Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
  1. #1
    Devoted Veteran Strider's Avatar



    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    11,330

    Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    I chatted with some friends about this the other day, and thought it could be interesting to hear your opinions.

    Let's take Africa as an example.
    Europeans colonizes and takes control of Africa, enslaving its people. When the industrialization comes in EU, the Europeans just bring their own technology with them to Africa, but the Africans don't undergo the same process. Europeans give 'back' the countries to the Africans. They have therefore skipped the most important step that all first world countries today have gone through in order to become first world countries.

    For reference, all first world countries have gone through these stages in some way:
    Quote Originally Posted by W. W. Rostow's stages of growth
    Traditional society
    Preconditions for take-off
    Take-off (industrialization)
    Drive to maturity
    Age of High mass consumption

    Do you think there's a possibility for the current third world countries to ever undergo the same development, or is it too late and they are doomed an eternal fate of being third world?
    Should first world countries completely stop all contact to third world countries, so that they might be able to create an industrialization of their own?
    Should first world countries take complete control, like the Europeans did in Australia, which is a first world country?

    Discuss.
    Behaviorally Related Neural Plasticity in the Arthropod Optic Lobes

    tumblr | last.fm

  2. #2
    Veteran Enthusiast


    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    6,380

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Do you think there's a possibility for the current third world countries to ever undergo the same development, or is it too late and they are doomed an eternal fate of being third world?
    There is a chance for them to grow, growth is inevitable. What I think will happen, is they will adopt our technology, but by the time they adopt our current technology, first world countries would have flourished past these technologies. So in a sense of the context of that time, they will still be a 3rd world country, but to our current context, if they were to have these technological advancements, then they would be a first world country/
    [i]Should first world countries completely stop all contact to third world countries, so that they might be able to create an industrialization of their own?[/i]
    No, they obviously can't handle it, I think by giving back the countries to the Africans has proven that they can't industrialise themselves. Look at all the blood diamond exchanges etc. (Although that's partially our fault as the consumer of these.)
    Should first world countries take complete control, like the Europeans did in Australia, which is a first world country?

    Yes, I think we should. I am Australia, and we are flourishing, and booming so much that our dollar has surpassed the American dollar, which is a huge accomplishment for a country of less then 25 million people.

  3. #3
    Insanity Skype's Avatar



    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    27,397

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Don't forget the locations of said third world countries lack resources. Even simple things like water are scarce, arguably the most important resource.

    Saying that I don't think it's our problem. Europe, America, both grew from nothing, we all started at 0, so to speak.

    I don't really care what happens in these countries and I believe we'd all be better off financially if our world leaders stopped caring too.

  4. #4
    Dedicated Member Ethan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    704

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Quote Originally Posted by Skype
    Don't forget the locations of said third world countries lack resources. Even simple things like water are scarce, arguably the most important resource.

    Saying that I don't think it's our problem. Europe, America, both grew from nothing, we all started at 0, so to speak.

    I don't really care what happens in these countries and I believe we'd all be better off financially if our world leaders stopped caring too.
    This. Pretty much.

    Yeah, it's sad that so many people could die but, it is putting countries that actually attempt to help in huge financial debt.
    [center:1unt1isk]
    -Streak[/center:1unt1isk]

  5. #5
    lucien is queen Hazzystan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    2,977

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Quote Originally Posted by Skype
    Saying that I don't think it's our problem. Europe, America, both grew from nothing, we all started at 0
    Europe and America have fertile land, and don't suffer from deadly droughts. The land in a large part of Africa is completely sterile and unsuitable for agriculture, and the droughts mean that water is scarce and hinders agriculture even more. The inability to grow crops in most of Africa means that it is impossible for the people there to have a reliable source of food or income. It also makes economic growth impossible, since agriculture is one of the building blocks of a prosperous society. Therefore saying that "Europe and America can do it" is a very unfair comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skype
    I don't really care what happens in these countries and I believe we'd all be better off financially if our world leaders stopped caring too.
    The US pours $680 Billion per year into a military so vast that it would be unconquerable even if the entire world turned against it. Britain is also investing billions into a nuclear programme that is on the whole pretty pointless, and may even be extinct in 5 years. Why don't we cut the budgets on these programmes, rather than take away the only lifeline that millions of families have?

    Again, as I said, economic growth is impossible on its own in many of these countries, and will continue to be if we completely cut aid.
    what is homo love?

  6. #6
    Insanity Skype's Avatar



    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    27,397

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Perhaps we are spending inhumane amounts of money on things like unnecessary military and scientific programmes but why should the money be spent on third world countries? It's not our fault nor our problem that the ancestors of the inhabitants of those countries decided it'd be a good place to start a civilisation.

  7. #7
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    398

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Quote Originally Posted by Skype
    Perhaps we are spending inhumane amounts of money on things like unnecessary military and scientific programmes but why should the money be spent on third world countries? It's not our fault nor our problem that the ancestors of the inhabitants of those countries decided it'd be a good place to start a civilisation.
    It's hardly their fault, and, whilst it is their problem, why shouldn't we help out? It'd save lives. Saying it's not our problem, just let them die is a bit immoral when we could actually do something.

  8. #8
    Insanity Skype's Avatar



    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    27,397

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Quote Originally Posted by Scourge
    Quote Originally Posted by Skype
    Perhaps we are spending inhumane amounts of money on things like unnecessary military and scientific programmes but why should the money be spent on third world countries? It's not our fault nor our problem that the ancestors of the inhabitants of those countries decided it'd be a good place to start a civilisation.
    It's hardly their fault, and, whilst it is their problem, why shouldn't we help out? It'd save lives. Saying it's not our problem, just let them die is a bit immoral when we could actually do something.
    It's not their fault and it's not ours. If we left it to nature the inhabitants would probably be dead by now, which is harsh but it's the truth. So many countries give so much aid to third world countries, including help from charities, and they are not advancing or improving in the slightest. We're effectively prolonging their suffering by helping them in such a half-assed manner.

  9. #9
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    398

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    Quote Originally Posted by Skype
    Quote Originally Posted by Scourge
    Quote Originally Posted by Skype
    Perhaps we are spending inhumane amounts of money on things like unnecessary military and scientific programmes but why should the money be spent on third world countries? It's not our fault nor our problem that the ancestors of the inhabitants of those countries decided it'd be a good place to start a civilisation.
    It's hardly their fault, and, whilst it is their problem, why shouldn't we help out? It'd save lives. Saying it's not our problem, just let them die is a bit immoral when we could actually do something.
    It's not their fault and it's not ours. If we left it to nature the inhabitants would probably be dead by now, which is harsh but it's the truth. So many countries give so much aid to third world countries, including help from charities, and they are not advancing or improving in the slightest. We're effectively prolonging their suffering by helping them in such a half-assed manner.
    That's absolute non-sense. Pro-longing their suffering? Not advancing or improving? Where are you getting that from.

    "What precisely is happening in the Third World? According to the United Nations, World Bank, and myriad other groups that keep track, the standard of living is improving. The statistic that almost trumps all others is life span. People who find their conditions worsening donít live longer lives. But life expectancy is consistently better in the Third World than a century or even half a century ago. In 1906 the life expectancy in India was 25 years; 2 today itís around 64.3 As recently as 1930 the average life span in China was only 24 years.4 Today itís 69 for men and 73.5 for women.5

    In The Skeptical Environmentalist, BjÝrn Lomborg notes that in France in 1800 the average life span was 30 years; it was 45 years in Denmark in 1845.6 The vast majority of the Third World is doing much better than that. According to the United Nations, the worst region in this regard is Africa: it has an average life expectancy of about 51 years. The worst of the Third World today is about where France was in 1913.8 Africaís life expectancy today is better than similar rates in the United States a century ago.9

    A good deal of this improvement is due to the massive decline in infant mortality. The current average infant mortality rate in Africa is 83 per 1,000.10 Thatís slightly better than it was in Sweden in 1900."

    http://www.thefreemanonline.org/feature ... rld-doing/

    Whilst this was published almost a decade ago, is still rings true today, with dramatic drops in child mortality, birth rates and death rates accelerating, and the poorer getting more money according to more recent publications.

    http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/blog/ ... ird-world/

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... mments=yes

    The fact is, our economic aid is helping them, and they now have a better standard of living. Saying that if we left them to nature they would be dead doesn't really morally justify leaving them to nature, because we can help, we are helping, and their lives are getting better for it. Saying it's not our problem doesn't mean we can't help out.

  10. #10
    Insanity Skype's Avatar



    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    27,397

    Re: Third World Countries - Lack of Industrialization

    You pretty much proved my point. I should add that I am more specifically talking about African third world countries.

    Increased life span and infant mortality rate does not rectify the fact that they are still inhabiting 'dead' land. Providing them with medicine and water or whatever else the countless millions gets spent on will not pull them out of the rut they are in. We are helping them live longer in a place that should not be inhabited.


 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •