Is Thailand A 3rd World Country Still?

[dannishgung]

So much talk about GMP, infrastucture, economic level ect ect, but to be a first world country, another most important element is people's mentality.

This involves poeple's education, reasoning and analyzing ability, conscious level, social equality, environment, ect ect all these elements have to be taken into consideration.

Thailand not only so behind in infrastuctures and ecnomical development,( even quite behind in the third world groups if you considered Poland, Croatia, Czech, Slovak, Slovenia, Estonia ect ect third world, then Thailand still much much lower than these countries in all fields)

Thais certainly score very very low in the education, reasoning ability, conscious awareness levels, social equality, evironmental, ect ect. The Thais's overall mentality department is still in fourth world, not yet reach the 3rd world yet.

[BAF]

There have been enough explainations and queries already to make you think about the validity of the term "3rd world", I'd like to see a definition of it which distinguishes countries such as Thailand, Cambodia and Venezuela from each other. Or are you just stuck up and avoid anything which might be "PC", whatever this means to you?

There have been enough explanations already on the differences between 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th world and NI countries.

Copying&pasting isn't fun.

Israel is not in europe so membership to the EU would be a bit odd.

Turkey isn't really in Europe either and has been forever in talks to become part of the EU.

There are several different geo-political considerations to support its membership and the only thing really impeding its entry is that Turkey is socio-politically as European as the som-tam is

Such problems don't exist in the case of Israel. Actually, Israel is probably more "European" and "Western" than some of the recently admitted ex-Eastern Bloc countries.

Could you tell us where exactly Israel is located geographically?

Tell me what you are exactly alluding to amongst all the possible misinterpretations your reply implies and I will address it.

Secondly because of Israel's reluctance to comply with many UN resolutions their membership of NATO would undermine the organisations status and role in global affairs.

These are really minor considerations with little bearing especially in the case of NATO membership.

...

Which planet do you come from?

The one where at least 3 out of 5 of the permanent members of the UN council have a long story of disregarding the maximum international organition's leads and various other international organizations' prescriptions and recommendations and that doesn't seem to undermine their status and role in global affairs in the least. And the one where the NATO was born a defensive treaty and has been adding members picked amongst the former enemies and only very recently (1999) is giving itself new purposes and goals other than the original defensive one.

Is it the same as yours?

[Plus]

Five pages and none wiser. Can we still refer to Thailand as a 3rd World country when making sarcastic and, probably, offensive comments?

Someone said that when he hears "3rd world" in relation to Thailand he takes time in explaining that it isn't. It's a bit like explaining that saying "stupid ass" isn't really true because asses/donkeys aren't all stupid. While technically correct it's still irrelevant to whatever the context is.

All these "more developed", "less developing", "more or less developed" grades are good for secondary school teachers, or World Bank, but for general use?

If this is what Zzap was looking for, he ceratinly has his mouthful of terms by now.

[zzap]

Much wiser than on page one, though it's been tedious asserting that there is more to it than "3rd world or not", we do have a number of terms and criteria to apply by now, thanks to Meadish, Kat, et al, to finetune the status of Thailand compared to its neighbours and others, it just seems that some are hung-up on using the inaccurate '3rd world' label, for their own reasons.

[thedude]

BAF ,

What about asian countries like South Korea and Singapore, or for that matter Taiwan? Will their "cultures" stand in the way of them being 1st world countries? How much development is necessary for a developing country to be a developed country? What are the objective criteria for first worldom?

They are NICs but they are not first world essentially for socio-political reasons.

"Developing countries" isn't meant as just "economically developing countries", remember we are talking about socio-economical-political definitions. NIC is one as well.

I see. What are these social-political reasons, and how are they measured? Perhaps you could explain comparing say South Korea and Italy.

With the exception of Japan (which as you have pointed out, have now mixed their culture sufficiently to qualify as a 1st world country), would you say that being a predominantly white society would give a country an edge in 1st worldom? After all, these cultures are so much easier to understand along western individualist christian democratic norms which do not require any pre-mixing.

[astral]

Slipping to 4th world with all the Victorian attitudes that are creeping in with Nanny Toxin.

[BAF]

I see. What are these social-political reasons, and how are they measured? Perhaps you could explain comparing say South Korea and Italy.

Well, you are surely not asking me to report here all of the hundreds different socio-political indicators (and how they are differently defined and misured) universally used by the the countless international organizations to study, compare, categorize and rank the various socio-political realities around this world... are you?

Anyway, just to keep the discussion on a practical level suitable to a non-specialized message board: imagine to be involved in a foreign country in a serious matter like, say, a murder or a financial dispute which may see you losing all of your properties.

Without asking if you have ever lived in Italy and South Korea, would you rather be handled by the Italian police, Italian justice system and Italian laws or by the South Korean police, South Korean justice system and South Korean laws?

Do you think the treatment (by the police and justice system) you would be subjected to would be practically equivalent?

Do you think it would be equally respectful of your perceived basic human rights?

Do you think it would be appreciably different if you weren't a foreigner?

Do you you think an Italian facing a murder/big financial dispute in Italy, a South Korean facing a murder/big financial dispute in South Korea and you facing a murder/big financial dispute in your homecountry all go through very similar and practically interchangeable experiences?

Just some basic questions to kick start the discussion, please keep the answers as short as possible and try to avoid widening the scope of our discussion.

With the exception of Japan (which as you have pointed out, have now mixed their culture sufficiently to qualify as a 1st world country), would you say that being a predominantly white society would give a country an edge in 1st worldom?

Of course not. The race and the color of the skin are not important, the culture is.

[zzap]

I see. What are these social-political reasons, and how are they measured? Perhaps you could explain comparing say South Korea and Italy.

Well, you are surely not asking me to report here all of the hundreds different socio-political indicators (and how they are differently defined and misured) universally used by the the countless international organizations to study, compare, categorize and rank the various socio-political realities around this world... are you?

Anyway, just to keep the discussion on a practical level suitable to a non-specialized message board: imagine to be involved in a foreign country in a serious matter like, say, a murder or a financial dispute which may see you losing all of your properties.

Without asking if you have ever lived in Italy and South Korea, would you rather be handled by the Italian police, Italian justice system and Italian laws or by the South Korean police, South Korean justice system and South Korean laws?

Do you think the treatment (by the police and justice system) you would be subjected to would be practically equivalent?

Do you think it would be equally respectful of your perceived basic human rights?

Do you think it would be appreciably different if you weren't a foreigner?

Do you you think an Italian facing a murder/big financial dispute in Italy, a South Korean facing a murder/big financial dispute in South Korea and you facing a murder/big financial dispute in your homecountry all go through very similar and practically interchangeable experiences?

Just some basic questions to kick start the discussion, please keep the answers as short as possible and try to avoid widening the scope of our discussion.

With the exception of Japan (which as you have pointed out, have now mixed their culture sufficiently to qualify as a 1st world country), would you say that being a predominantly white society would give a country an edge in 1st worldom?

Of course not. The race and the color of the skin are not important, the culture is.

I don't know anything about the police/judicial system in either of these countries, what I'd think is hardly a measure as to their development status. I would assume laws and procedures in different countries vary, how does this influence the rating (as to 1st wrld or not)?

Since you brought up this example, please elaborate.

[BAF]

I don't know anything about the police/judicial system in either of these countries, what I'd think is hardly a measure as to their development status. I would assume laws and procedures in different countries vary, how does this influence the rating (as to 1st wrld or not)?

Since you brought up this example, please elaborate.

As per your post #60 and my (still unanswered) reply #62, before being able to reply to you on this other subject I have to know if we are indeed from the same planet because if we are not my reply will likely not be applicable to your own reality.

BTW, the fact that you may be in a parallel universe would also explain why you say "though it's been tedious asserting that there is more to it than "3rd world or not", we do have a number of terms and criteria to apply by now, thanks to Meadish, Kat, et al, to finetune the status of Thailand compared to its neighbours and others," and you go on (probably referring to me) "it just seems that some are hung-up on using the inaccurate '3rd world' label, for their own reasons" while it's especially me the one who has been trying to explain that there are "a number of terms and criteria", much wider than what you and others here believe, to assess and describe a country's status of development (and that Thailand, by "those number of terms and criteria", is a 3rd world country).

[zzap]

Sigh..., this is going round in circles.

The point myself and others have made is that there are more accurate terms which carry less derogatory connotations than '3rd world'.

'A developing country on the edge of industrialisation', for example, sounds different from '3rd world country', and it fits Thailand, it is more specific as well as positive.

Perhaps it's your turn now to stop evading and wriggling out, but give concise to the point responses to the queries posed to you? You haven't made any convincing case for your terminology, after questions about the '2nd world', or the difference between Italy and S-Korea, for example.

BTW, you didn't seriously expect an answer to whether I live on the same planet as you?

[Kerryd]

Well, at least this topic isn't about Bush or the war in Iraq !

The terms 1st/2nd/3rd world, Developing Country et al, are terms which need to be either updated or dropped altogether.

Too many groups, with too many agendas, decide who is a 1st/2nd...5th world country. The criteria for determining a country's status is too varied. One country may have 1st world GDP numbers, but 3rd world health care standards, 2nd World corruption, 4th world life expectancies, 5th world welfare, ect.

Who actually makes the definitive judgement about whether a country is 1st/2nd/3rd World ? Is that status based on how a country matches up against a certain superpower ?

As for "Developing Country" label, that would imply that there are fully developed countries already in existence. Which countries can be considered "Fully Developed" ? I don't know of any perfect countries. Even the "Developed, 1st World" countries continue to develop themselves further. Again, who makes the definitive judgement, and is it based on how a country matches up against the US ? (While being better than some countries, it can hardly be considered a "perfect, fully developed country")

Should there be an "Un-Developing" label for countries that seem to be going backwards (like the Sudan, Somalia, or the Congo) ?

[somchai jones]

Aaaaaarrrrrrrrrgh!!!!!!!!!!

[thedude]

I see. What are these social-political reasons, and how are they measured? Perhaps you could explain comparing say South Korea and Italy.

Well, you are surely not asking me to report here all of the hundreds different socio-political indicators (and how they are differently defined and misured) universally used by the the countless international organizations to study, compare, categorize and rank the various socio-political realities around this world... are you?

Anyway, just to keep the discussion on a practical level suitable to a non-specialized message board: imagine to be involved in a foreign country in a serious matter like, say, a murder or a financial dispute which may see you losing all of your properties.

Without asking if you have ever lived in Italy and South Korea, would you rather be handled by the Italian police, Italian justice system and Italian laws or by the South Korean police, South Korean justice system and South Korean laws?

Do you think the treatment (by the police and justice system) you would be subjected to would be practically equivalent?

Do you think it would be equally respectful of your perceived basic human rights?

Do you think it would be appreciably different if you weren't a foreigner?

Do you you think an Italian facing a murder/big financial dispute in Italy, a South Korean facing a murder/big financial dispute in South Korea and you facing a murder/big financial dispute in your homecountry all go through very similar and practically interchangeable experiences?

Just some basic questions to kick start the discussion, please keep the answers as short as possible and try to avoid widening the scope of our discussion.

With the exception of Japan (which as you have pointed out, have now mixed their culture sufficiently to qualify as a 1st world country), would you say that being a predominantly white society would give a country an edge in 1st worldom?

Of course not. The race and the color of the skin are not important, the culture is.

actually i'd choose south korea. not that i've been there or anything but keeping this on a practical and non-specialised level like you suggest, i think law and order is better maintained, more predictable, and more respectful of the individual in south korea than in italy. also, i've read news reports about some pretty surreal italian court decisions such as the one recently that ruled that a pat on the bottom is not sexual harassment so long as it is "isolated and impulsive". wow, big can of worms there.

[shasta]

Boy! I enjoy this topic.

[steveromagnino]

Boy! I enjoy this topic.

me too :-)

BAF - you ask.....

Well, you are surely not asking me to report here all of the hundreds different socio-political indicators (and how they are differently defined and misured) universally used by the the countless international organizations to study, compare, categorize and rank the various socio-political realities around this world... are you?

No. We are merely asking you to post a link which defines the terminology that you are using (1st, 2nd, 3rd and now 4th world) in terms that are either political ideology based as per the definitions given by others throughout this thread (in which case everything you say about defining where Thailand sits in terms of development is pointless, since it is a political classification rather than a development one) or using measures of development which may or may not include socio political measures.

Having posted such a link, we can then go and explore ourselves, as I have done for instance for the income data from World Bank site (which for me is an interesting one; I like financial development, I am not so interested in the other ones in top line analysis because I can't get my head around some of their measures).

Please do not send links to classifications such as newly industrialised, less developed countries etc, as these are different classifications to the 1st - 4th world system. All I want is to start off a debate with clear guidelines as to the classification system, then we can use the data available to assess where Thailand sits on YOUR classification system.

You can do a cut and paste if you want, but as it stands now, the person not understanding this 1st - 4th world classification system is me, because I still haven't got definitions of what makes up each category, least of all 4th world.

[BAF]

Sigh..., this is going round in circles.

Oh I agree, but what we probably disagree on is who is to blame...

The point myself and others have made is that there are more accurate terms which carry less derogatory connotations than '3rd world'.

'A developing country on the edge of industrialisation', for example, sounds different from '3rd world country', and it fits Thailand, it is more specific as well as positive.

You really should read the thread you are replying to:

BAF, post #13 "For the PC types, 3rd world countries like Thailand are also called "developing countries" (or "less developed countries", whichever you like better)."

BAF, post #46 "There isn't anything PC in the expression itself, the PCness is in the fact that it's being used to avoid using the original expression "3rd world" because it has somehow "developed" an almost insulting (!) connotation to PC eyes.

It's the same story with everything else with the PC brigade.

In itself what has the noun "negro" of insulting? It was initially the perfectly normal word to indicate dark skinned Africans. Then it was "deemed" insulting(!) and it was "black", then the story repeated and it has to be "person of color"... and so on and on...

And don't think that it happens only in the English language. It's the same everywhere in the West (because the PCness is the same).

In my own mother tongue (Italian), and using the same example as before it was "negro", than "nero" (which means black), then "persona di colore" (which means person of color).

Even "developing country" and "less developed country" are (misteriously) growing an insulting connotation so yet other expressions are being used nowadays..."

PCness rarely leads to accuracy, it usual produces just moronic results, as others have already pointed out in this thread. Personally, I despise PCness but you are of course free to use whatever expression you prefer as long as the results keep some resemblance with reality.

The point of this thread is that somebody disagrees on the fact that Thailand is a "developing country" (that's "3rd world country" for me and most of the analists community) and thinks that LOS is something else (NIC, 1st world country, 2nd world ecc).

I don't think the subject of this thread is ever been that to establish whether it's better to use "3rd world country" or the PC equivalent "developing country" (to indicate the same thing). I'm not interested in this either.

Perhaps it's your turn now to stop evading and wriggling out, but give concise to the point responses to the queries posed to you? You haven't made any convincing case for your terminology, after questions about the '2nd world', or the difference between Italy and S-Korea, for example.

It's not MY terminology, it's the correct terminology. I've simply pointed this out to you.

You are talking about "gut feelings" (like the poster who is not convinced S. Korea is a NIC and has never even been there), I'm talking about (part of) what I have been studying.

"Making a convincing case" for my terminology would mean giving a crash course in geo-political matters on a Thai-related message board, something I don't have the time for and don't have any interest in.

You and others are of course free to do researches of your own (with your own time) and report here that Thailand is a 2nd world country, I will then check your sources and accept the result...

BTW, you didn't seriously expect an answer to whether I live on the same planet as you?

Now more than ever...

Incidentally, I take this that you really didn't know what you were talking about regarding the NATO, the EU etc and your comment on our planets of origin was meant to mask that.

You just had the "gut feeling" that my reply to mittheimp on these matters where somehow "out of order" but you didn't actually know and couldn't, in fact, explain the reason why so you just came out with this "funny" remark.

[BAF]

The terms 1st/2nd/3rd world, Developing Country et al, are terms which need to be either updated or dropped altogether.

To be replaced with..?

You have to understand that these are not definitions, these are merely labels which refer to categories part of a complex definition.

This definiton isn't even univocal, although the various "flavors" cooked by the different international bodies are largely congruent.

Too many groups, with too many agendas, decide who is a 1st/2nd...5th world country. The criteria for determining a country's status is too varied. One country may have 1st world GDP numbers, but 3rd world health care standards, 2nd World corruption, 4th world life expectancies, 5th world welfare, ect.

This doesn't make any sense. Saying that a 3rd world country "has 1st world GDP", or better said 1st world per capita income", (which, BTW, would make it a NIC unless it could achieve such result with an agricultural based economy) but other 3rd or 4th world country characteristics means that country doesn't comply with all the requirements to be considered a 1st world country and it is not a 1st world country. It also is not a 4th world country if it has "4th world life expectancies" since the main difference between 3rd and 4th world countries is the annual rate of development (or, more appropriately, growth), not the life expectancies (which is a so called "secondary character").

Who actually makes the definitive judgement about whether a country is 1st/2nd/3rd World ? Is that status based on how a country matches up against a certain superpower ?

All the international organizations involved and operating worldwide in social, economical and political studies, relations, aid, cooperation etc etc etc use such type of classification. The bigger ones conduct their own studies and come up with their personal interpretations (and definition) of the data available. Some of those organizations have coming up with such rankings and definitions as their very own "reason for living".

As for "Developing Country" label, that would imply that there are fully developed countries already in existence. Which countries can be considered "Fully Developed" ? I don't know of any perfect countries. Even the "Developed, 1st World" countries continue to develop themselves further. Again, who makes the definitive judgement, and is it based on how a country matches up against the US ? (While being better than some countries, it can hardly be considered a "perfect, fully developed country")

Copying&pasting things already said and said again is becoming really tiresome...

BAF, post #56 "Well, you rarely hear 1st world countries called "developed countries" but rather "most developed countries" or the like.

Remember that this is just the consequence of wanting to find substitutes for the perceived insulting expressions "3rd world" and "4th world"."

You have to ask for an explanation to the PC brigade, not the analists community.

Should there be an "Un-Developing" label for countries that seem to be going backwards (like the Sudan, Somalia, or the Congo) ?

Well, they are properly defined 4th world countries. (One of the) PC equivalent is "least developed countries".

This has already been talked about as well...

[BAF]

actually i'd choose south korea. not that i've been there or anything

Since you seemed so surprised and unconvinced that South Korea is a NIC I took it as a given that you had at least some basic knowledge on its socio-political reality and that it was said knowledge to suggest you that South Korea is something else than a NIC... (I also assumed that you chose Italy as representative of any other Western country)

But it now seems that you:

1) have never set foot in both of those places

2) don't even consider Italy as really representative of a typical 1st world country (on the base of a news report...)

So, what are we talking about?

In which way my comparing two places you know nothing about can help you understand why South Korea is a NIC and not a 1st world country? And what do you base your "feeling" that South Korea is something else than a NIC on?

also, i've read news reports about some pretty surreal italian court decisions such as the one recently that ruled that a pat on the bottom is not sexual harassment so long as it is "isolated and impulsive". wow, big can of worms there.

Are you suggesting that an Asian country (or any other on the face of earth, for that matter) is more attentive than a Western one to women's rights??

In Italy even "out of line" comments qualify for sexual harassment, let alone pats on the bottom...

Please provide a link to this very interesting piece of "news report".

[zzap]

Well, you obviously have a strong interest in the subject. Unfornunately, other than attacking those you disagree with (as 'PC' or whatever else gets in your way) you have offered precious little as an explanation, and dodged all direct questions.

Sorry, I don't have more time for this, continue without me...

[BAF]

BAF - you ask.....

Well, you are surely not asking me to report here all of the hundreds different socio-political indicators (and how they are differently defined and misured) universally used by the the countless international organizations to study, compare, categorize and rank the various socio-political realities around this world... are you?

No. We are merely asking you to post a link which defines the terminology that you are using (1st, 2nd, 3rd and now 4th world) in terms that are either political ideology based as per the definitions given by others throughout this thread (in which case everything you say about defining where Thailand sits in terms of development is pointless, since it is a political classification rather than a development one) or using measures of development which may or may not include socio political measures.

You still havent' got that we are talking about socio-economical-political definitons, have you?

Even if you pretend to define "developing", "developed", "least developed", "most developed", "less developed" and all the rest of this confusing PC crap purely from an economical point of view, Thailand would still be a "developing country" since its economy is still agriculture based.

Below you say that you have already explored the World Bank site and that you have verified there some of the financial (economic) indicators which define Thailand as a developing country. Now you say that you are interested in nothing else than an economic approach (i.e. you are refusing to consider the socio-political aspects of the development of a country) so what else is there to add??

Having posted such a link, we can then go and explore ourselves, as I have done for instance for the income data from World Bank site (which for me is an interesting one; I like financial development, I am not so interested in the other ones in top line analysis because I can't get my head around some of their measures).

Please do not send links to classifications such as newly industrialised, less developed countries etc, as these are different classifications to the 1st - 4th world system.

???

1st world = "most developed countries", "developed countries"

2nd world = communist and, in part (see my previous posts), ex-communist countries

3rd world = "developing countries", "less developed countries"

4th world = "least developed countries"

NIC = "newly industrialized countries" which are technically 3rd world countries (hence my "4+1" remark in previous posts) that have economically developed to, or almost to, 1st world level but which still have to socially and/or politically catch up

And don't forget to thank the PC brigade for your total confusion on this matter...

All I want is to start off a debate with clear guidelines as to the classification system, then we can use the data available to assess where Thailand sits on YOUR classification system.

Sorry but if you ignore (and refuting to believe) even the basics (see above) I really don't know where I can point you to...

OK, what about browsing the UN site (www.un.org) and seeing what terminology they use, where Thailand stands and what it is called then putting in a search engine "3rd world" and "developing countries" to verify the correspondence?

You can do a cut and paste if you want, but as it stands now, the person not understanding this 1st - 4th world classification system is me, because I still haven't got definitions of what makes up each category, least of all 4th world.

Sorry, you won't find a concise definition in a pocket book titled "Geo-politics and world socio-economical-political matters for dummies".

As I have written to zzap I don't have the time nor the interest in giving a crash course in geo-political matters on a Thai-related message board, I have simply pointed out to you what the universally accepted, well known and well studied reality is.

You and others are of course free to do researches of your own (with your own time) and report here that Thailand is a 2nd world country, a 1st world one or whatever else you pretend it to be, I will then check your sources and accept the result.

zzap, as expected, has left. What about you?

I have told you Thailand is a 3rd world country (or a "developing country" which is nothing else that the PC label for the same exact meaning). Go check on some of the international organizations how Thailand is called, go verify on a search engine that saying "developing country" is indeed the same as saying "3rd world country" and report back here.

[zzap]

NICs almost 1st world level?

Thank you, Mr. anti-'PC', for insisting to cause confusion.

Still no definitions nor answering of hard questions.

It's called "waffling" in English.

[thedude]

also, i've read news reports about some pretty surreal italian court decisions such as the one recently that ruled that a pat on the bottom is not sexual harassment so long as it is "isolated and impulsive". wow, big can of worms there.

Are you suggesting that an Asian country (or any other on the face of earth, for that matter) is more attentive than a Western one to women's rights??

In Italy even "out of line" comments qualify for sexual harassment, let alone pats on the bottom...

Please provide a link to this very interesting piece of "news report".

oh boy, now you've asked for it.

the below articles can be located if you google "italian court" and click "news"

exerpts of some results for your easy reference...

From The Age (highly respected Australian newspaper) Feb 18, 2006

Italian court draws fire with sex ruling

Sexually abusing a teenager is less serious a crime if the girl is not a virgin, Italy's higher court said in a controversial ruling that immediately drew a barrage of criticism.

The court ruled in favour of a man in his 40s, identified as Marco T, who forced his 14-year old stepdaughter to have oral sex with him after she refused intercourse.

Women's rights, did you say? The rape of a woman in Italy is now a lesser offense if she is not a virgin.

From a UPI press release, Feb 18, 2006.

Italian court says no to mom's last name

Italy's Constitutional Court has upheld a law preventing children from taking their mother's last name as a surname unless the father is unknown.

The court said it did not have the power to change the law, adding that lawmakers should address the issue, ANSA reported. The court said the law is a throwback to a dated legacy of a patriarchal concept of the family.

Arcidonna, Italy's largest women's rights group, said the ruling reveals a growing gap between Italian society and political life.

And for the sexual harassment case i refered to earlier, its from BBC world news published on 25 Jan, 2006.

Italian court allows bottom patting

Italy's highest appeals court has ruled that a pat on the bottom is not sexual harassment, provided that it is "isolated and impulsive".

The Court of Cassation supported a decision overturning an earlier guilty verdict by a lower court against a public health agency manager accused by a female employee.

The woman also accused the manager of threatening to damage her career if she reported the incident, which occurred in 1994 in northern Italy......

(cont'd)....The court, which has the final say on all appeals except those related to the constitution, has drawn criticism in the past for its alleged sexism.

It threw out a sexual harrassment case in 1997, maintaining that the defendent was in love with his victim and was "just being gallant" by kissing her.

And it caused a storm in 1999 when it ruled that a woman wearing tight jeans could not be raped.

It said that the woman would have had to help get the jeans off, and this was tantamount to consenting to sex.

Feminists responded by calling a "skirt strike", insisting they would wear jeans until the decision was changed.

Now, i'm not sure about "out of line" comments qualifying for sexual harassment, but the courts have consistently shown how it is ready to relax the rules in other more serious cases. Perhaps the judicial system and its stance towards women's rights should more correctly be compared to that of say, Afganistan? Does this also raise the possibility that some NICs like S Korea are somewhat more evolved, and hence superior to some old 1st world countries like Italy?

[steveromagnino]

You still havent' got that we are talking about socio-economical-political definitons, have you?

Even if you pretend to define "developing", "developed", "least developed", "most developed", "less developed" and all the rest of this confusing PC crap purely from an economical point of view, Thailand would still be a "developing country" since its economy is still agriculture based.

1st world = "most developed countries", "developed countries"

2nd world = communist and, in part (see my previous posts), ex-communist countries

3rd world = "developing countries", "less developed countries"

4th world = "least developed countries"

NIC = "newly industrialized countries" which are technically 3rd world countries (hence my "4+1" remark in previous posts) that have economically developed to, or almost to, 1st world level but which still have to socially and/or politically catch up

OK, what about browsing the UN site (www.un.org) and seeing what terminology they use, where Thailand stands and what it is called then putting in a search engine "3rd world" and "developing countries" to verify the correspondence?

Sorry, you won't find a concise definition in a pocket book titled "Geo-politics and world socio-economical-political matters for dummies".

You and others are of course free to do researches of your own (with your own time) and report here that Thailand is a 2nd world country, a 1st world one or whatever else you pretend it to be, I will then check your sources and accept the result.

Thank you, for finally providing the key to your system. I have indeed explored the UN site, but given how slow it is to load things up, and how infrequently references occur using YOUR system compared to the system everyone else uses...well what can I say, your post here is the only one clear to me. Thanks.

So....to be clear then... any communist country, or ex communist country, is 2nd world. Therefore, Cuba, is 2nd world, and so is North Korea while Poland and the ex sattellite states of USSR are 2nd world. Totally economically disparate, but ok, that is one group.

Clearly, since we have never been communist, we can also never be second world here in Thailand. So I don't need to spend time looking that up around the net.

You are right on one thing though, cruising the web looknig for definitions is a waste of time, luckly Wikopedia did it for me, establishing....

'However, there is no objective definition of Third World or "Third World country" and the use of the term remains controversial. In geographical and political academia, it is almost never used, as it is seen as being out of date, colonialist, othering and inaccurate. In general, Third World countries are not as industrialized or technologically advanced as OECD countries.'

If we do use first world though, then I refer to that useful source of knowledge wikipedia (also known as info for dummies who aren't provided it by someone who knows more than them online)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Firstworld.png

Now according to this link, South Korea IS first world, and so is South Africa.

So... how about we agree between us to use the HDI, and just use their breakdown, since it is, unlike your awkward mixture of political type (communist vs. non-communist vs. the rest) an index based on objective measurement of development in a variety of criteria

'The UN Human Development Index (HDI) is a comparative measure of poverty, literacy, education, life expectancy, childbirth, and other factors for countries worldwide. It is a standard means of measuring well-being, especially child welfare. The index was developed in 1990 by the Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq, and has been used since 1993 by the United Nations Development Programme in its annual report.' - how easy is that! A definition in 1 paragraph.... the actual formula is an average of a formula for life expectancy, for education and for GDP.

Check yo' self b4 yo' reck yo' self playa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Human_Development_Index

no doubt available many other places as well. It isn't perfect, since I still think business is the key driver, but I'll let it slide with the GDP as just 1 part of the formula.....

Now....let's see how they rank in order from top to bottom....

Norway (=)

Iceland (↑ 5)

Australia (=)

Luxembourg (↑ 11)

Canada (↓ 1)

Sweden (↓ 4)

Switzerland (↑ 4)

Ireland (↑ 2)

Belgium (↓ 3)

United States (↓ 2)

Japan (↓ 2)

Netherlands (↓ 7)

Finland (=)

Denmark (↑ 3)

United Kingdom (↓ 3)

France (=)

Austria (↓ 3)

Italy (↑ 3)

New Zealand (↓ 1)

Germany (↓ 1)

Spain (↓ 1)

Hong Kong SAR of PR China (↑ 1)

Israel (↓ 1)

Greece (=)

Singapore (=)

Slovenia (↑ 1)

Portugal (↓ 1)

Republic of Korea (=)

Cyprus (↑ 1)

Barbados (↓ 1)

And that...ladies and Gentlemen...is the top 30. Taiwan is not included since it isn't a country, but according to calculations it would slot in just above Singapore, which makes that, ahem, 3 countries about on par with Portugal which is, and let's get really clear about this, in your definition a first world country right? And since we are on that,

Oh ######.. what was that about Korea? It isn't developed enough to be first world? OK, I know it from business terms, and they are kicking butt, no question. You could argue on the literacy thing but they are better than Japan at english.... and life expectancy is good.

OK, this is, according to one source, who is in the OECD...

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Iceland

Ireland

Italy

Japan

Luxembourg

Netherlands

New Zealand

Norway

Portugal

Spain

South Korea

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Not that surprising tat Singapore is missed out, after all, they are tiny and apparently they have also asked not to be included in the group due to lack of development, but nevertheless they are certainly more developed than Korea, and OMG, how did Korea get in there? Guess they must be first world then.... what with their fancy phones and all. And Taiwan would be in there too. Korea joined in 1996, incidentally.

So.... having come from a picture that there is only Japan within Asia that is in the 'developed group' which you are calling 'first world' we then jump straight to 3rd world with 2nd world being this awkward catch all for ex comm countries (incidentally, around the web I have REALLY struggled to find definitions for most of YOUR terminology, especially compared to the terminology more often used which you write off as 'PC'. Actually, I am struggling to find definitions at all!)

NOw one other thing....

Having posted such a link, we can then go and explore ourselves, as I have done for instance for the income data from World Bank site (which for me is an interesting one; I like financial development, I am not so interested in the other ones in top line analysis because I can't get my head around some of their measures).

'I am not so interested in the other ones in top line analysis'

You claim:

'I have simply pointed out to you what the universally accepted, well known and well studied reality is.'

Now let's see just how screwed up this crazy bunch of cowboys are:

according to the UN

'Definition of:

developed, developing countries

There is no established convention for the designation of “developed” and “developing” countries or areas in the United Nations system. In common practice, Japan in Asia, Canada and the United States in northern America, Australia and New Zealand in Oceania and Europe are considered “developed” regions or areas. In international trade statistics, the Southern African Customs Union is also treated as developed region and Israel as a developed country; countries emerging from the former Yugoslavia are treated as developing countries; and countries of eastern Europe and the former USSR countries in Europe are not included under either developed or developing regions.

Reference

United Nations. Standard country or Area Codes for Statistical Use. Series M, No. 49, Rev. 4 (United Nations publication, Sales No. M.98.XVII.9). Available in part at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm.

So...what we have is this massive bloated organisation that are full of pumped up civil servant types, bandying around terms, and they haven't even got a decent classification system for them?!

No wonder it can't be summarised in a book for dummies!

By comparison, some of the things i know a little about...playing the piano, intellectual property law, marketing, finance, creating indexes, yacht design - how strange that these little things are so easy that each can be summarised into a book with definitions and a cover and everything!

I'll summarise like this.... I think you are fighting a tough debate here... you claim that Thailand is 3rd world, and neither of us have agreed on terms or definitions, to which you have finally offered a 'rosetta stone' connecting accepted terminology used today (which you claim is solely the result of being 'PC' as opposed to the reality that political boundaries of the cold war are no longer relevant) with your own terminology which you challege us to debate that Thailand is 2nd world or find a link doing so, when by your own definition 2nd world is communist or ex communist. You are also trying to convince me that Korea is by SOME definition not developed, and should be a NIC which is yet another term (what is it in your 1st - 4th world terminology again - the plus 1 right?) when it is OECD, it ranks high enough on the HDI to be developed and is was also considered to be part of the first world (as an American ally) in the 'non PC' system you continue to use.....

Huh?

Did I miss something>??

Well, anyway, I know now about this HDI, and I am back comfortable in the believe that the almighty west is not the only developed part o' this little ol' world. That's what I see from the data I've posted. Can you guide me as to what I am missing about Korea? And yes, I go there, actually I was there as late as last month. Can't say I've been to Italy lately, I enjoy Taksin's antics, not sure if his Italian twin is as funny though. Did he do a reality TV show too ler?

My point all along has been not that Thailand is or isn't developed, but that we should use terms that make sense, not some antiquated cold war terms.

My point all along has been not that Thailand is or isn't developed, but that we should use terms that make sense, not some antiquated cold war terms as per....

BAF quote :

The 1st world is made up of all of the Western countries plus Japan and the 2nd world was made up of the communist countries and is today made up of those same countries but with some of the now ex-communist countries sliding outside the "2nd world" category towards the 3rd world and some towards the 1st (the latter mostly impeded by socio-political considerations rather than by economical ones).

History teaches us that what prevents 3rd world countries to become 1st world is, most and foremost, their 3rd world cultures. Japan, China and India are perfect examples of the fact that values and principles aren't changed by economic development, it's quite the opposite. It's the change in the culture, in the values and principles on which a society and its approach to others is based that makes possible a drastic economic development (which then, of course, also has a part in the further development of those values and principles).

The less willing to change the societies and the cultures are, the slower the pace of their development is.

Japan has made it to 1st world status and look at how socio-economical-politically different it is from all the rest of the Asian societies.

Japan is also the sole non-Western 1st world country and look at the inner tensions and contrasts that adopting many Western values and principles (which are the only ones leading to development) has created when mixed in such a short time with their local flavour of typical Asian values and principles...

ENDS

[note that Japan is the only non-western 1st world country,at least according to BAF, and now we want to know... how does Korea fit into this based on all the data above?!]

[Donz]

according to the end of finacial year stats for 2005, South Korea had the strongerest ecomony in the world.

They also go the highest internet connection by percentage, something like 99.7% of the population.

I saw it on 60 mins

[Sporting Dog]

I couldn't be arsed reading the last six pages BUT I go for a ride on my bike around the countryside from where I live (South of Krabi) and there is definitely people living third world out there...and most don't seem too bothered about it!!

The kids seem to be having more fun than those I see back in Oz and I know family is a reality out there so......

[kasi]

Thailand doesn't fall into any of our pat little western classifications which give some of us comfort.

Thailand is a 2500 year old Kingdom which possesses more culture, grace, and history than all the western countries put together!

I think anyone who can classify Thailand as third world sh!thole is wrong. If that's what they want they can move. There are plenty of places in the world which qualify: Los Angeles, London, Paris, Chicago, Miami, just to name a few.

Edited February 23, 2006 by kasi

[Octaviousbp]

I thought this was an interesting definition of "Real Development". It involves:

"...indigenous people determining their own future, confident, not intimidated, but free people determining what they want to do and doing it for themselves, exerscising agency, actively moving forward to create better lives and improve their well-being according to their won priorities and criteria as tehy have done for millennia" - Susan Maiava.

It's an interesting definition of the post-development persuasion, but sort of problematic as well. It runs the risk of essentializing indigenous people and their culture into a cohesive, static, homogenous entity that is void of tensions and antagonisms.

It does however avoid the Hegelian notion of history, and the perception of development as being the journey to a fixed (Western) ending point.

I hope this makes sense... it's kind of academic language, but the points are valuable none-the-less

[BAF]

oh boy, now you've asked for it.

I've asked for a link to get details on the case you brought up and all I got is a copy&past mostly from the same BBC article with no link to it and where many things are mentioned with no references to the original cases (names, places, rulings' nos etc).

Great journalismn and great reporting by you NOT.

exerpts of some results for your easy reference...

For "my easy reference" I need a link and/or names/references not anonimous excerpts. I had to google all of it loosing a lot of time chasing this anonimous crap.

Premise 1: most of the legal terms I'm going to use are directly translated from the Italian so they will probably be inaccurate.

Premise 2: the Corte di Cassazione is the third grade of judgement in Italy, after the Tribunale (Civile and Penale) and the Corte di Appello.

Italian court draws fire with sex ruling

Sexually abusing a teenager is less serious a crime if the girl is not a virgin, Italy's higher court said in a controversial ruling that immediately drew a barrage of criticism.

The court ruled in favour of a man in his 40s, identified as Marco T, who forced his 14-year old stepdaughter to have oral sex with him after she refused intercourse.

Women's rights, did you say? The rape of a woman in Italy is now a lesser offense if she is not a virgin.

BS. Suprema Corte di Cagliari, sentence no 6329, Valentina P. against Marco T.

In the first 2 grades of judgement Marco T. had been sentenced to 3 years and 4 months of jail and a fine of € 5000 plus the expenses of the judgement for having had consensual sex (a BJ) with his stepdaughter. It wasn't a violent rape, but the fact that Valentina was at the time 14yo (he was 31) legally made it a rape and automatically prosecuted.

The judge recognized the aggravating circumstance (which upped the punishment) that the minor was under his custody.

He appealed in the third grade because he was asking for the fact that the sexual act was consensual (and there was no physical violence involved) to be recognized as a mitigating circumstance (to balance the aforementioned aggravating circumstance).

The Suprema Corte has accepted to recognize this (and to balance the aggravating circumstance with this mitigating circumstance) and in motivating the sentence has also mentioned the fact that since the age of 13 she, admittedly, has been regularly having having sex with coetaneouses and other adults.

Italian court says no to mom's last name

Italy's Constitutional Court has upheld a law preventing children from taking their mother's last name as a surname unless the father is unknown.

The court said it did not have the power to change the law, adding that lawmakers should address the issue, ANSA reported. The court said the law is a throwback to a dated legacy of a patriarchal concept of the family.

Arcidonna, Italy's largest women's rights group, said the ruling reveals a growing gap between Italian society and political life.

Again crappy journalism.

The only thing true is that children have to take their father's surname if he is alive at the time of their birth and their parents are, at the same time, legally married. However they can also take their mother's surname, written either first or after their father's surname, they just can't take their mother's surname ALONE with no mention of the father's surname.

In all the other cases (father dead or not legally married or unknown) they can take whichever surnames their parent/parents choose.

And in all cases (the first included) once they are 18yo they can change their surname and adopt only that of their mothers if so they want.

Absolutely earth-shattering indeed...

And for the sexual harassment case i refered to earlier, its from BBC world news published on 25 Jan, 2006.

Italian court allows bottom patting

Italy's highest appeals court has ruled that a pat on the bottom is not sexual harassment, provided that it is "isolated and impulsive".

The Court of Cassation supported a decision overturning an earlier guilty verdict by a lower court against a public health agency manager accused by a female employee.

The woman also accused the manager of threatening to damage her career if she reported the incident, which occurred in 1994 in northern Italy......

BS. Corte di Cassazione, sentence no 623 25/01/2001, M.E against D.A.

In the first grade the Tribunale di Venezia found M.E guilt and sentenced him to 1 year and 6 months of jail plus a fine of the equivalent of € 1500 plus the expenses of the judgement. He appealed and in the second grade he convinced the Corte di Appello di Venezia that his act wasn't of a sexual nature and was made between friends (he was able to prove that their relationship went beyond the office) but he was still found guilty of menacing his subordinate of damaging her career if she reported the incident (he got 10 months of jail and a fine of the equivalent of € 1000 plus the expenses of the judgement).

She appealed and in the third grade the Corte di Cassazione ruled that although their relationship was of a friendly nature his act was an "intrusion in her sexual sphere" rather than a comradely one and since their understanding of the nature of their relationship wasn't evidently the same her interest prevails because of the "sexual nature" of the part of her body which he (non violently) slapped. They reconfirmed the first sentence and he got 1 year and 6 months of jail plus a fine of the equivalent of € 1500 plus the expenses of the judgement.

(cont'd)....The court, which has the final say on all appeals except those related to the constitution, has drawn criticism in the past for its alleged sexism.

It threw out a sexual harrassment case in 1997, maintaining that the defendent was in love with his victim and was "just being gallant" by kissing her.

BS. Corte di Cassazione, sentence no 6651 27/04/1998, Napoli. D.F.S. against N.P.

D.F.S. had been found guilt in the first 2 grades of judgement of violenza sessuale ("sexual violence") for having kissed on a cheek a girl (while telling her that he loved her) with whom he was used to take the bus with and the Corte di Cassazione declassed the sentence as a less serious "aggression" (with no violence nor injury involved) and gave him a less heavy sentence of 8 months of jail and a fine of the equivalent of € 1000 plus the expenses of the judgement.

And it caused a storm in 1999 when it ruled that a woman wearing tight jeans could not be raped.

It said that the woman would have had to help get the jeans off, and this was tantamount to consenting to sex.

Feminists responded by calling a "skirt strike", insisting they would wear jeans until the decision was changed. [/i]

BS. Corte di Cassazione di Potenza, sentence no 1636 02/1999, Carmine C. against Rosa. P.

They were used to go out together and one day they went together in an isolated street with his car and had a sexual intercourse, he had been found guilt of rape because in the 1st and 2nd grade of judgement the judges believed her that she changed idea at the last minute. She had absolutely no sign of physical violence and it was, according to an hospital medical visit, a "normal, non-violent, sexual intercourse". She had to admit that initially her intention was of having sex with him (she had to admit this because her jeans were so tight and his car was so small that she had to get out of the car to take her pants off, while sitting on the ground), so it was essentially her word against his.

So since she admitted ("thanks" to the jeans) that she initially wanted to have sex with him and since

the doctors said that both of them had absolutely no laceration, contusion, wound or any other physical sign indicating a collutation, resistance or even a "strong" sexual act the Cassazione deemed there wasn't proof but her word that she changed idea at the last minute and that that was forced sex.

Now, i'm not sure about "out of line" comments qualifying for sexual harassment,

For example, a guy has been recently sentenced because he told a coworker that he wanted to cum on her big knockers...

but the courts have consistently shown how it is ready to relax the rules in other more serious cases. Perhaps the judicial system and its stance towards women's rights should more correctly be compared to that of say, Afganistan? Does this also raise the possibility that some NICs like S Korea are somewhat more evolved, and hence superior to some old 1st world countries like Italy?

As my circumstantiated reply shows, the only thing consistently shown here is crappy journalism and crappy researching&reporting skills.

[solo siam]

I would say that a country in which sending a local 1 page/1 minute fax costs roughly the same as the hourly minimum wage, the majority of the population arent even registered as working, and get only 2 days off per month, isnt a particularly developed country. A wealthy few at the top doesn't make the country first world, the massive gap between the rich and the poor is part of why its a third world country.

Thailand doesn't stop being a relatively poor country just because some expats like it here.

I enjoy living here, like the Thai people and way of life but I'm under no impression that its a first world economy - for example theyv'e only had ADSL for what 2-3 years.

[zzap]

Noone here asserted Thailand to be a "first world economy", Digital. There have been a few suggestions on where exactly to place it earlier.

And it would be interesting to see BAF comment on what Steve made the effort to research and post...

Edited February 23, 2006 by zzap