The “first world”

Of them to whom much is given, much is expected. Honestly, I think the United States should be kicked out of the first world (or “developed world”), stupendous per-capita income notwithstanding. We have a first-world level of economic development but a well below first world level of social development. That should be reflected in international discourse. It would be good if journalists and the like use the term first world (if they use it at all, I know it’s problematic) to refer to the social-democratic world, especially when speaking of the first world as a group of nations characterized by high quality of life.

This is of a piece with my belief that public policy is informed perhaps too much by economics, but certainly far too little by sociology. It may be that economics is a science, and that the laws of economics are self-enforcing and non-negotiable, but if social sciences count as sciences, that should include sociology. As sure as “no such thing as a free lunch” is a law of economics, “no justice no peace” is a law of sociology. If so (and I believe so), political projects (such as neoliberalism, or if you prefer, ideological private sector preference, or insistence on “separation between economy and state”) that insist on disregarding such fundamental laws will (and should) fail miserably. Burn, baby, burn, as far as I’m concerned.