut trying to coin a phrase.
Menelmacar
21-11-2003, 21:05
The generally-accepted system is:
First-world - wealthy capitalist countries. The US, Canada, Menelmacar, and most of Europe would be examples.
Second-world - was formerly the Soviet bloc but since that no longer exists this category is now very small in RL. Refers to socialist or communist countries. The PRC, Cuba, SeOCC, and most of CACE would be examples.
Third-world - poor nations in the rest of the world. Like most of Africa.
Following this progression, if there was a fourth world it would be an absolute shithole.
~Siri
Tanah Burung
21-11-2003, 21:07
There is a "fourth world" movement composed of indigenous peoples in first-world countries, like the Mohawks -- the colonized within, they also call themselves. This terms has not gained general acceptance, but some political scientists use it this way. Others use it only for the Least Developed Countries -- Malaysia being third-world, but Somalia being so far behind that it seems likke another world from Malaysia, for instance. But there is no agreed-on definition for fourth world. For that matter, the defintion of third-world can be debated.