Subject: Re: North/South; First, Third and Fourth?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:54:52 -0400


Joe and Liz ask about the resurgence of the terms North and South to replace First
and Third worlds.  It's my sense that North/South never really went away,
particularly in political science discourse (it's there in Wallerstein, back into
the 70s), but obviously in the post-Soviet era the three worlds theory makes even
less sense than ever, hence the shift.  Of course, despite its usefulness as a
shorthand for certain axes of domination, this terminology is equally problematic
(is Serbia North or South? how about China? Australia?).  But alternative terms are
hard to come by...

While we're slipping back a bit into the question and answer list-mode Sangeeta
rightly laments, I've got a question about Marlene's use of the term "fourth
world.."  This term came up at our poco reading group the other night, where
someone defined it along the lines of what were sometimes called "internal
colonies"--populations of migrants and their descendants living in more or less
unassimilated groups within first world states.  Is this the generally accepted
meaning?  Can anyone suggest a source or etymology for this term?

Ed

***********************************************************
Ed Wiltse                            ecwiltse-AT-naz.edu
English Dept.                       ph: (716) 389-2646
Nazareth College                 fax: (716) 586-2452
Rochester, NY 14618         http://www-pub.naz.edu:9000/~ecwiltse/




     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---