Why is the US not considered a third world country?
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?
Have you ever lived in an actual third world country? Here’s some from my home country for each of your examples:
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.
1.2. and 3. worlds are terms from the cold war.
Languages evolve over time, all dictionaries now have OPs use of the word as the first definition.
What definition and what dictionary?
Just because a lot of people use a phrase incorrectly doesn't mean that it should be the accepted meaning.
A good example is "have your cake and eat it, too". As the Unabomber famously fixated on, the phrase was originally "you can't eat your cake and have it, too". That saying actually makes sense and has meaning.
After a while people began to jokingly say it backwards, as "you can't have your cake and eat it, too". That was dandy, until people forgot that it was a joke. Now, years later, we're all left with a saying that is fucking ridiculous sounding and but we keep saying it because we need the original phrase in our language.
Sure, language evolves and changes. Sometimes though, it's a good idea to be sticklers about the rules.
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.
I guess I still go by the original definition. There are other words that offer more detail anyway - kakistocracy, gerontocracy, corporatocracy, kleptocracy, etc.
Third World is an outdated term to refer to neutral countries in the cold war.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.
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.
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”.
Also, the "developed" vs. "developing" terminology doesn't really have a category that fits a country that was previously developed and is now declining.
Neoliberal hubris
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.
Looks like the USA is still about $10 trillion higher in GDP than China.
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.
Where are you getting this from?
Because of very high GDP per capita. It's another discussion whether GDP is a reliable measure of economy output.
The Gucci belt
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1629536?v=pdf UN report from 2018 so pre-pandemic.
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.
Did you figure it out yet?
Because the original concept of “ordinal world country” came out of the Cold War:
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
Personally, terms like 'first world' and 'third world' are pointless to me.
No country is without flaws, I'd say, because most countries are inhabited by people.
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.
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
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.
The US is a 3rd world country.
Okaymatewanker, luxury smearing is still smearing.
Yyyuck
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.
Cause derp a derp a dee.
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"
Language changes people.
In what ways are people changed by language?
That would mean that the US is more corrupt. I'm pretty sure that's not what you meant, so I'm just adding this to help.
I don't know if it's a language thing or a regional thing (or just a regular mistake), but "rank" usually means that 1 is the most, 2 is the second most, and 100th would be less corrupt than 1, 2, etc.