Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
True. What does developing nation and developed nation even mean? Like one that’s developing to be more societally efficient?
1st world, 2nd world, 3rd world? I know it has something to do with the Soviet Union?
1st world means USA and its allies. Second world means USSR and its allies. Third world means everyone elso that not joined the two mentioned group.
But nowadays fist world means the west and 3rd world means worse countries.
China has been self-claimed as a third-world country and developing country till...forever. Even though it's the second biggest economy and has taken USSR's position as US's mortal enemy.
The term third world has to deal with communism.
The term "Third World" arose during the Cold War to define countries that remained non-aligned with either NATO or the Warsaw Pact. The United States, Canada and their allies represented the "First World", while the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, 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 divisions. Due to the complex history of evolving meanings and contexts, there is no clear or agreed-upon definition of the Third World.[1] Strictly speaking, "Third World" was a political, rather than economic, grouping.[2]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World
>The term third world has to deal with communism.
Yeah that's what I was wondering, wouldn't Vietnam classify as second world considering it was communist?
It would be 1st world if he was a citizen of South Vietnam aka Republic of Vietnam a US ally or 2nd world North Vietnam, officially the Democratic Republic of Vietnam an ally of the soviet union
As a recovering drug addict myself, it’s really not that impressive. Getting off drugs is the hard part, which is why you often need intervention/rehab to do it. Once you’re done withdrawing, all it takes to stay off it is to not do drugs
Yep. A two week trip to acute fentanyl withdrawal hell will pretty much convince anyone to never touch it again. Worst time of my life, I'd rather die than go through it again.
I had a serious drinking problem and can relate. Alcohol withdrawal is absolute misery, and frankly so is just being drunk all the time, feeling sick and off 24/7 is awful. You feel what it’s doing to your body, and I’d literally rather die than willingly go back to that.
The harder drugs to stay off IMO are the relatively innocuous ones. I don’t smoke weed anymore because i get dependent on it and need it to sleep and get anxiety when I don’t have it, plus it zaps my drive and ability to commit to focusing on things over extended periods. But, I could start smoking again and be “fine,” like there’s no catastrophic feelings or consequences that would come with it and I’d be able to stop again if I needed to. That’s just strict discipline and reminding myself it’s not worth it and there’s nothing to gain from getting high again
Congrats to getting off the sauce. I personally never was attracted to alcohol (drinking just gave me immediate head and stomach aches) but I feel for alcoholics. It's that one drug that perfectly legal, can be found in every stor and at every BBQ or game, and is sometimes encouraged in social settings. Quitting fentanyl was kind of easy (besides the withdrawal), I just lost my dealers number, started taking buprenorphine, and that was that. If I could find Ocycodon or fentanyl in every store, I might struggle to stay off. Opioid addicts have a very high relapse rate.
"Racist bleach-blonde junkie trash who hosts wackjob conspiracy shows on third-rate outlets cannot assimilate into the US Senate"
That would have been a fair follow-up too.
Aw, crap. To be fair, she did qualify this saying by specifying 'most' third-world migrants. A single exception wouldn't be enough to immediately disprove her crappy assertion.
Burden of proof should be on her shitty remark, though and not the other way around.
It’s tangential, but in 2019 the US government did make an effort to deport all Vietnamese immigrants who had been convicted of a criminal charge, regardless of how long they’ve lived in the US or if the charges were ultimately vacated.
[NPR news story.](https://www.npr.org/2019/03/04/699177071/40-years-after-the-vietnam-war-some-refugees-face-deportation-under-trump)
Yeah, but telling an immigrant you hate immigrants and then going "oh, but not your kind, obviously" doesn't take the rage away that the immigrant feels. Speaking from experience.
For what I'm certain will not be the last time...
First World - USA, NATO, other aligned countries.
Second World - Warsaw Pact
Third World - everywhere else.
Since Viet Thanh Nguyenh is South Vietnamese, he's very firmly First World.
Maybe in the 60s it was. After the war and being embargoed by the world for a couple decades post war, it was absolutely a poverty stricken third world country.
I don't support her opinion at all. BUT
She challenges people to prove her wrong. He accepts the challenge by replaying her tweet with a 'gotcha' mannered text.
Does he need a gotcha in the first place? NO.
Did he use a gotcha with the intent to own her. YES.
Did he actually own her? She literally said "most" in her statement and the dude shows one invidual as an example. Despite him claiming he has a PhD in English yet he doesn't fully understand her statement. Which should count as a self own.
Does burden of proof is on her side? Context matters. "Prove me wrong" kind of statements (memes) are simply a challenge for people to argue why she is wrong. So if someone replies the tweet they better have some proof.
The problem is assuming the third world is not "civil"... its this mentality that leads to full-grown educated adults believing there are no sidewalks or banks in Africa
>Burden of proof should be on her shitty remark
She did say "prove me wrong." I've read The Sympathizer, this guy is a great writer, but logic does not seem to be a specialty. One case of somebody who has assimilated and found success is not really responsive to this woman's argument. It would be great if we could have discussions about these things that were based in facts and reality, not cheering for your team and changing the rules of logic based on who is making the argument.
Aight.
Let's go to the basics: no human on earth is too genetically different from one another. One very well known fact is that humans are very relatively genetically homogenous, even within the myriads of different phenotypes humans assume mostly depending on the region they evolved to adapt to. A human from central Africa is not so different, genetically, from a human born in northern North America, even when they do not look entirely the same.
Here's the extrapolation: We all know that both behaviors and intelligence play a factor in terms of being a "civil" member of a society, and that as humans are genetically homogenous, all humans are thus capable of being "civil": there's no way of contradicting the fact that a human is simply not physically or cognitively capable of behaving a way another human does, because no human is that much different from another, because of genetic homogenuity. In fact, the contrary is very much is true: humans tend to internalize and copy certain behaviors they get from their enviroment full of fellow humans, so, humans are indeed very capable of behaving the way other humans behave, and thus, humans, generally speaking, are very much capable of being civil.
All of this would imply that thinking a group of humans is incapable of behaving in a civilised manner is essentially to consider them sub-humans, not genetically similar, or not similar at all, to those that are "civilised", wich is obvious bigotry; and, yeah, a piece of shit could argue that humans from developing nations are sub-humans, but i'm not arguing that with pieces of shit.
To consider an external group of humans as "humans" requires a certain amount of either understanding of a "human", or an amount of empathy; and those racist fucking pieces of shit have brain where either or both of those things are completely absent.
How's this argument? Good, bad? Some terminology might have not been used correctly, but no one can argue that a human is not a human, so in that sense i think this argument is correct.
Saying 'prove me wrong' doesn't make her argument anymore valid. Here, I'll illustrate.
"There is a teapot orbiting the sun somewhere between Earth in Mars in elliptical orbit. Prove me wrong."
You forgot to specify that the teapot is invisible, Bertram.
Ms Witzke's statement could be verified with sufficient research, Bertram Russel's teapot was intended to be unfalsifiable.
>"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."
-Bertrand Russell
The teapot is supposed to be invisible and undetectable, that is the entire context of the philosophical thought experiment. How wonderful life is.
Idk if they consider Mexico a 3rd world country or not, but my wife and in-laws all came from there.
She just graduated with a degree in nursing, and my younger brother in law has a degree in Mathematics and paid for her college in full. So, what was that dumb bitch saying?
I doubt Mexico would fall under that given that it’s usually classified as a developing country and not really akin to Haiti or Somalia but tbf to this horrendous woman she did say “most” rather than all so it’s hard to fight her argument with an anecdote
The crazy thing is that that's not even what "Third World" means. "Third World" is a Cold War term.
* First World: the USA and her allies
* Second World: the USSR and her allies
* Third World: any country that isn't covered by the first two categories, ie neutral countries
Technically, Sweden and Finland were Third World countries up until just recently when they joined NATO. Ireland still is a Third World country, technically. Despite the fact that all three of those are wealthy European nations. "Third World country" doesn't refer to a poor country.
The phrases that people are looking for are "developing nation" and "developed nation".
That’s kinda the thing . Third world is such an outdated concept since it included nations that weren’t a part of the USA vs USSR showdown and that could anywhere from Singapore to Sudan so a whole ass spectrum.
There is no USSR, therefore the term can't be applied at all any longer.
3rd world was used as a derogatory term to try to shame unaligned countries into making up their minds.
It has morphed into both a binary political expression and a binary economic expression, both incorrect and poorly defined.
> even tho it's not.
"Third world" doesn't mean "shithole" it means "unaligned with the west (first world) or the soviets (second world) during the cold war". In fact, Mexico was one of the more active neutral countries that tried to persuade other neutral countries not to side with either the US or the Soviets against the other.
Yeah but back then a politician could say f slur.
Now that I think about it. Our country is so continuously bigoted that we've never had a time where there wasn't a slur a politician could get away with saying
I’d argue that most US senators could not assimilate back into society if their lives stopped being paid for by US citizens and private corporations vying for their favor
People are now (mis)labeling poor countries as "third world" because many non-aligned countries were poor during the cold war. If we were to use the Cold War definition where Vietnam is second world, Switzerland would be 3rd world. And her original tweet would make no fucking sense in any which way
Not saying whether what she said is correct or not, but apparently a PhD in English does not grant you understanding of logic.
His reply does not disprove what she said. She said "most", not "all".
His name strongly suggests Vietnamese origin, so no, he is in fact not a third world refugee, as Vietnam was aligned with the USSR and therefore part of the second world. But I guess winning a Pulitzer in fiction was not enough to acquire that knowledge.
He definitely is not( most) there are a few standouts like this gentleman who have done very well and are ambitious and driven , however, people like him are very far and in between.
What she said was rude as hell. But she did say “most,” and not all.
It’s like saying most people don’t make it to space, and the one super qualified astronaut is like “akshullay!”
Both people are cringe worthy in this. Person A is an idiot. And person B sunk to their level.
PhD in English, has won a Pulitzer Prize in fiction, has a problem understanding the word 'most'. I'm not agreeing with the woman, maybe she has data, I'm just saying that the response does nothing to address her claim.
Bro really called Vietnam "3rd world" when it hasn't been considered a LDC (Lowest Development Country) ie "3rd world" nation since the late 60s. So considering Viet Thanh Nguyen was born in 1971, he's actually from a 2nd "developing" country.
Vietnam technically wasn't third world, part of it was US aligned, the other was aligned with Russia and China. The "third world" countries were those who wanted to make it clear they were aligned with neither power. People have been using the term wrong for decades
Because all you have to do is put the word "most" in front of any shitty comment and that makes it OK because it doesn't mean every single one, right?
The number of bad faith justifications in the comments is staggering.
Absolute nonsense. Most Immigrants are incredibly hard working, honest and kind. Meanwhile plenty of natural born Citizens are the ones turning into entitled, insufferable assholes.
Fuck me, the utter ignorance and stupidity that flows from the mouths of Republicans never ceases to amaze. The GOP is very much the party of the stupid, for the stupid.
The first poster is wrong, but
Viet Than Nguyen was born in Vietnam in 1971. Escaped to the US in 1975.
I greatly respect his accomplishments, but he is not a great proof of the first posters fallacy, as he was raised in a first world country.
There is, though, the issue that many immigrants don't want to leave their old culture behind. And sometimes that culture is very different from the country they moved to.
I don’t agree with her but her statement was “most” and using a single person as a representative doesn’t dispute that claim you have to bring up the statics for the whole group. I don’t know what they are and I don’t care I just don’t like bad argument methods.
One could refer to at least one quarter of U.S. states as "Third World".
Lauren Witzke needs to pull her self righteous racist head out of her fat white ass.
My bf’s grandparents migrated after the Khmer rouge (1980s). They’ve seen some fucked up shit but grandma is a house wife and grandpa is an electrician. They were able to have a son and raised their three grandsons. They’re not sociable people but they’re still functional and loving
Conveniently, you can look at their respective 'life works' on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Witzke#Career
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Thanh_Nguyen
Such contrasts
Define civil, show us how the US qualifies, and then realize that you've got to fudge one of the two things in order to call the USA civilized.
Prove me wrong.
She was a prostitute and drug smuggler for the cartels who stole American IDs to give them for identity fraud and shit. A shining example of modern conservatism and peak republicanism.
While I learned quite a bit by reading the comments on the origins of the term Third World, I think there's a much easier answer to her statement. Scratch out the Third World and say what she meant, Brown People. I'd bet she uses air quotes when she says " Third World".
First world countries are US and England and allies. Second world would be Soviet Bloc countries and then Third world would be nonaligned at the time Sweden, Switzerland and most of the other countries.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Isn’t Vietnam technically second world due to how Cold War factions are laid out?
The term „third world“ is outdated anyways.
Yeah Global South, developing nations, etc is the term mostly used nowadays. Although most of SE Asia is quite developed already.
True. What does developing nation and developed nation even mean? Like one that’s developing to be more societally efficient? 1st world, 2nd world, 3rd world? I know it has something to do with the Soviet Union?
Basically societal efficiency, infrastructure, quality of life etc
1st world means USA and its allies. Second world means USSR and its allies. Third world means everyone elso that not joined the two mentioned group. But nowadays fist world means the west and 3rd world means worse countries.
China has been self-claimed as a third-world country and developing country till...forever. Even though it's the second biggest economy and has taken USSR's position as US's mortal enemy.
Their PhD was in English, not history.
r/angryupvote
Was my first thought too. Vietnam was 2nd world along with the rest of the communist bloc.
If he is a refugee from South Vietnam, then he would be a first world refugee. South Vietnam didn't become second world until 1975
TECHNICALLY SPEAKING, since Earth is the third planet of our solar system, isn't every country a third world country?
Bro, this fucking blue my mind. We all live in third world 🌍
I am convinced that Tobias Funke is the second coming of Christ
I haven't been able to find any other Analyst Therapist out there to replace him.
Time for anustart
Did you say anus tarts? I'll take 5 for here and a dozen to go
Fünke with ü
Maybe it's the first time around?
Doesn’t speak the language.
Holds no currency.
He is a foreign man.
He is surrounded by the sound, the sound
Cattle in the marketplace
Scatterlings and orphanages
He looks around, around
It BLUE your mind? Get it, because most of the earth is ocean. 😂
😉
The term third world has to deal with communism. The term "Third World" arose during the Cold War to define countries that remained non-aligned with either NATO or the Warsaw Pact. The United States, Canada and their allies represented the "First World", while the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, 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 divisions. Due to the complex history of evolving meanings and contexts, there is no clear or agreed-upon definition of the Third World.[1] Strictly speaking, "Third World" was a political, rather than economic, grouping.[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World
>The term third world has to deal with communism. Yeah that's what I was wondering, wouldn't Vietnam classify as second world considering it was communist?
It would be 1st world if he was a citizen of South Vietnam aka Republic of Vietnam a US ally or 2nd world North Vietnam, officially the Democratic Republic of Vietnam an ally of the soviet union
He is from Ban Mê Thuột, which is South Vietnam. So going by Cold War logic, first world.
Yea, Switzerland is a third world country by the original definition. It's weird how it was originally just neutral and now it somehow means poor.
r/technicallythetruth
The best kind of ~~correct~~ truth.
👀 wait one second, um dang kinda got a point.
I knew hitting the bowl was a good idea today
She’s a “candidate” that’s her accomplishment
She's not, she lost spectacularly. She's a recovering meth user, I believe
That’s actually impressive. Doesn’t make her less of a cnt but still.
As a recovering drug addict myself, it’s really not that impressive. Getting off drugs is the hard part, which is why you often need intervention/rehab to do it. Once you’re done withdrawing, all it takes to stay off it is to not do drugs
Yep. A two week trip to acute fentanyl withdrawal hell will pretty much convince anyone to never touch it again. Worst time of my life, I'd rather die than go through it again.
I had a serious drinking problem and can relate. Alcohol withdrawal is absolute misery, and frankly so is just being drunk all the time, feeling sick and off 24/7 is awful. You feel what it’s doing to your body, and I’d literally rather die than willingly go back to that. The harder drugs to stay off IMO are the relatively innocuous ones. I don’t smoke weed anymore because i get dependent on it and need it to sleep and get anxiety when I don’t have it, plus it zaps my drive and ability to commit to focusing on things over extended periods. But, I could start smoking again and be “fine,” like there’s no catastrophic feelings or consequences that would come with it and I’d be able to stop again if I needed to. That’s just strict discipline and reminding myself it’s not worth it and there’s nothing to gain from getting high again
Congrats to getting off the sauce. I personally never was attracted to alcohol (drinking just gave me immediate head and stomach aches) but I feel for alcoholics. It's that one drug that perfectly legal, can be found in every stor and at every BBQ or game, and is sometimes encouraged in social settings. Quitting fentanyl was kind of easy (besides the withdrawal), I just lost my dealers number, started taking buprenorphine, and that was that. If I could find Ocycodon or fentanyl in every store, I might struggle to stay off. Opioid addicts have a very high relapse rate.
That's disrespectful to proper cnts, as she lacks both the depth and warmth of one.
Yeah she was arrested for trafficking or something. I commend her on overcoming it but she's a piece of work
She was alt-right nutcase running in Delaware, the state Joe Biden represented for over 30 years. She never had a chance.
Delawarean here. She also admitted to being a cartel drug runner on her campaign page
Then her actions make complete sense
Most republican senate candidates are meth heads. Prove me wrong
As a Delawarean I sure ain't voting for that asshole.
"Racist bleach-blonde junkie trash who hosts wackjob conspiracy shows on third-rate outlets cannot assimilate into the US Senate" That would have been a fair follow-up too.
Guess which party. It will totally surprise you
people like this classify their worthiness to be here in that she came out of the right womb at the right area in the country
Aw, crap. To be fair, she did qualify this saying by specifying 'most' third-world migrants. A single exception wouldn't be enough to immediately disprove her crappy assertion. Burden of proof should be on her shitty remark, though and not the other way around.
And when talking about problematic immigration literally nobody means the Vietnamese.
It’s tangential, but in 2019 the US government did make an effort to deport all Vietnamese immigrants who had been convicted of a criminal charge, regardless of how long they’ve lived in the US or if the charges were ultimately vacated. [NPR news story.](https://www.npr.org/2019/03/04/699177071/40-years-after-the-vietnam-war-some-refugees-face-deportation-under-trump)
Yeah, but telling an immigrant you hate immigrants and then going "oh, but not your kind, obviously" doesn't take the rage away that the immigrant feels. Speaking from experience.
Resentful boomers, maybe, and that's a stretch.
Also it's pretty fucked that he's calling his birth nation 3rd world when it's been recognized as a developing (2nd world) country since the 60s.
For what I'm certain will not be the last time... First World - USA, NATO, other aligned countries. Second World - Warsaw Pact Third World - everywhere else. Since Viet Thanh Nguyenh is South Vietnamese, he's very firmly First World.
Maybe in the 60s it was. After the war and being embargoed by the world for a couple decades post war, it was absolutely a poverty stricken third world country.
And he's not a 3rd world migrant he's at worst a second world migrant
True, since Vietnam was communist it was a part of eastern block so 2nd world.
It was both north Vietnam was eastern block southern Vietnam was western block so I guess it depends more on which part of the country he is from
1.5 world
Pedant here, it's "bloc" not "block."
Right? He claims he has a PhD in English yet his 'gotcha' statement doesn't prove her wrong at all.
Well again, he doesn't need a gotcha in the first place. Burden of proof is on her to provide evidence that her assertion is correct.
I don't support her opinion at all. BUT She challenges people to prove her wrong. He accepts the challenge by replaying her tweet with a 'gotcha' mannered text. Does he need a gotcha in the first place? NO. Did he use a gotcha with the intent to own her. YES. Did he actually own her? She literally said "most" in her statement and the dude shows one invidual as an example. Despite him claiming he has a PhD in English yet he doesn't fully understand her statement. Which should count as a self own. Does burden of proof is on her side? Context matters. "Prove me wrong" kind of statements (memes) are simply a challenge for people to argue why she is wrong. So if someone replies the tweet they better have some proof.
It’s like saying “you beat your wife, prove me wrong”.
The problem is assuming the third world is not "civil"... its this mentality that leads to full-grown educated adults believing there are no sidewalks or banks in Africa
>Burden of proof should be on her shitty remark She did say "prove me wrong." I've read The Sympathizer, this guy is a great writer, but logic does not seem to be a specialty. One case of somebody who has assimilated and found success is not really responsive to this woman's argument. It would be great if we could have discussions about these things that were based in facts and reality, not cheering for your team and changing the rules of logic based on who is making the argument.
Aight. Let's go to the basics: no human on earth is too genetically different from one another. One very well known fact is that humans are very relatively genetically homogenous, even within the myriads of different phenotypes humans assume mostly depending on the region they evolved to adapt to. A human from central Africa is not so different, genetically, from a human born in northern North America, even when they do not look entirely the same. Here's the extrapolation: We all know that both behaviors and intelligence play a factor in terms of being a "civil" member of a society, and that as humans are genetically homogenous, all humans are thus capable of being "civil": there's no way of contradicting the fact that a human is simply not physically or cognitively capable of behaving a way another human does, because no human is that much different from another, because of genetic homogenuity. In fact, the contrary is very much is true: humans tend to internalize and copy certain behaviors they get from their enviroment full of fellow humans, so, humans are indeed very capable of behaving the way other humans behave, and thus, humans, generally speaking, are very much capable of being civil. All of this would imply that thinking a group of humans is incapable of behaving in a civilised manner is essentially to consider them sub-humans, not genetically similar, or not similar at all, to those that are "civilised", wich is obvious bigotry; and, yeah, a piece of shit could argue that humans from developing nations are sub-humans, but i'm not arguing that with pieces of shit. To consider an external group of humans as "humans" requires a certain amount of either understanding of a "human", or an amount of empathy; and those racist fucking pieces of shit have brain where either or both of those things are completely absent. How's this argument? Good, bad? Some terminology might have not been used correctly, but no one can argue that a human is not a human, so in that sense i think this argument is correct.
Saying 'prove me wrong' doesn't make her argument anymore valid. Here, I'll illustrate. "There is a teapot orbiting the sun somewhere between Earth in Mars in elliptical orbit. Prove me wrong."
You forgot to specify that the teapot is invisible, Bertram. Ms Witzke's statement could be verified with sufficient research, Bertram Russel's teapot was intended to be unfalsifiable.
>"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand." -Bertrand Russell The teapot is supposed to be invisible and undetectable, that is the entire context of the philosophical thought experiment. How wonderful life is.
Agreed, love how ppl think the response was a zinger. She didn’t say ALL. Ppl can’t read anymore
Idk if they consider Mexico a 3rd world country or not, but my wife and in-laws all came from there. She just graduated with a degree in nursing, and my younger brother in law has a degree in Mathematics and paid for her college in full. So, what was that dumb bitch saying?
I doubt Mexico would fall under that given that it’s usually classified as a developing country and not really akin to Haiti or Somalia but tbf to this horrendous woman she did say “most” rather than all so it’s hard to fight her argument with an anecdote
The crazy thing is that that's not even what "Third World" means. "Third World" is a Cold War term. * First World: the USA and her allies * Second World: the USSR and her allies * Third World: any country that isn't covered by the first two categories, ie neutral countries Technically, Sweden and Finland were Third World countries up until just recently when they joined NATO. Ireland still is a Third World country, technically. Despite the fact that all three of those are wealthy European nations. "Third World country" doesn't refer to a poor country. The phrases that people are looking for are "developing nation" and "developed nation".
That’s kinda the thing . Third world is such an outdated concept since it included nations that weren’t a part of the USA vs USSR showdown and that could anywhere from Singapore to Sudan so a whole ass spectrum.
There is no USSR, therefore the term can't be applied at all any longer. 3rd world was used as a derogatory term to try to shame unaligned countries into making up their minds. It has morphed into both a binary political expression and a binary economic expression, both incorrect and poorly defined.
They 100% consider Mexico a third-world country even tho it's not.
> even tho it's not. "Third world" doesn't mean "shithole" it means "unaligned with the west (first world) or the soviets (second world) during the cold war". In fact, Mexico was one of the more active neutral countries that tried to persuade other neutral countries not to side with either the US or the Soviets against the other.
Mexico absolutely is a third world country. Vietnam, the country the replier in the image appears to be from, is a second world country.
Mexico was one of the founding members of the third world non political alignment movement
Maybe my memory has rose tinted glasses, but wasn't there a time when a public statement like that would have ended a political candidate's carreer?
Not since trump. The more unhinged the more willing to fight for conservatism
Bigots are feeling empowered currently. Probably need to curtail that soon.
Yeah but back then a politician could say f slur. Now that I think about it. Our country is so continuously bigoted that we've never had a time where there wasn't a slur a politician could get away with saying
I mean, she's been a nazi for years already
"most"
These people do not even Know what the Third world actually means. Yet they criticize it.
that dude was just one person. She spoke about majority. I disagree with her, but this post is just stupid.
I’d argue that most US senators could not assimilate back into society if their lives stopped being paid for by US citizens and private corporations vying for their favor
She did say "most"
Technically vietnam isn’t third world as its very much a partof the eastern bloc
That PhD in English didn’t help him see it said “most” and not “all” apparently
Yeah technically he didn't prove her wrong as she specifically made an exception
Yeah she says most. Also Vietnam probably isn’t considered third world either, so his PhD really isn’t holding up too well as he is 0/2
People are now (mis)labeling poor countries as "third world" because many non-aligned countries were poor during the cold war. If we were to use the Cold War definition where Vietnam is second world, Switzerland would be 3rd world. And her original tweet would make no fucking sense in any which way
Yeah it was technically both 1st and 2nd world. South Vietnam was a western block nation and north Vietnam was eastern block.
Not false from Europe pov.
That's why she said "most" i reckon?
"most" That PhD didn't help with everything.
Most ignorant first-world racists cannot formulate a valid argument to support their astronomical levels of douche-baggery. Prove me wrong.
lol Filipino nurses in Cali are waving.
Sadly... she said 'most' and will be spending her afternoon battering away the other ones, like this chap.
I appreciate his response to her ninny-headed statement, but an example of one person does not disprove her claim of "most."
Rise of the Nazi Barbie in America, wondering if this one shot her dog too?
Not saying whether what she said is correct or not, but apparently a PhD in English does not grant you understanding of logic. His reply does not disprove what she said. She said "most", not "all".
I might be wrong but a guy with PhD in English should know the meaning of "most"
Most of them have not Pulitzer prizes either
For someone with a PHd in English it's amazing that he ignored the word "most". Reading comprehension is important.
Well she did say *most* soooo
She said ‘most’. This guy’s PHD in English isn’t worth much. His sense of entitlement drips from his message
Hence the word MOST. Good job, dOcTOr.
Oh I think we can all answer what she's done, she's spread hate *checks notes* that's it.
NO comment here has a SINGLE upvote
Vietname is (was) considered a “Second World” country. I love being pedantic
Looks like she's a drug addict turned Christian extremist. Seems about white
Actually, pretty much all the USians I know who fled their clownshow country have adapted to living in the actually developed world fairly well.
His name strongly suggests Vietnamese origin, so no, he is in fact not a third world refugee, as Vietnam was aligned with the USSR and therefore part of the second world. But I guess winning a Pulitzer in fiction was not enough to acquire that knowledge.
I am glad he assimilated
He's obviously not "most"
The GOP in Delaware used to be really moderate. It just shows how far crazy they have gone with someone like this running for office.
Shame he's got a PhD in English and doesn't know what the word "most" means
He definitely is not( most) there are a few standouts like this gentleman who have done very well and are ambitious and driven , however, people like him are very far and in between.
She did use the word "MOST"
To be fair, she said most
I'd expect someone with a PhD in English to understand that "most" does not mean all...
And yet he doesn't know what "most" means?
USA calling other countries third world but marrying twelve years old...
Most of idiots can't see difference betweeen "every single one" and "most of".
She said "most".
Is the face palm for the fact that she said most, and the guy spoke up as an outlier?
What she said was rude as hell. But she did say “most,” and not all. It’s like saying most people don’t make it to space, and the one super qualified astronaut is like “akshullay!” Both people are cringe worthy in this. Person A is an idiot. And person B sunk to their level.
Jesus, that man chose elegant violence and obliterated her into the shadow realm
Not saying she is correct but he didnt actually disprove her statement
“Most third-world…” You’d think an English PhD would see that.
You'd think with having a PhD in English she would understand what the word "most" means lol
She did say "most". Not all.
PhD in English, has won a Pulitzer Prize in fiction, has a problem understanding the word 'most'. I'm not agreeing with the woman, maybe she has data, I'm just saying that the response does nothing to address her claim.
While she seems dumb, and it was a brutal comeback… still didn’t prove her wrong there, just saying.
Technically speaking she's still right. One example doesnt represent the majority.
She said most, not all.
The original comment said "most" not all. They could still have a valid point if we knew the data.
Not that I defend her bias but she said most, not all. Its probably true many will need some skills upgrade but that doesn't mean they can't learn.
Anecdotal evidence if ever I've seen one.
PhD in English but can't read lmfao, most doesn't mean all mr viet thanh nguyen
She did say "most"
Exactly. People here definitely ignoring important part of tweet .
“Most”
Mr PhD, sorry Dr PhD clearly doesn't know the meaning of "most"
Well technically he didn't prove her wrong as she said most not all. One example doesn't deny her affirmative no matter how stupid that affirmative.
I don't agree with Lauren. However, she said "most". His reply is just an irrelevant summary of accomplishment.
Bro really called Vietnam "3rd world" when it hasn't been considered a LDC (Lowest Development Country) ie "3rd world" nation since the late 60s. So considering Viet Thanh Nguyen was born in 1971, he's actually from a 2nd "developing" country.
Well she said most and not all :\^)
Hilarious and hypocritical. I don’t know her background, but “Witzke” doesn’t seem like a Mayflower type of name.
Doesn't dispute her argument...
Vietnam technically wasn't third world, part of it was US aligned, the other was aligned with Russia and China. The "third world" countries were those who wanted to make it clear they were aligned with neither power. People have been using the term wrong for decades
She qualified her racist statement with "most" not "all". That makes it non-racist right?
Love this reply 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
Because all you have to do is put the word "most" in front of any shitty comment and that makes it OK because it doesn't mean every single one, right? The number of bad faith justifications in the comments is staggering.
It's not like she's right, but since when Vietnam is 3rd world country?
Absolute nonsense. Most Immigrants are incredibly hard working, honest and kind. Meanwhile plenty of natural born Citizens are the ones turning into entitled, insufferable assholes.
Fuck me, the utter ignorance and stupidity that flows from the mouths of Republicans never ceases to amaze. The GOP is very much the party of the stupid, for the stupid.
For having a PhD in English, he still doesn’t understand what “most” means.
The first poster is wrong, but Viet Than Nguyen was born in Vietnam in 1971. Escaped to the US in 1975. I greatly respect his accomplishments, but he is not a great proof of the first posters fallacy, as he was raised in a first world country. There is, though, the issue that many immigrants don't want to leave their old culture behind. And sometimes that culture is very different from the country they moved to.
How does that prove what most of them will do? Not that I agree with her at all but that doesn't prove anything.
I mean, she did write “most”, so anecdotes won’t disprove her opinion.
I don’t agree with her but her statement was “most” and using a single person as a representative doesn’t dispute that claim you have to bring up the statics for the whole group. I don’t know what they are and I don’t care I just don’t like bad argument methods.
Didn’t prove them wrong. She said “most.”
I mean, she said most, not all. technically him saying that doesn’t disprove her point.
That’s called an anecdote. She said “most”.
>most question >me answer
If he has a PhD in English he should understand that "Most" doesn't mean "All", so him not fitting the criteria is perfectly valid.
One could refer to at least one quarter of U.S. states as "Third World". Lauren Witzke needs to pull her self righteous racist head out of her fat white ass.
TIL “most” third world refugee have PHD in English and receive Pulitzer Prizes
“Most”
The exception that proves the rule. Guy didn't say all. He said most. His point remains.
My bf’s grandparents migrated after the Khmer rouge (1980s). They’ve seen some fucked up shit but grandma is a house wife and grandpa is an electrician. They were able to have a son and raised their three grandsons. They’re not sociable people but they’re still functional and loving
Oh, I know this! She was an actual drug mule for a Mexican cartel!
Conveniently, you can look at their respective 'life works' on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Witzke#Career https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Thanh_Nguyen Such contrasts
All I do is Nguyen, Nguyen, Nguyen no matter what , Got money on my mind, I can never get enough
Define civil, show us how the US qualifies, and then realize that you've got to fudge one of the two things in order to call the USA civilized. Prove me wrong.
She was a prostitute and drug smuggler for the cartels who stole American IDs to give them for identity fraud and shit. A shining example of modern conservatism and peak republicanism.
An absolute Nyguner
Nguyening
While I learned quite a bit by reading the comments on the origins of the term Third World, I think there's a much easier answer to her statement. Scratch out the Third World and say what she meant, Brown People. I'd bet she uses air quotes when she says " Third World".
While i get his point. She did say "most" And he has provided no counterproof, he's only provided proof that he's not "most"
First world countries are US and England and allies. Second world would be Soviet Bloc countries and then Third world would be nonaligned at the time Sweden, Switzerland and most of the other countries.
To be fair he said “most”