essay of 1500 words

Does the notion of a ‘Third World’ continue to have any validity in today's world? The division of the world into three large blocks, which was based on the level of

development and the system prevailing in a given state, was for years the main determinant for categorizing individual countries. The whole was based on alliances made during the Cold War. The countries of the broadly understood West, with a capitalist economy, formed the first world whose most important player was the United States of America. On the opposite side of the "ideology of building the state economy" were the countries of the socialist bloc, headed by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The vast majority of discussions about that period are focused precisely on these two competing structures, leaving out the last piece of the puzzle, which is the 'Third World'. This term applies to countries that did not directly support either side of the conflict between the first and second worlds. These countries decided to start cooperation, according to which, despite the differences between them, they were able to support each other and be a counterweight to the two main blocks. It all began during a conference in Bandung, Indonesia, which took place in 1955 (Randall, 2004). The African and Asian states gathered there began actions leading to the uprising a few years later Non- Aligned Movement. Over the following years, the countries of the two main blocs sought to achieve the greatest impact in the countries of the Third of them, which gradually led to differences in the development of individual Third World states. The finalization of these processes was the fall of the Iron Curtain, and thus the end of the division into the first and second world due to global economic changes and the decisive development of globalization. If the 'two worlds' are vaguely connected, can we still talk about the third world in our time? Although this concept is still in use, looking at the geopolitical situation, we should finish defining the former Third World countries with this name. This essay will try to prove that today's global world is too complex and diverse to still isolate third world countries, which will be supported by scientific work from scholars. Due to this, a picture of the current 'division' of the world will be created, and evidence will be found to prove irregularities in the use of the 'Third World' term.

So what is the starting point for many scholars who undertake to measure the term 'third world'? Following many scientific papers, it is not difficult to notice that the factor connecting them all is the influence of emerging powers on the theory of the third world. The BASIC countries that were part of the 'third block' are currently one of the economically most powerful countries in the world, which is confirmed by the high position in the GDP rankings of such countries as Brazil (9th place), India (5th place), China (2 place) or South Africa ( 37th place) (according to www.imf.org). These countries not only destroy the division into the worlds, but also the global north and south. By combining tradition with modernity, they created the extended version of Liberal Great West, which is beginning to impose trends on the global market. 'North and South, East and West are now only points on the compass, not economic destinies.' (Zoellick, 2010 cited by Hurrell, Andrew, 2013). The situation that Zoellick describes is caused by an extremely fast-growing multipolar global economy. At the heart of this process is the flexibility of retraining many areas of the economy to adapt to global market trends. Economic development began a number of processes leading to today's position in the world of many former Third World countries. In the article 'Narratives of emergence: rising powers and the end of the Third World?' Hurrell describes the main factors by which we can clearly define the groundlessness of the term 'Third World'. He begins his analysis with the main motivations for the countries referred to as this. These countries sought to achieve economic and political strength. If they currently have both of these forces, the difference between them and the first world countries has disappeared, which at the beginning of the discussion shows the blurring of the border between the old types of worlds. The way these countries have reached today's position is compared to the willingness of many European countries to join the European Union. 'At a time when neighboring countries have a liberal and successful structure, then others do everything to join it' (Hurrell, 2013). This was also the case with many Third World countries which, by introducing numerous reforms aimed at creating a free market economy,

have become somewhat similar to the first world countries. At this point, it can therefore be concluded that the barrier separating these worlds has been broken, because global capitalism is an extremely complex form, which consists of many forms of connections and complex structures, the number of which far exceeds three worlds from the Cold War. Global North and South now often exist in the same geographical space, and differences in development are no longer based solely on the geographical location and colonial past of the state. As an argument to emphasize the reasoning, the author used the psychology aspect on which our type of thinking about the Third World was based. The Third World is over because it 'has been known'. It was the lack of knowledge about the individuality of each state and treating them as a whole that made it the proverbial Third World. With the increase in social awareness, we are beginning to understand the culture and individuality of individual states, which allows us to understand their place in today's world. Because the concepts are fluid, the Third World is now less fluid as a whole, so we can get to know each of its former members much better.

It is worth examing the relevance of the Third World concept also in terms of strong facts. Vicky Randall did this in the 'Third World Quarterly' study. The author decided that this concept may be relevant only in a few cases taking into account geopolitical analysis, but generalizations related to the economic and political situation about former Third World countries are currently unfounded. Analyzing the exact situation of this group of countries over the years during which the Cold War took place, a progressive development of the axis of inequality between them is outlined. With the increase of awareness about a given country, it ceased to be anonymous and became an increasingly important player on the international arena. The arrangements outlined at the Bandung conference were implemented in various ways due to the influence of the first or second world countries on third world countries. This explains today's economic divide between these countries and the processes that led to it. We can clearly indicate some of the development models of these countries during and after the Cold War. Countries such as Iraq or Jordan were created from the very beginning by the West and despite their cultural separateness, Western influences left their mark on them. One of the most spectacular and successive development models we can see from East and Southeast Asia. Its precursors were China and India, and later it was adopted by other Asian Tigers, i.e. countries of South Asia, which recorded rapid and gradual economic growth. This model was based on a kind of hybrid that combined regional traditions with capitalism, creating a kind of a cult of work, and also becoming a competitive form for the West. An interesting situation can also be observed in Latin America, whose countries, unlike the rest of the third world, were independent for over a hundred years, so their development and economic priorities were much more focused. The worst situation was found in African countries, which were left to some extent alone, with their colonial past. They were unable to create a homogeneous society due to the colonial division of the continent. It often happened that in one country there lived different tribes, with different beliefs and a system of values. This type of social situation was a brake on building a competitive economy and to a large extent is the reason for the current situation in which the African continent found itself. This simple scheme already contains several development paths in itself, which shows the numerous ruptures in the Third World concept and clearly divides it into many separate and distinct groups. The author also assumes that if after the end of the Cold War the Second World ceased to exist, then we can no longer sketch the third world, and thus the most rational division seems to be the use of the global north and south, but it also has a lot of ambiguities. An extremely important aspect to understand the concept of the Third World is to compare it with the Cold War. The division of developing countries was largely dependent on peace on their territory. The countries of the first and second world trying to influence the world more than once led their conflicts in third world countries. 'The last two decades of the Cold War have been the dominant element in today's Western world' (Westad, Odd Arne, 2012). An example of such activities is the Vietnam War, as well as Korean War or military operations in Angola. The best summary of this phenomenon are the words of Niall Ferguson 'The Third World War prevented the Third World War' (Ferguson quoted by Westad, Odd Arne, 2012). It was the sum of individual

armed conflicts that somehow prevented another major global conflict. But it is also necessary to point out the individual countries in which the struggle took place, because it is closely related to their further development. These conflicts also caused market fluctuations and rapid changes in economic conditions, which had different impacts on individual economies of third world countries. This, in turn, resulted in further divisions of the already diverse group of countries. Therefore, it can be said that 'the collapse of the third world began in the 1970s' (Westad, Odd Arne, 2012). Considering all the research and looking for their common points, it can be concluded that, regardless of the issue being examined, one comes to the conclusion that the long-term activities carried out as part of the Cold War gradually led to the division of the Third World into many smaller subgroups. How a given country dealt with the dynamic changes in the global market, its own past and an attempt to adapt to the realities of international politics was a key element that placed them in the position in the global hierarchy in which it currently stands. The superficial division of countries has lost its significance years ago, and the continued use of it can be considered somewhat tactless categorizing countries due to their geographical location or colonial past. The events of the twentieth century, just as they created the Third World, also led to its end, so you can define the Third World as a kind of episode in history, a creation that was so fragile that it could not resist global change and the passage of time. Due to the confirmed outdatedness of the Third World concept, there is no validity for that in today's world. References: 1)Hurrell, Andrew. (2013). 'Narratives of emergence: rising powers and the end of the Third

World?'. Brazilian Journal of Political Economy 2)Zoellick, Robert B. (2010) ‘The End of the Third World: Modernizing Multilateralism for a

Multipolar World’, Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars 3)Vicky Randall. (2004) 'Third World Quarterly' Vol 25, No 1, pp. 41-53 4)https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pl/dictionary/english-portuguese/the-third-world 5)Westad, Odd Arne(2012). 'Two Finales: How the End of the Third World and the End of the

Cold War Are Linked.' , Oxford University Press 6)https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/third-world 7)http://statisticstimes.com/economy/projected-world-gdp-ranking.php 8)https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD