English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Why are other races outside the G14 considered as 3rd world? And why is it that every leader in such nation that does not toe the western value is considered… well you know the T word.

2006-07-06 04:47:28 · 10 answers · asked by Point Blank 2 in Social Science Sociology

10 answers

Third world countries don't have democratic leadership; i.e., their leaders are not working for the people, elected by the people, and essentially cannot lose their jobs because of the people they were supposed to serve but didn't. They generally have an agenda to stay in power any way they can and don't have a natural empathy towards those they are supposed to protect.

Third world countries don't necessarily lack funds either, as it has been suggested. These countries' leaders accept monetary aid of other countries, but there is no accountability to how it gets spent, and so it goes to waste.

A good example of this is the leadership of the Palestinian people. First we have Yassir Arafat who gains billions of dollars in aid from all over the world, including Israel. Does he use his newfound wealth to build roads, schools, a viable infrastructure? No. He uses this aid to buy guns and weaponry and then recruit and train terrorists, to the undermining of his own people's welfare.

Because you have widespread poverty, the people are angry and are easier to recruit into highly volatile factions that seek to destroy instead of build -- not realizing that by warring with their neighbors, they are destroying their own people, not because they are in a war, per se, but because the money that was supposed to be used to better the many is actually being used to insulate the few. I lived in the Middle East for five years and saw it first hand.

This is not just so in Israel and the West Bank & Gaza, but in many African countries as well. Look at Rwanda and the Sudan, and other places like this. Their leaders had the wherewithall to do what was right; they chose instead to do what was comfortable.

Rebecca
http://www.ipowergrfx.com
http://www.publicadjuster.com

2006-07-06 06:00:13 · answer #1 · answered by Rebecca 7 · 1 3

Having a leader which would save the nation is a very simplistic approach to a very complex problem. Every single time someone though this would be the answer, the world gained another Hitler, Stalin or Gerge W. Bush.

At our current situation, global economy (globalization, etc.) makes it impossible for any nation which doesn't thrive on the exploitation of others to improve.

The world cannot have many leading nations, for then, too many ideologies and problems (and solutions to theses problems) would arise, forcing current world leaders change their actons and plans for those nations. That would affect their profit in a negative way.

We are seeing it happening right now (as it had before) with the situation in Iraq. Why hasn't any nation taken a similar action in Africa, for example ?

To have some interesting insights on this subject, read (or watch) 1984, Why we fight, Syriana and, yes, V for Vendetta.

2006-07-06 12:00:17 · answer #2 · answered by marcoschimenti 1 · 0 0

What better way to control your people is to keep them hungry and poor. Feed them false hopes and empty promises. Kowtow to big business and listen to their dictates and implement the policies they seem fit to run your country down to the ground.

That's what most third world nations get themselves into. Corruption down to the very core driven by the insatiable appetite for greed and covetiousness. Ethics and conscience has no place in any third world country most especially if the people are kept divided by strife and war.

Notice that there are small conflicts of some kind in any third world country, where the law is at the end of a gun barrel forced down your parched throat, while the oligarches and politicians fat and rich take their vacations in Europe or some exotic place living it up to the hilt using taxpayers money, protected by armed goons and riding in gleaming and spankingly new cars of all makes and models.

Only if the people of all third world countries rise up and unite and not listen to what local media and politicians dictates, and face the real enemy which is the rotten system which serves a priviledged few, then that would be the start of any third world country's exodus to a new and better era.

2006-07-06 12:35:28 · answer #3 · answered by ding p 1 · 0 0

By definition, third world countries lack wealth. In consequence they lack power. So a leader from the third world would have to persuade richer countries that it was in their interests to help the third world develop economically.

Arguably two of the twentieth century's most admirable political leaders, Gandhi and Nelson Mandela, came from the third world. Both of them argued powerfully for a more just distribution of wealth. But perhaps there is only so much that even such charimatic individuals can do.

2006-07-06 12:22:32 · answer #4 · answered by Philosophical Fred 4 · 0 0

It is the spirit of the head that flows down to the body.

Example:if you what to build a world class organization you have to share your vision and mission with your worker so the can help build your dream.
By doing this you are able to show your staff where you are going thereby giving them a glimpse into the future.

In the absence of the above idea, indicates that the leader is not encouraging his staff to be receptive; which proves that the leader has a problem. because you cannot lead with out people following you.

The problem with third world leaders is; they lack the above strategy.

It is the spirit of the head that flows down to the body.

2006-07-06 12:15:57 · answer #5 · answered by Deb 4 · 0 0

Blame it on the French, specifically Alfred Sauvy who coined the termed. Do a search on "third world" or Alfred. There are many references. None of which make it a derogatory term as you have. It's not a race issue.

Why are so many leaders in third world countries killing their own people?

2006-07-06 11:58:01 · answer #6 · answered by bond_wj 1 · 0 0

Alot of third world countries are in poverty Because of their leaders. Their leaders live in luxury while the people starve. They hoard everything for themselves.

2006-07-06 11:51:36 · answer #7 · answered by tmills883 5 · 0 0

We should all make friends and start to share. Not fight and steal and control people. Get a leader who can make that happen and we will all be saved

2006-07-06 11:56:07 · answer #8 · answered by thecharleslloyd 7 · 0 0

the leaders are greedy and better off if their country is poor,so long as they can feed their fat faces!

2006-07-06 14:14:30 · answer #9 · answered by sanders_sammy 2 · 0 0

maybe because their leader is spoiled

2006-07-06 11:50:40 · answer #10 · answered by ▲▼▲▼ 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers