The term "Third World" arose during the Cold War to define countries that remained non-aligned with either NATO or the Communist Bloc. The United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Western European nations and their allies represented the First World, while the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and their allies represented the Second World. This terminology provided a way of broadly categorizing the nations of the Earth into three groups based on political and economic divisions.

French demographer, anthropologist and historian Alfred Sauvy, in an article published in the French magazine L'Observateur, August 14, 1952, coined the term Third World (French: Tiers Monde), referring to countries that were unaligned with either the Communist Soviet bloc or the Capitalist NATO bloc during the Cold War. His usage was a reference to the Third Estate, the commoners of France who, before and during the French Revolution, opposed the clergy and nobles, who composed the First Estate and Second Estate, respectively. Sauvy wrote, "This third world ignored, exploited, despised like the third estate also wants to be something."] He conveyed the concept of political non-alignment with either the capitalist or communist bloc.


Naturally, most Africans largely rejected the notion of their nation being classed as "third world" citing the derogatory notion as being addressed as third world citizens. The phrase third world has largely been discarded in place of a more derogatory phrase "developing Nation".

Within the original context to which the phrase "Third world" was coined which has it's roots from the non-aligned nations, I believe the third world categorization is far less offensive than "developing nation" which the later description is purely based on disadvantage.

Except for your reference to the origin of the term 'third world', which is pure history; in modern day context, the term 'third world' sounds more derogatory and thus more offensive than 'developing nations'.

third world I think.

unfortunately Nigeria belong to underdeveloped nation .categorizing Nigeria as a developing or ⅓ world is a promotion

Third world is more offensive. Sounds more like third-class citizens.

But Nigeria should be fourth or fifth world. E no merit that third world at all.

dodelight:
Except for your reference to the origin of the term 'third world', which is pure history; in modern day context, the term 'third world' sounds more derogatory and thus more offensive than 'developing nations'.

The United States before the end of WWII was considered a second world and prior to that the new world.

The Third world concept arose after WWII with the decolonization era which saw the independence of many former European colonies.

Third World to me, reflects the limited or lack of global and regional diplomatic and economic influence.

Developing Nations on the other hand, leaves one with the impression of an autistic retard nation.

It's to me another useless political correct dictum akin to how the term "Special needs" has now replaced "invalid".

For as long as we accept the description "developing world" and with Europe, US and China not slowing down soon for us to catch up, I believe we will be stuck with that euphemism for another century.

nwamehn:
Third world is more offensive. Sounds more like third-class citizens.

But Nigeria should be fourth or fifth world. E no merit that third world at all.

See it as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd generation categorization.

Will you prefer a 1g device over a 3g device?

FeloniousFelon:


The United States before the end of WWII was considered a second world and prior to that the new world.

The Third world concept arose after WWII with the decolonization era which saw the independence of many former European colonies.

Third World to me, reflects the limited or lack of global and regional diplomatic and economic influence.

Developing Nations on the other hand, leaves one with the impression of an autistic retard nation.

It's to me another useless political correct dictum akin to how the term "Special needs" has now replaced "invalid".

For as long as we accept the description "developing world" and with Europe, US and China not slowing down soon for us to catch up, I believe we will be stuck with that euphemism for another century.

Neither of the terms really matters me. I don't really feel it. What makes a nation develop is not really about what help it gets or doesn't get from abroad; it's rather the capacity of the leaders to channel the right course for the nation and their resolve to follow it through.

FeloniousFelon:

See it as a 1st, 2nd, 3rd generation categorization.
Will you prefer a 1g device over a 3g device?

Lol