THE GLOBAL DIVIDES:

The North and The South

Do you like coffee?

If so, then perhaps you have visited different coffee shops like Starbucks and the Coffee Bean
and Tea Leaf, or have heard about Figaro, UCC Coffee, and Seattle’s Best.
We always PATRONIZE o tumatangkilik ng BRANDED. Especially when we enter these coffee
shops nagkakaroon tayo ng GLOBALIZATION EXPERIENCE – kasi you experience
globalization in these shops, obsviously 😊. This is an evidence of global interconnectedness
kung saan ang MNC’s at TNC’s (kung di niyo pa alam ang mnc at tnc, ay siya, bahala kayo) are
the medium of these experience of globalization.

TO PATRONIZE FOREIGN MARKETS IN OUR COUNTRY na sobrang liit magpasahod, at

ine-exploit ang mahihirap - Is it good or bad?
Ang pag-aaral natin ngayon ABOUT GLOBALIZATION and its effects on the growing division
of the rich and the poor is important – MAHALAGA (sanaol).
Developed and Developing…
First and Third World countries….
The NORTH and The SOUTH…
*music intensifies*

THE GLOBAL SOUTH

This term is associated with the development gaps observed among states.
So ang development gaps po ay yung mga KAKULANGAN ng isang bansa sa pag-unlad.
😊

IT IS A SOCIAL AND POLITICAL MMOVE AGAINST GLOBAL INEQUALITIES WHICH

OFTEN LEAD TO CATEGORIZING COUNTRIES AS DEVELOPED OR DEVEOPING OR
FIRST OR THIRD WORLD.

If there is an imbalance in the GLOBAL POWER (halimbawa, hindi masyadong nabibigyan ng

Karapatan sa trade, or lagging palugi ang offer ng mayayamang bansa) and some countries take
advantage while others are left behind, then those who are left behind are members of the
PUSONG SUGATAN (joke hehe) those poor countries left behind by the rich countries are
members of the GLOBAL SOUTH. 😊

The old term was THIRD WORLD. (after WORLD WAR II)
Kung third world country ka (after the war) you are neither CAPITALISTS (first world) nor are
you COMMUNISTS (second world). You are left out po, kaya ikaw ay pang THIRD world. 😊
(which is okay kasi sanay naman kayong maging third-wheel).
Buti na lang kamo, NAG-COLLAPSE po ang Communists or the SECOND WORLD, so
obviously, the THIRD WORLD term can no longer be used (wala nan gang second eh).
However, the term THIRD WORLD ay nag stay (sana all) kasi there is this PREVAILING
POVERTY and ECONOMIC DEPENDENCE ng mga mahihirap na bansa compared to the
FIRST WORLD (capitalists countries na yumaman dahil sa businesses).
Nag-collapse man ang 2nd world, the poverty of the third world countries is still EXTREME,
hence the term ‘third world’ lingered

Question: For whom and under what conditions the global SOUTH becomes relevant?
Answer: Global South can be found between the objective realities if global inequality and the
subjective responses to these.
The Global South is an emerging term used by the World Bank to refer to low and
middle income countries located in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean which
stand in contrast to the high income nations of the Global North.
These nations are often described as newly industrialized or in the process of industrializing,
are largely considered by freedom indices to have lower-quality democracies, and frequently
have a history of colonialism by Northern, often European states.
The BRIC countries, Brazil, India and China, with the exception of Russia and along
with Indonesia, have the largest populations economies among Southern states. The
overwhelming majority of these countries are located in or near the tropics and have at least
one neglected tropical disease.
The Global South is one half of the global North–South divide, and does not necessarily refer to
geographical south. Most people in the Global South live within the Northern Hemisphere
 Legend:
RED – Countries belonging to the GLOBAL SOUTH
BLUE – Countries belonging to the GLOBAL NORTH

This map is, however, temporary, since the economies of different countries can rise/fall in
different times. 😊 (Hindi natin masabi baka mas mayaman na tayo sa North Pole, Char.)
For example:
GREECE
For the story of the Greek Economy Crisis, read the article from this link below:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/070115/understanding-downfall-greeces-
economy.asp

From what you’ve read, can you say that Greece is becoming a third world country?

THE RIGHT LABEL

Every label has its problems — and, as it turns out, an interesting back story. Here's what I
learned from talking to many, many experts.

More than half a century ago, the Cold War was just starting. It was Western capitalism versus
Soviet socialism. But there was another group of countries. Many of them were former colonies
(like the Philippines). None of them were squarely in either the Western (capitalists) or the
Soviet (communists) camp. Thinking of these three factions, French demographer Alfred
Sauvy wrote of "Three worlds, one planet" in an article published in L'Observateur in 1952.

The First World consisted of the U.S., Western Europe and their allies. The Second World was
the so-called Communist Bloc: the Soviet Union, China, Cuba and friends. The remaining
nations, which aligned with neither group, were assigned to the Third World.

The Third World has always had blurred lines. "Although the phrase was widely used, it was
never clear whether it was a clear category of analysis, or simply a convenient and rather vague
label for an imprecise collection of states in the second half of the 20th century and some of the
common problems that they faced," writes historian B.R. Tomlinson in the essay "What was the
Third World," published in 2003 in the Journal of Contemporary History.

Because many countries in the Third World were impoverished, the term came to be used to
refer to the poor world.

TODAY:
This 1-2-3 classification is now out of date, insulting and confusing. Who is to say which part of
the world is "first"? And how can an affluent country like Saudi Arabia, neither Western nor
communist, be part of the Third World? Plus, the Soviet Union doesn't even exist anymore.
And it's not like the First World is the best world in every way. It has pockets of deep urban and
rural poverty, says Paul Farmer, co-founder of the nonprofit Partners in Health and a professor at
Harvard Medical School. "That's the Fourth World," Farmer says, referring to parts of the United
States and other wealthy nations where health problems loom large.
we would not use First World or Third World, unless there is reason to do so — referring to past
ways of thinking or quoting somebody.
"Developing countries" sounds like it might be a better choice. On the surface, it seems accurate.
We're studying about countries that need to develop better health care systems, better schools,
better ways to bring water and electricity to people.

Some people in these so-called developing countries are fine with the term. "We're definitely not
out of the developing, under-underdeveloped category," says Dipa Sinha, an economist and
researcher at the Center for Equity Studies in New Delhi, which works on issues of social and
economic inequalities. "If you look at any human development indicators, such as child and
maternal health, nutrition, sanitation, we're worse than Bangladesh."

It's such a convenient label to use. Everybody knows what you're talking about. It's what The
Associated Press style guide suggests using, and that's the style that NPR follows. According to
AP: "Developing nations is more appropriate [than Third World] when referring to
economically developing nations of Africa, Asia and Latin America. Do not confuse with
'nonaligned,' which is a political term." And mostly a historical term now.

So "developing world" seemed to be a good solution.

Negative perspectives on the term ‘developing world’

The term 'developing world' assumes a hierarchy between countries. It paints a picture of
Western societies as ideal but there are many social problems in these societies as well. It also
perpetuates stereotypes about people who come from the so-called developing world as
backward, lazy, ignorant, irresponsible.

Maybe the solution is to come up with a classification that is based on data. That's how the
World Health Organization categorizes countries. It uses the term "low- and lower-middle-
income countries," or LMIC for short. This acronym is sometimes split in two: LICs and MICs,
pronounced "licks and micks" and sounding like an old-fashioned kind of candy. The LMIC
category is based on World Bank statistics that divide up countries by gross domestic product:
There are low income, lower middle income, middle income and high income.
At first glance, numbers seem to offer an objective way to divide up the world. But collecting the
statistics "can present a challenge because not every country does a good job of estimating
GDP," says Neil Fantom, who leads the World Bank's Open Data initiative. And let's face it: No
one outside the world of global health and development agencies talks about LMICs.

THE NORTH-SOUTH DIVIDE

Global North
- Home to all members of G8 (USA, Japan, Russia, Italy, United Kingdom, Germany,
France, and Canada)
- USA, Canada, Western Europe
- Developed parts of Asia
- Australia, and New Zealand
- Rich, industrialized, wealthy nations
- Democratic, capitalist countries
Global South
- Africa - Developing Nations
- South (Latin) America - Non-democratic Countries
- Developing countries in Asia including Middle East
Another way of classifying countries as either developed or underdeveloped is by the concept of
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. It was first used by United Nations in 1993 as a standard of
human well-being that takes to account people’s ability to develop their needs and interests
(gaano kalaki ang chance mag-imrove ang sarili). UN Development Reports rank countries
according to human development indicators.

These improvements are below:

HDI’s include:
Life expectancy and health profile
Education and literacy
Fuel
Sanitation
Shelter
Food
Jobs
Crime
Personal distress
Careers/jobs
Political participation

IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE CURRENT HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (o listahan ng

mga bansa na nangunguna sa Human Development kasama yung mga nasa ilalim)
You can visit this link below:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/hdi-by-country/

Major Lenses of Global Relations

In order to make sense of ‘north-south divide’ idea, we have to understand the theories, values,
and assumptions through which global relations have been interpreted.
HOW DO THEORISTS SEE OUR WORLD?
A. Realism
This is one of the most criticized perspectives yet the most dominant and influential.
Realist ideas can be traced from Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes.
The realist vision is a pessimistic world.
The international system is UNEVEN (hindi pantay) and conflictual (puno ng suliranin at
di-pagkakasunduan) and marked by power struggle (agawan ng kapangyarihan) which is based
from how the HUMAN NATURE is characterized. The system is filled with SELFISHNESS and
GREED.
Governments prioritize SELF-INTEREST and SURVIVAL. Because of this, the degree
of peace is believed to be relative and temporal (pansamantala).
If you see the world as a realist, then you believe that the GLOBAL RICH NATIONS only
interact with the GLOBAL SOUTH only to promote their own interest.

B. Liberalism/Constructivism
Liberals are opposite of realism because of a more optimistic view of the international
system. They believe in the principle of balance and harmony is found in all forms of social
interactions. AS reflected in Immanuel Kant’s belief, “universal and perpetual peace” is possible
because countries are capable of COOPERATION and they VALUE MUTUAL RESPECT.
Liberals assume that through trade and economic interdependence , division and war are less
likely to happen.
Constructivists also convey cooperation, trust, and peace among international actors.
However, these goals are possible only if these are based on existing norms and conduct which
are institutionalized (nakasanayan na sa lipunan). Hence, institutions play a vital role in
promoting peace in an international system.

C. Marxism
This perspective of Marxism offers a distinctive (naiiba) approach by highlighting the
structures of economic power rather than patterns of conflicts and cooperation (tinitignan
ang mismong istruktura, kung sino yung nasa taas at kung sino yung nasa baba).
Marxisim suggests inequalities in the global system. As countries in the Global South engage in
trading with the parts of the Global North, tehe capitalists (business, yung nasa ibabaw) tend to
dominate and exploit (abusuhin) the Global South (nasa ilalim).
D. Post-Modernism
Postmodernists debunk (pinalalabas ang katotohanan) the ideas of hierarchy, dogmas, or
existing structures in global relations. Represented b the writings of Michel Foucault,
postmodernism is believed to be based on the belief that TRUTH IS ALWAYS CONTESTED
and PLURAL (pwedeng labanan ang katotohanan, at ang katotohanan ay hindi nag-iisa,
maraming versions daw ng katotohanan ex: ang katotohanan mo ay iba sa katotothanan niya, at
ng iba pang bansa o Sistema). Hence, emphasis was given that all ideas and concepts are
expressed in language which itself is caught in complex relations of power.
POWER then lies on the LANGUAGE referred as ‘idea of discourse power’ – human
interactions which can disclose or illustrate power relations.

Halimbawa:
China: The Spratley Islands are ours!
Philippines: Everyone must be quarantined.
France: “We will not trade with you anymore.”

For the meaning denoted in each statement by different countries, makikita natin yung kanilang
PERCEPTED na kapangyarihan na meron sila – sa pananaw nila – hence, there is no single truth.
😊

Ayern,

QUIZ:

ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS

1. Discuss some evidences today that the poverty and problems of the Global South are
globalized.
2. With the Global Pandemic we are experiencing today, what are some solutions that we can
come up so that a country like ours, labeled as a Global South, can survive this conflict?
3. Choose one lens out of the 4 lenses of globalization, and describe our country’s economy and
politics today using that perspective, in details.