Roots

[Okeefenokee]

GCF says it was all sunshine and unicorns back then. There was no third world. They was all independent kings and shit. Then the western world invented the third world in the past century. He'll tell you all about it.

If GCF says that, he's misinformed. There have always been the big elephants, with the little mice running beneath them.

The current term 3rd world though, comes from the Cold War, where it was the 1st world Western nations, mainly NATO members, the 2nd world Soviet Bloc, and everybody else was the 3rd world.

yeah, I know.

[Speaker to Animals]

We was kings, yo.

[katarn]

GCF says it was all sunshine and unicorns back then. There was no third world. They was all independent kings and shit. Then the western world invented the third world in the past century. He'll tell you all about it.

If GCF says that, he's misinformed. There have always been the big elephants, with the little mice running beneath them.

The current term 3rd world though, comes from the Cold War, where it was the 1st world Western nations, mainly NATO members, the 2nd world Soviet Bloc, and everybody else was the 3rd world.

yeah, I know.

Thats where it comes from, yes. But colloquially it means another thing entirely. Now listed as the No 1 definition: the underdeveloped nations of the world, especially those with widespread poverty.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/third-world

[SuburbanFarmer]

Once again, I'm not disputing that life was nasty, brutish, and short across the globe, prior to the 20th. Indeed, for about half of humanity, it is still that way. That's the difference that I'm pointing out. We live in engineered, climate-controlled bliss, whilst half of our species still struggles to find food and medicine.

Such a disparity was impossible prior to the 20th. As they say, no king could buy a cellphone. Well now every peasant has one, but that does not mean that they're living well, or that the world is more fair due to the domination of Western civ.

We've left half of us far, far behind, and it's not right. That's all. So let's stop pretending that our newest form of society is the gleaming light upon humanity, or even that it's inherently superior to all others, because we are not done evolving. At least, I certainly hope not.



We should keep looking for alternatives, and fighting to change the world, because without that change, we will most surely end in ruin. This is not the best that we can do.

[Speaker to Animals]

Third world means nations not aligned with NATO or Warsaw Pact. Sweden was technically third world.

Developing world means shithole.

At some point, somebody is going to table the idea of dividing the world into European-peoples based civilizations, East Asian-based civilizations, and everything else. Looking at it through that perspective is the greater eye-opener.

[katarn]

Yes, this is true.

There are reasons why they are catching up now, and in many places are still in terrible messes. The West first got rich by stealing their stuff, and killing anyone who tried to stop them. Our current wealth is from more peaceful means, but the colonial period only really ended in the 1960s.

If you want to have nightmares read up on the Western powers conquest, and colonization of almost the entire planet, with the exceptions of Ethiopia, and Siam. Such conquest often involve not only the destruction of local institutions, but also of local bossiness, including factories, and farms, with the occasional bonus genocide. If you want to add nightmare fuel, look the combined 500+ year African slave trade by the Muslim powers, as well as 300+ trade of the Western nations. For extra credit, read the book The Heart of Darkness, by Joseph Conrad. It's a description of the Belgian Congo under the cover of being fiction.

Those were all terrible. But its not as simple as bad Western powers (and I know thats not exactly your argument). African slavery, after all, was centuries old before Muhammed and his Arabs thought of trading with Kilwa or Mogadishu, and disease was a big factor as well.

What factories were around for the Europeans to destroy?

[katarn]

Third world means nations not aligned with NATO or Warsaw Pact. Sweden was technically third world.

Developing world means shithole.

At some point, somebody is going to table the idea of dividing the world into European-peoples based civilizations, East Asian-based civilizations, and everything else. Looking at it through that perspective is the greater eye-opener.

Again, that's what they officially mean, but (especially without Soviet Russia) no one really uses them that way. Third world, to most now- speaking for Americans I guess, have no idea in other countries- is interchangeable with developing world. It's not proper, but it is.

[katarn]

Once again, I'm not disputing that life was nasty, brutish, and short across the globe, prior to the 20th. Indeed, for about half of humanity, it is still that way. That's the difference that I'm pointing out. We live in engineered, climate-controlled bliss, whilst half of our species still struggles to find food and medicine.

Such a disparity was impossible prior to the 20th. As they say, no king could buy a cellphone. Well now every peasant has one, but that does not mean that they're living well, or that the world is more fair due to the domination of Western civ.

We've left half of us far, far behind, and it's not right. That's all. So let's stop pretending that our newest form of society is the gleaming light upon humanity, or even that it's inherently superior to all others, because we are not done evolving. At least, I certainly hope not.



We should keep looking for alternatives, and fighting to change the world, because without that change, we will most surely end in ruin. This is not the best that we can do.

So what should we do to help those in the poorer parts of the world? I fully agree we should, but I think our own issues take priority.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Once again, I'm not disputing that life was nasty, brutish, and short across the globe, prior to the 20th. Indeed, for about half of humanity, it is still that way. That's the difference that I'm pointing out. We live in engineered, climate-controlled bliss, whilst half of our species still struggles to find food and medicine.

Such a disparity was impossible prior to the 20th. As they say, no king could buy a cellphone. Well now every peasant has one, but that does not mean that they're living well, or that the world is more fair due to the domination of Western civ.

We've left half of us far, far behind, and it's not right. That's all. So let's stop pretending that our newest form of society is the gleaming light upon humanity, or even that it's inherently superior to all others, because we are not done evolving. At least, I certainly hope not.



We should keep looking for alternatives, and fighting to change the world, because without that change, we will most surely end in ruin. This is not the best that we can do.

So what should we do to help those in the poorer parts of the world? I fully agree we should, but I think our own issues take priority.

Our own issues have always taken priority. That's how we got here.

At this point, i have no idea how to share the wealth without a complete civilizational redraw because our system is not made to do it.

[Okeefenokee]

Once again, I'm not disputing that life was nasty, brutish, and short across the globe, prior to the 20th. Indeed, for about half of humanity, it is still that way. That's the difference that I'm pointing out. We live in engineered, climate-controlled bliss, whilst half of our species still struggles to find food and medicine.

Such a disparity was impossible prior to the 20th. As they say, no king could buy a cellphone. Well now every peasant has one, but that does not mean that they're living well, or that the world is more fair due to the domination of Western civ.

We've left half of us far, far behind, and it's not right. That's all. So let's stop pretending that our newest form of society is the gleaming light upon humanity, or even that it's inherently superior to all others, because we are not done evolving. At least, I certainly hope not.



We should keep looking for alternatives, and fighting to change the world, because without that change, we will most surely end in ruin. This is not the best that we can do.

GCF is that loon that thatcher roasted in her going away session.

He wants to go back to when everyone was poorer, but at least we were closer.