third world can also be very affirmative. in vijay prashad's history, the third world is the noble and dignified revolutionaries that both resisted colonialism and rejected capitalist imperialism, and rejected the militancy and authoritarianism of the eastern block. the ones that learned from both and were to build a new world system based on bilateral cameraderie and pluralism. i use that definition, but am always overrun with people with this kneejerk hatred of the term
and rejected the militancy and authoritarianism of the eastern block
I mean, the Eastern Bloc was far from ideal but this sounds like a reductive holdover from liberal readings on the Cold War. One side was actively "imperializing" while the other was giving weapons and aid to people resisting that.
third world can also be very affirmative. in vijay prashad's history, the third world is the noble and dignified revolutionaries that both resisted colonialism and rejected capitalist imperialism, and rejected the militancy and authoritarianism of the eastern block. the ones that learned from both and were to build a new world system based on bilateral cameraderie and pluralism. i use that definition, but am always overrun with people with this kneejerk hatred of the term
deleted by creator
Right after I posted this I was listening to the most recent episode of Death is Just Around the Corner and the host said basically the same thing.
I mean, the Eastern Bloc was far from ideal but this sounds like a reductive holdover from liberal readings on the Cold War. One side was actively "imperializing" while the other was giving weapons and aid to people resisting that.
thats how the third world theorists viewed them