Why are some countries referred to as the 3rd world country?

Question

Well I don't know any right off the bat but on t.v in those countries where poverty is a real big problem, flies all over those poor kids because they can't take a bath and they are all skin and bones because they can't eat etc. This stuff makes me want to cry, but why if someone is talking about them they are often referred to as 3rd world countries? Please don't be mean to me with your answers because I'm not being funny here!

Answer 1

The term was coined during the Cold War to distinguish the countries aligned with the US from the ones sided with Russia. The third world countries are the ones that weren't allied with either.

First World was meant to refer to capitalist countries with a high standard of living, like the US, UK, and Scandinavian countries. Second World countries were communist, like those in the Soviet Union. Technically, countries like Brazil that are thriving and have a high standard of living are also considered to be Third World because they were never teamed up with the US or the USSR during the Cold War. The term more commonly refers to politically and economically unstable countries with a low life expectancy & standard of living, like Zimbabwe and Venezuela.

~ Pax

Answer 2

Skylark is dead on as to the origin of the term, but I think the meaning has evolved.  Now that the cold war is ostensibly over, though US-Russian relations continue to be at strained at times, notably over issues such as Georgia and Iran, the term remains in use, often used to describe impoverished countries.  It would seem that its use would require another two "worlds", and it would appear that we do still divide the planet's sovereign states three ways:

Mature countries with well-developed and stable political and economic infrastructure.  These would include the US, Canada, UK, EU, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, Israel, South Africa. Whether Russia fits here or category 2 is a subject worthy of debate.

Developing Economies with modern or revisionary political systems, or developed economies without representative government.  These include India, China, Egypt, most Arab countries, Colombia, Venezuela, Thailand, Pakistan.  Many are single-resource economies or have governments that we would consider primitive (sheikdoms)  

Countries that still can't seem to get it together, whether due to continuous war and rebellion, lack of natural resources, arable land or infrastructure necessary to develop a production-based economy.  These would include much of sub-Saharan and western Africa, several countries in South America such as Peru and Bolivia, several of the densely populated southeast Asian countries and many island nations.

Obviously, this list was thrown together hastily, and I won't argue too strenuously about who belongs where.  Just wanted to point out that the "Third World" has taken on a new meaning.  It's still economic in nature, but nowadays practical and pragmatic rather than theoretical.