Just made a map
"Development of the World"
I used newest HDI data, and political distinctions I concluded that autocracies cannot be considered First World by definition to determine the development of countries.
I chose roughly 0.850 as the minimum HDI required for a country to be considered First World.
Rest of the demarcations are arbitrary - things like crime levels, average salaries etc. were useful.
What do you think?
>I concluded that autocracies cannot be considered First World
Why? That makes no sense. Even the Cold War definitions with greater political connotations of First/Third world included multiple autocratic governments under first world. Using a modern definition that focuses on development, it makes even less sense to exclude developed autocratic countries.
shit map, we should be yellow
Romania has an HDI of 0.816 and therefore cannot be yellow
Autocracies like Saudi Arabia cannot be considered First World.
>Ukraine
>Moderate Third World
Top kek
>putting women and fags in their place= Autocracies
we will see who is around in 100 years Mr. Spain in denial
Doesn't HDI include shit like "freedom of press", "womens rights", and "gay right". Hardly a metric you should follow
We are greens.
Shit map.
It is indeed a shit map, here is the real one
This