Why is the US not considered a third world country?

WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world – 77 points –

IMO, The US has crumbling infrastructure, corrupt government, dangerous cities, and a lot of homelessness, among so many other problems. Hell, millions of people in the US don’t even have power right now.

What’s the difference?

72

Have you ever lived in an actual third world country? Here’s some from my home country for each of your examples:

  • Corruption in government is worse and more blatant than what you see in the US. It happens at the top all the way down to the lowest levels. You sometimes have to bribe people just to get some services done. I once had to have a police report done for an auto accident. The officer had the report typed up and they just needed to click the print button. He then said I can pay a quick process “fee” to get the report now, or come back to get the report in 3 days. It was an hour drive to the station, but I didn’t want to pay a bribe, so I came back after 3 days.

  • Infrastructure is crumbling not just because of lack of maintenance, but because the cheapest materials are used and infrastructure is not built up to code. Every step of the process means a cut for someone’s own pockets, so you end up with a tiny amount compared to what was initially funded. Perfectly functioning roads are destroyed and rebuilt in perpetuity because contractors are in cahoots with local government to implement “projects” where they fleece funds by agreeing on a budget then switching materials to substandard quality and pocketing the remaining amount, with the politician getting a % of course. A section of the street in my childhood home is still unpaved 30+ years later just because no one bothered to finish it.

  • Homeless people in the US may still have access to food banks, shelters, charities, etc. Homeless people in thrid world countries may have nothing at all.

  • People lose power in the US due to catastrophies. We had random 12 hour blackouts and water shut-offs several times a month for no reason at all. Water isn’t potable in the entire country and you have to boil or buy water from filter stations if you want to be safe.

You've doctored your first two points to avoid the fact that widespread corruption and crumbling infrastructure are in fact a feature of the USA. That said, obviously we are not a 'third world' country, nor a 'developing or under-developed' country. We are, instead in our own special category of fucked. We have an absolutely giant economy, but as we have decided politically to disinvest in all of our public sectors, either by privatization or under-funding, we are rapidly becoming dysfunctional. Add to that the huge global reclaiming of surplus value from workers wages to plutocrats profits, and we are, as is obvious, in a political crisis shared by the rest of the neoliberal democracies.

Nope, my first two points did not change from my edits. I never said corruption or crumbling infrastructure isn’t widespread in the US. I just said that not only do both exist in third world countries as well, but it’s even worse.

Third World is an outdated term to refer to neutral countries in the cold war.

Unless there was a sudden dramatic shift in US geopolitical policy it would literally be impossible for it to be considered third world, as the very definition of third world as the definition inherently implies that the country in question is not allied with the US and the broader Western World.

Austria and Switzerland were third world, technically Yugoslavia was too. China became third world for a decent stretch after the sino-soviet split since the other half of the definition relies on not being allied with the Soviets in particular.

The use of third world as an insult for poor countries is a neo-colonial mindset that just takes for granted that anyone who isn't an outright ally of the west or of the Russians must just be too poor to be worth considering as anything but uneducated people in dirt houses living subsistence lifestyles and who's main interaction with an apparatus of state is occasionally seeing a humvee loaded up with the child soldiers of this warlord or that drive by.

1.2. and 3. worlds are terms from the cold war.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-world_model

Languages evolve over time, all dictionaries now have OPs use of the word as the first definition.

What definition and what dictionary?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/third%20world

Maybe saying all dictionaries is a bit much, I only checked a few.

USA doesn't fit any of those definitions anyway.

I know what OP means, 3rd world is just not the right word.

USA is a banana republic

Oh 100%, I'm just saying his use of the word is in no way wrong like half the comments seem to imply. Everyone knew exactly what he meant and the definition is in most dictionaries.

This seems to pop up everytime the word is used and it's a major pet peeve of mine.

My comment is only aimed at those that think third world only means the historical definition when that hasn't been the case for at least two decades. The word third world is almost always used to mean developing country in day to day conversation.

I guess I still go by the original definition. There are other words that offer more detail anyway - kakistocracy, gerontocracy, corporatocracy, kleptocracy, etc.

Developing countries would be the synonym for third world in the definition used by OP.

I agree language is descriptive and not prescriptive, but it sounds like comparing two categories developing vs developed may be more apt and not three like an updated 3 world model would entail. Or maybe I just find it unsettling to call something a third without referencing a third of something.

Because "first world" means NATO, not having a high standard of living.

Because the actual definition of a 3rd world country doesn't define the USA as one...that's why. You're adding things that don't fall into the definition.

I’m not trolling, I’m genuinely asking. What doesn’t fall into the definition of a third world country?

It's a cold war term - basically, first world is the US and capitalist countries, second world is the Soviet and communist countries, and third world are the unaffiliated.

It's slightly more nuanced than that, but that's the basic summary.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World

Or maybe we come up with a new word instead of just using old words incorrectly?

We literally did come up with new terms after the cold war. We now say Developing and Developed nations.

Nope that was apparently too confusing, now we say global north and global south.

It's a much better system, see Australia in the south of the globe, is in the global north for instance. It just makes perfect sense.

I'm sorry but that's still the meaning of the term. I know it is colloquially understood to mean a "poor" country, but we shouldn't ignore the original intent.

Also, please don't tell me how my country is. I quite literally live here. I can read every article online that you can, plus I can go outside and see it for myself. We know we have problems, we aren't ignorant to them - at least not all of us - and they're nowhere near as bad as some commentors on this post believe they are.

As a non american we 100% see america as 3rd world.

Speak for yourself. I see it as fucked up, but definitely not third-world...

  • 1st world = US, NATO, and their allies.
  • 2nd world = USSR, China, the Warsaw Pact, and their allies.
  • 3rd world = everyone else.

e.g. Switzerland would be a 3rd world country by the original definition.

Third world actually came from the cold war. There were the two major sides, but then there was a whole bunch of countries that weren't really on either side. A whole "third world". Of course, a lot of those countries were poor, so the term came to be associated with that, but there really isn't a coherent definition of what it means to be a third world county. It has never really been about the standard of living for the average citizen though. More about whether a country is a bully or the bullied on the international stage, and we all know where the US falls on that spectrum.

It’s a term rooted in geo-political alliances and power standings, not economic status

If you mean “developped” vs “develloping”.

The HDI of the US is significantly lower than canada or northern europe, but still much higher than the world average.

Here’s an Inequality Adjusted version of the Human Development index, the US comes 27th, below Estonia and Cyprus, but 27th out of nearly 200 is counted as “develloped”.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index&diffonly=true

Also, the "developed" vs. "developing" terminology doesn't really have a category that fits a country that was previously developed and is now declining.

Because the definition of "first world" is "aligned with the US during the Cold War", second world was aligned with the USSR, third world were countries not significant on the global stage. It correlates with but does not require poverty or dictatorships.

Several reasons.

  1. The US is largely responsible for defining what 1st, 2nd, and 3rd World countries are.
  2. It has the largest economy in the world.
    (I think? That may have gone to China by now. Not sure. But it was true recently.)
  3. Even with everything you said being true. It's still the wealthiest country in the world, by a large margin. Epically when you compare incomes, lifestyles, and infrastructure to actual 3rd world countries. It's not even close.

Because the "third world" doesn't mean what people think it means. It's cold war terminology. First World is western aligned nations, Second World is Eastern bloc, Third World is nonaligned with the eastern or western nations. FBFW it meant nations that generally weren't powerful or wealthy enough to be of interest to either East or West, and that poverty often meant they really had a lot of infrastructure and other problems. That's why we're not "Third World", it's a geopolitical alignment, not a quality of how we treat our citizens and infrastructure. So we're First World even if our country is turning into a shithole in some ways.

Because of their GDP. People are incredibly rich there. But one false move and there are no safety nets. You can get bankrupt in an instant.

Because of very high GDP per capita. It's another discussion whether GDP is a reliable measure of economy output.

Because the original concept of “ordinal world country” came out of the Cold War:

  • “first world” was US/Western affiliated/allied
  • “second world” was USSR affiliated/allied
  • ”third world” just meant “none of the above” for a very long time

However, since then, understanding of the term in popular discourse has somewhat shifted from geopolitical affiliation to a vague amalgam of socioeconomic status/GDP/“are you a pariah state”/etc.

On a less serious note: the US is really just several dozen 3rd world countries in a trenchcoat essentially relying on (but also politically backstabbing) the economic product of like 5 or 6 states that could be first world economies in their own right

Because the majority of old people are rich and there are still the echoes of a real middle class. Let's see if Trump gets elected and everyone with the cash to do so flees his outrageous proposed tariffs.

I 100% agree; the thing is they measure this stuff by the mean so a few outliers (rich districts or billionaires) make things look reasonable by number.

Because of their modern and huge airforce and army, along with all the big tech companies, and Hollywood.

The PR image of America is quite nice. The reality, not that great.

I don't like the government system, I don't like the police, I don't like anything to do with this country's government. I just don't like it, because... they're sneaky, like I said - they're deceitful, they're lying, they're cheats, they rip the people off. That's the American government for you. America is a third world country, and people don't recognise it... and I think that that's pretty god damn sad, that they don't recognise their own country as a third world, third rate, third class slum

Add political violence to your list.

It's mostly the stable government, infrastructure, currency and tech.

Pretty much why I've been calling the US a 3rd world country for years.

Your"IMO" aren't opinions; those are the facts, jack

IMO, no country that primarily uses toilet paper instead of a bidet is 1st world.

Another Lemmy "hot take"

My guess is Lemmy skews young.

so many of these revelations and showerthoughts are pretty banal coming of age stuff.

The country most famous for the bidet trend is France and currently swimming in the Seine is still looking impossible. If my infrastructure is so shitty and 3rd world here at least my lakes, rivers and water ways are all clean enough for me to use.

Every country has its problems, but calling the US 3rd world is just your brain being full of straight negative propaganda. Simultaneously not every French River is unusable or every country filled with Bidets an actual mark of their progress. Go experience a country first before just talking shit.

Also, stable government?? Literally our biggest problem is that our government has been so stable that it has changed for 240 years.

The US has the clean water act - correct.

"at least my lakes, rivers and water ways are all clean enough for me to use". - very, very wrong.

Many of your waterways are so polluted that they regularly catch fire and are linked to higher cancer rates

Then there's "The country most famous for the bidet trend is France and currently swimming in the Seine is still looking impossible",

which, if we

  1. ignore Japan

  2. pretend fecal matter is only unsanitary if you clean yourself with water(incorrect)

  3. and follow your implication that because bidets were popularized in one country, part of a single river in their country is historically dangerously polluted(incorrect),

makes as much sense as

"The country most famous for TP is the US and currently the Mississippi, Ohio River and Savannah are and will be polluted for decades to come, plus the Cuyahoga river and also US drinking water catches on fire sometimes."

How about

"If my infrastructure is so shitty"

No "ifs" about it, American infrastructure is crumbling. Your power grids regularly fail and are vulnerable because of their age, your bridges are collapsing, people can't easily travel the country because of undeveloped mass transit, your health care system has failed its population, and you can't house or feed even your veterans, let alone large parts of your population.

Those are all direct evidence of a critical failure in US infrastructure.

"Also, stable government??" Putting aside that your standard for stability is

"our government has been so stable that it has changed for 240 years."(I have no idea what you're going for here),

Your corrupt presidents, senators, congressmen, governors and citizens regularly cry out for secession and civil war, regularly attempt to defraud your electoral system and literally attempted a violent coup to overthrow your governmental seat of power just three years ago.

Trump, liable for rape and treason, constitutionally prohibited from running for president, might be re-elected, despite his admiration for and aspiration to emulate authoritarian regimes(and so many other faults).

Not the picture of stability. The picture of instability, in fact.

Pretty much why I’ve been calling the US a 2nd world country for years.

FYI, "second world" means communist -- or more specifically, Warsaw Pact. Only delusional MAGAs would call the US that.

Bidets are truly the line between civilization and barbarism

Done with my business!

Should I use my own hand covered by a strip of absorbent tissue paper to smear waste over my skin?

Or wash it away with water without touching my waste with my hand?

What a dilemma.

2 more...

TIL: Way too many people think it's still the Cold War. Language changes people.

Yup, it does change. It was attempted to mean "poor" and it's been reappropriated since

If you're trying to use modern language, it's "developed" and "developing"

You mean global north/ global south.

Developing and developed are considered negatively.

But in terms of laypeople words, that are used every day, 1st and 3rd world mean the same thing.

North/south imply certain regions can't improve and is far worse than developed/developing

If layperson words didn't have an issue with 1st/3rd world, you wouldn't see so many comments about it

Language changes people.

In what ways are people changed by language?