"THIRD WORLD" Are we??
That day i was watching this movie GURU for the 3rd time i guess!!!
but i noticed sumthing which i hadnt the previous two times...Abhishek bachhan said sumthing about we being called a "Third World Country"these three words forced me to think!!!
What does this mean....are we a completely different world!!!Are we some kind of aliens just sharing this planet we call MOTHER EARTH with them...Like two different life forms who have the same mother!!!well maybe 50 years back this was acceptable because we were a human form whose future could be decided by some other human form(called the brits)
but what relevance does this hold in todays world scenario!!! When without us these supposedly "first world countries" wont survive!!!
well am sure most would agree with me on that..But on second thoughts wasnt 50 yrs back the scenario similar???werent the kids in Britain being fed the food that grew in india!!so practically they were surviving because of us!!
soo i dunno its kinda hurtful to be labelled like that when it makes more sense to call these countries "third world" who like leeches have been sucking our money n resources to survive!!
but i noticed sumthing which i hadnt the previous two times...Abhishek bachhan said sumthing about we being called a "Third World Country"these three words forced me to think!!!
What does this mean....are we a completely different world!!!Are we some kind of aliens just sharing this planet we call MOTHER EARTH with them...Like two different life forms who have the same mother!!!well maybe 50 years back this was acceptable because we were a human form whose future could be decided by some other human form(called the brits)
but what relevance does this hold in todays world scenario!!! When without us these supposedly "first world countries" wont survive!!!
well am sure most would agree with me on that..But on second thoughts wasnt 50 yrs back the scenario similar???werent the kids in Britain being fed the food that grew in india!!so practically they were surviving because of us!!
soo i dunno its kinda hurtful to be labelled like that when it makes more sense to call these countries "third world" who like leeches have been sucking our money n resources to survive!!
posted by paras @ 5:18 AM
7 Comments:
At 7:37 AM,
Anonymous said…
hmmm....so u really hate bein calld "third world" do u??bt hw does it mattr wat ppl call us??deir r lots f ppl out der thruout d wrld who kno India's worth...it dsnt really mattr wat ppl label u as...wat mattrs is wat u think f ur country..ges ders no need to prove it to d world hw much it needs us..its known or will soon b known newz..
At 10:52 AM,
paras said…
hmmmm dats true but being labeled sumthing which doesnt make any sense is not fair n doesnt feel great either...but probably we need our actions 2 speak for us n am sure we would do that
At 8:18 PM,
soup said…
bhai mere...its always easy to form opinions on the basis of what you see...but theres always something "behind the scene"...
the brits didnt take like all the food from india...it was a mere 1.something %...which is very less taking into consideration the fact that it was colonialism...
read dude...something neutral...u'll get a better picture...and who knows? you might start loving the brits for bringing railways to india and trying to initiate the industrial revolution...which eventually our "gr8" leaders gandhi n nehru were against!!
At 8:21 AM,
Shreya said…
actually, thats not true, according to stats it was actually more than just 1%. And it's not just that they took away food, the entire agricultural scenario in india was changed to suit their colonial needs. so was railways. it is true that we owe the british for actually introducing them in india, but dude, go into the details, things cudve been done so much better, if it actually was for India.
As for the post, actually, "third world" is the term used for countries that were not aligned either with America or Soviet Union during the cold war.... those were the two world, and these non aligned countries the third world. so it didnt really mean tht India and the others were in any way inferior to the other countries. Anyway, it just so happened that these non aligned countries were actually the less developed ones. so now third world seems to imply less developed. (which in a sense is true if u compare indian economy with the US economy, dont u think?)
Yes, its insulting.
But only if u take it for its wrong meaning.
Phew!!! long comment... :)
At 9:28 AM,
paras said…
@shreya
hmmmm u are right i checked and realised.but believe me its not the tag its more the attitude which hurts :(
At 11:05 AM,
@archie@ said…
m sorry i dint bother to read d huge comments above,bt lemme js tell u mah dear frend dt the only implication u cn draw frm 'third world'(takin into consideration the coinin f dis term) is dt india ws amongst the neutral countries supportin neither the united states n co.,nor the soviet(axis powers n allie powers if m nt wrng)....d term is misinterpreted cz smhow all dese countries more or less were amongst the developing n underdeveloped ones.....
n i smhow feel this article is vague,i mean seems statistically wrng at a lotta places,as if ur writin fr d sake f sm discrimination that is,n ur too frustrated abt it....
big deal wteva u call us mann,the bottomline is we need to come out f d conch shell....development development development....
as if i care;)....
At 2:50 AM,
Anonymous said…
Great work.
Post a Comment
<< Home