States and Categories: An analysis on “What Does ‘Third World

Country’ Mean?” by NowThis World

Aranilla, Idel Lawrence1,2,3, Mr Gerald Sioson 1,2,3,4

College of Computer Studies

Bachelor of Science in Information Technology (1-YA-5)
Our Lady of Fatima University

College of Arts and Sciences

The Contemporary World (TCWD111)

2021
Third World Countries
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1xBpBaBbrA
Give your insights about the video above.
5 Paragraphs
Please be guided of the following:
Font style: Tahoma
Font size: 12
Single Spacing

States and Categories: An analysis on “What Does ‘Third World

Country’ Mean?” by NowThis World

People long to categorize objects, concepts, and experiences that

share similar traits, purpose, structure, and history with one another. It
ranges from words as simple as a genre to the complexity of state and their
development. While even a toddler knows the categories under the former—
the differences among comedy, action, romance, horror, and drama—the
confusion of the concept comes in the latter sense. Growing up, people have
familiarized themselves in the division of the world and state based on their
development: first-world, second-world, and third-world countries. The
common notion was that the farther one’s country is from the first-world
category, the more impoverished his reality turns out to be. Although it has
become a public customary, experts deem such a method of sorting countries
as an outdated and old-fashion way of thinking; offensive when one brand
states as “third-world.” As such, the question of what should one call and
categorize those countries arises. “What Does ‘Third World Country’ Mean?” is
a two-minute-and-nine-second video by NowThis World uploaded on Youtube
in 2015, which provides a brief and thorough discussion regarding the issue of
state categorization.

At its surface, all forms of labels given to entities have their problems
in one way or another. However, a history that explains it lies beneath the
word and the category it falls into. During the onset of the Cold War in the
1950s, the first world was made of countries that sided with the capitalist
ideology of the United States (Western Europe and their Allies), while the
second world comprised of those that leaned on the communist and socialist
ideology of the Soviet Union (China, Cuba, and their Allies). Those that did
not affiliate themselves between the two became what is known as the third-
world, including countries such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Yet when
one thinks of the highly-urbanized country that is prominent for its artificial
islands and the world’s tallest infrastructure (Burj Khalifa), he does not view it
as a state that fits the public perception of the third world. If the sorting
construction made does not have any socio-economic implication, then how
should people brand states in the present contemporary setting?

The video delves deeper into the idea and wraps up the nooks and
crannies of the labels “developing nations” and “poor nations.” While the
former term provides a better-sounding brand for countries of the third world,
the generalization that was associated with it made the pie bigger.
Developing nations became an umbrella term that included highly-
industrialized countries such as Brazil, India, and China—in some cases
including South Africa to completely form the BRICS Economy—as well as
those of which at the other end of the spectrum that does not have any way
for socio-economic progress and stability like Syria and Somalia. Although the
categorization became widely accepted presently, it is still too general, which
led to the thought of what about “poor nations?” However, depending on the
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ranking of each state released by the United
Nations (UN), “poor nations” also become unreliable for such a group based
on each country’s monetary and domestic production value. Thus the video
concludes that when one wants to think of world poverty, he can start by
looking at the 48 countries that constitute the category as “countries on the
UN’s list of least developed nations” (NowThis World, 2015).

While the long and awkward terminology presents a more formal and
specific point, I do not see it as a categorization that could replace the public
perception of the third world. The delineations made in the video forgot to
incorporate several factors that constitute the overall presence of a country in
the global economy: population density, state laws, income per capita,
poverty rate, among others. With these elements into consideration, the
global division of the North and South becomes more accurately viable.
Bisected using Brandt’s line, the global divide does not correlate with the
countries’ geographical relation but development. Although the Global North
and Global South still act as umbrella terms similar to developed and
developing nations, respectively, it provides a better picture of the
contemporary global structure. Given the Global South, one does not need to
worry about the issue with the previous term (developing nations) concerning
the wide socio-economic disparity between the statuses of countries under
BRICS and the plight of the majority under Africa. Housing more checklist in
the criteria than just the GDP of the states, the global divide presents a mean
of categorization that sees not only the superficial conditions of countries,
rather, up to the smallest units of its structure such as the constituents’
circumstances and contextual situations. The idea is exemplified in China’s
status as part of the Global South. According to Singh (2014), even though
the highly-industrialized country is one of the leading drivers of the
international economy, they fall short to mobilize towards the rankings of the
Global North because of their high population density and poverty rate, low
income per capita, wide socio-economic disparity among the people and
regions, and their lagging socio-political and financial systems. Moreover, the
country is at the middle level of the international Human Development Index
(HDI) that further hinders it from becoming a member of the Global North.
And with explicit words about development replaced (poor or wealthy, least
developed, developing, or developed, and first, second, or third worlds), the
discriminatory and offensive stigma with branding countries diminishes.

Categorizing states based on their height of socio-economic level and

development remains complicated, albeit supposed to be easy. It is a concept
that is difficult to be defined in a standardized sense because of the
numerous ever-changing factors that come into play. Given such, knowing
their own state identities is a crucial aspect for forming global solutions
catered specifically for them. And while sorting hundreds of countries into just
two or three groups sounds lacking, it has been proven helpful for
international relations. Whether one chooses to conform with the
categorization of the global divide and others on the list or stick with the one
that he grew up with, it is important to know that at its core, the point is for
countries lagging behind be pushed forth to achieve progress through
multilateral and bilateral aids and agreements—the essence of globalization.
REFERENCES

NowThis [NowThis World]. (2015, January 3). What Does “Third World
Country” Mean? [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1xBpBaBbrA

Singh, G. (2014, August 25). Srivatsan asked: Is it justified to include China

as a part of the “Global South” in the present context? Manohar
Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses. Retrieved
November 1, 2021, from
https://idsa.in/askanexpert/china_global_south