[Skunkabilly]

And could civilization be correlated to its people being armed?

[Blackhawk]

How about this:

1st: self reliant and able to force its will on other nations through military or economic means.

2nd: self reliant only

3rd: all others.And could civilization be correlated to its people being armed? Don't think so.

[Lone_Gunman]

Not sure exactly your question, are you wanting definitions of first, new, and third world countries?

[Hkmp5sd]

The 3rd world does not have TV or Internet access. :)

[No4Mk1]

You can read a good discussion of this here (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/General/ThirdWorld_def.html) but in a nutshell:

1st World - Modernized West
2nd World - Former Communist Block
3rd World - Underdeveloped Impovrished Nations

These are the traditional definitions. You raise an interesting question about the correlation of armed citizenry to relative civilization. I would have to agree that there probably isn't much of a correlation any more, but I wonder if you look back through history....

[GinSlinger]

1st, 2nd, 3rd not in use as much in International Relations. There we refer to the world as North and South. For the most part the Northern Hemisphere is more industialised. Important exceptions include China (which is considered to be in the "South") and Australia (which is considered North). Sometimes the term "trasition zones" is used to refer to the "Little Dragons" of the far-east and Isreal.

GinSlinger

[Art Eatman]

It woudl take a Google search or some such to find the earliest time of the usage...

Roughly, the terms came about in reference to industrialization, governmental stability and standard of living. This last included measures of consumer goods, health and longevity. 40 or 50 years back, that meant mostly western Yurrop and the U.S.; Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand for First World.

"2-1/2" world meant places like Costa Rica and possibly South Africa. Originally, it also included even the "better" South American countries, I believe.

Third World? Well, most all of Africa serves as a role model...

It's not a set of absolute judgements, of course.

There are parallels between categorization and the mix of political freedom and whether or not the economy is essentially capitalistic.

Note that as China has given up on Mao's notion of a Great Leap Forward, and has moved more to a Capitalistic Leap, they've dramatically improved their economic status. That is, the more the mainland Chinese emulate the offshore Chinese, the higher the standard of living.

:), Art

[PATH]

Well here in the US we are in the first world. Everywhere else is the third world as far as I am concerned..

[Skunkabilly]

I have heard of parts of the US such as DC, referred to as 'third world', and wasn't sure if it was a sarcastic remark, or if those places really fit the description.

The arms were just an afterthought.

[Wildalaska]

If the measurement is flush toilets, then parts of Alaska are third world....

[faustulus]

MONEY

[PATH]

Faustulus,

Precisely!

PATH

[JPM70535]

1st world- countrys that all 3rd worlders aspire to enter at all costs, and that all 2nd and 3rd worlders get gobs of money from .

2nd world- countrys that while their citizens do not seek to emigrate, still expect 1st worlders to provide gobs of money to prop up their economies.

3rd world- All countrys whose governments are broke, corrupt, and incompetent to the degree that their citizens will try to leave them at all costs,and whose governments exist only as long as the 1st world foots the bill.

Lets see, 3rd world, Africa, Asia, China excluded, All of South America, The Carribean, Mexico,

2nd world, Russia, China, Japan, Oil Rich Sheikdoms, France,

1st world, Canada, Australia, England, Germany, and of course the US, that great cash cow and refuge for all theworlds riff raff.

In reality there is only one 1st world country and that is,AMERICA!!

[PeacefulWarrior]

The "third world" is anywhere you can't drink the water from the tap without consequences.

[twoblink]

Skunk,

The difference is country of origins of their AK47's and price.

1st World = from Romania or China, and about $169+ on up.

2nd World = from Romania, China, and the South Americas, from about $100 and up.

3rd world = from anywhere in the world, and starts at about a loaf of bread in price, and up..

:D

3rd world laws say, you can't have guns, but we aren't able to enforce that law because you have more firepower then we do.

2nd world nations say, you can't have guns, and can do something about it, but very little.

1st world nations try to make the entire nation into Singapore...
:neener:

[Wildalaska]

The "third world" is anywhere you can't drink the water from the tap without consequences.

Hmm, Ive gotten "Lenins Revenge" in Moscow, "Maggie Thatchers Revnge" in London, "Hitlers Revenge" in Munich (well maybe that was from too much beer) and "Bangkok Belly", so I guess they are all third world:neener:

[F4GIB]

From my experience in the past year:
USA & Canada - First world.
UK and Europe - 1 and 1/2 (they really aren't up to our standards. Holiday Inn regularily
beats the best in Europe.)
Mexico - sometimes as good as Europe but mostly
Second World.
West Africa - third world (and the gap between
Mexico and Africa is much greater
than the gap between Europe and
Mexico.
Third world is unimaginablly bad. You have to go
there to even begin to get a handle
on it.

[romulus]

UK and Europe - 1 and 1/2 (they really aren't up to our standards. Holiday Inn regularily

Oh dear lord...

[10-Ring]

1st world is basically, modernized west w/ the infrastructure in place to be self sufficient.
3rd world has basic infrastructure needs

In any gov't the idea of "guns & butter" is a basic decision they make. Whatever resources a gov't decides to put into feeding its people or supplying its armies also helps determine how quickly or slowly a country changes its "3rd world" status.

[KMKeller]

Good thread! It'd be interesting to discover the determining criteria that are in place, if there are any or if this is an arbitrary standard meaning "as good as us" or "not as good as us".

[Carlos Cabeza]

The lack of modern refrigeration.
Medical facilities, Basic human rights and other such things.

[geojap]

I hate to tell you guys, but No4Mk1 is exactly correct. That is the textbook definition from a International Political Science textbook. Those definitions, however, have been somewhat corrupted by our everyday use of those terms. The media uses the term "Third World" constantly and probably has no idea what the term originally meant. We never hear the term "Second World". It is most likely obsolete as many of the countries it refers to no longer exist or are not communist anymore.

I think the rest of the offered definitions, jokingly or more serious, are based on everyday perceptions of how the terms are used in the media and not on what the terms actually refer to.