The 1-2-3 Country Classification System: Inconsequential or Not?
Illustration by Mikayla LoBasso
“If you shouldn’t call it a third world country, then what should you say instead?”
The answer isn’t as straightforward as we’d like it to be. The 1-2-3 classification system in place is a nomenclature that is wrong - for several reasons. It’s a geographically imprecise label built upon prejudice and several other complications. But, to stop ourselves there and not grasp an understanding of not only the roots, but further implications of this question would be inappropriate.
So, what exactly is a ‘Third World’ nation today, or even 50 years ago? To be frank, it has always had blurred lines, but here’s a bit of historical context. In the late 1940’s, the Cold War was only just beginning when the denomination of the First, Second and Third World were coined. The First World included the U.S.A., Canada, most countries in Western Europe as well as their allies. The Second World was the “communist” alliance, made up of China, Cuba, The Soviet Union, etc. Every other nation that did not pertain to either two was marked as part of the Third World.
These labels have an inaccurate definition in today’s socio-cultural and political environment, as well as having a prejudicial ideology planted within them. It isn’t really clear as to what it means to be a third world country, due to the fact that in the 21st century there isn’t just one route of achieving economic and social affluence anymore. A capitalist democracy is no longer the prerequisite to join the First World-ers club. For example, Saudi Arabia – the sandbox I call home – is a theocratic led, oil funded nation which has a much larger per capita income than the First World country of Turkey, but still, it is only recognized as a developing country. Brazil, on the other hand, is perceived as a ‘poor’ country because it typically isn’t categorized under the First World umbrella. Interestingly enough, the Global Peo Services states that in 2020 Brazil had the eighth highest GDP in the world.
‘Developing countries’ might even seem like the next best option, but believe me, it is still problematic. It further indicates that there is a hierarchy between countries, and paints Western nations as idyllic, when in reality we know that they can be far from it. Take the wise words of Auntie Antifa on Twitter as the perfect example, “America is a third world country in a Gucci belt.” Soon enough as a society we begin to internalize this hierarchy and create borders between ‘First’, ‘Second’ and ‘Third’ World nations, which perpetuates prejudicial rhetoric. What seems most sensible to me is to discard these words and have conversations about nations using more specific metrics.
Although the question might feel inconsequential, it is essential that we ask ourselves under what consensus does a Third World country attain its label? Are these nations a product of colonialism or neglect? The tremendous amount of economic inequality present in our world today is not an outcome of something that occurred overnight, it’s a direct result of colonialism. This is the process which has had a severe reaching impact on developing countries, and it is also the methodology of spreading capitalism. To put it into simpler terms, the duplexity of both systems grants richer countries the opportunity to exploit less developed nations through the draining of their natural resources and raw materials for personal growth and accumulation. When these countries continuously extract from less developed areas, isn’t it obvious that the economic and political imbalance will never cease to exist? However, economic consequences are not the sole inhibitors of growth. There are still cultural repercussions of colonialism that have pitted various parties against one another, resulting in a cultural and social division. It’s also worth mentioning that while colonialism does play a massive role in the 1st-2nd-3rd world imbalance, it is not the sole reason a country remains impoverished. Improper management and corruption also fails a nation's welfare and growth.
So, is the 1-2-3 country classification system really as bad as it sounds? I mean, I wouldn’t go as far as saying it is the most problematic thing going on in the world right now, but it does most certainly affect how we perceive nations around the world, alongside with their cultures. Furthermore, it’s a simple query that urges us to pose more in-depth questions about colonialism and exploitation. This world doesn’t exist in black and white; labels always have problems associated with them. Being aware of the roots of language and what kind of narrative they convey is essential. So as a rule, I’d just say try aiming for specificity when talking about a country. Mistakes are inevitable, but at least we’re trying.
Sources
If You Shouldn’t Call It The Third World, What Should You Call It? by Marc Silver, NPR. January 4th, 2015.
Per Capita Income by Will Kenton, Investopedia. Updated July 14th, 2019.
The Economic Impact of Colonialism by Daron Acemoglu & James Robinson, VOX EU. January 30th, 2017.
The Top 15 Countries by GDP in 2020, Global Peo Services. 2020.