The most uncivilized people on earth?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ULTRA said:
Civilized is generally taken as meaning urbanized after the greek root of the word.
Was there any point in your post? No. I knew I put you on my ignore list for a reason..
Click to expand...

then you're an idiot. and if you believed that, you wouldn't have mentioned the military dicatorship, would you? pay attention to the topic. they didn't ask what is considered a 'civilization' but what is 'uncivilized people' which makes an inference on whether people are handled humanely more or less. people don't consider 'civilized' in reference to people to physical urban development as much as it relates to humane laws, practices and treatment. do you consider someone 'civilized' if they are a rapist and murderer just because they live in a developed country? lmao.

even the posts above are referring to political and ethical corruption. is there some reason why you didn't address those then? isn't this supposed to be an actual 'thinking' forum rather than popular social conditioning?

in general, 'uncvilized' is closely related to a countries level of corruption.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/11/01/most-currupt-countries-2010-business-beltway-currupt-countries.html

areas of the middle-east, africa and some parts of south america, southeast asia, and even some western nations (as in predominantly white) come up such as russia and poland come up. but it's all a gradient which fluxes.

roughly, according to this list and it's governments, these are the most corrupt nations currently on the bottom:

somalia
myanmar
afghanistan
iraq
uzbekistan
turkmenistan
sudan
chad
burundi
equatorial guinea
angola
venezuela
kyrgystan
guinea
republic of congo
tajikistan
russia
papua new guinea
laos
kenya
guinea-bissau
congo brazzaville
central african republic
cambodia
yemen
paraguay
nepal
libya
iran
haiti

i was closer to accurate even before i looked it up!

and it goes on and up from there. willnever's post was mostly completely off and no one even noticed. he just pulled it out of his/her ass probably due to racism! every country has human trafficking but the worst ones currently are india, saudia arabia, russia, brazil, mexico, azerbaijan, israel, united states, netherlands, romania, bulgaria, lithuania, thailand, ukraine, china, belgium, germany, greece, italy, japan, turkey, moldova and nigeria.

notice that the highest "demand" is from usually "wealthy" countries and the origins of such people are trafficked usually from more poorer countries.

http://www.iast.net/thefacts.htm

Demand:

Belgium, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Thailand, Turkey and the United States are countries ranked "very high" as destination countries of trafficked persons. 12


Prostitution in the Philippines is a de facto legal industry that is now the fourth largest source of gross national product (GNP) for the country. 13 300,000 sex tourists from Japan alone are believed to visit the Philippines every year. 14

The sex industry in the Netherlands is estimated to make most $1 billion each year. 15 It is a major Western European destination country for trafficked women with 2,000 brothels and numerous escort services, using an estimated 30,000 women. 16 Moreover, 68-80% of women in its sex industry are from other countries, a factor highly indicative of sex trafficking.

Globally:

UNICEF reports that across the world, there are over one million children entering the sex trade every year and that approximately 30 million children have lost their childhood through sexual exploitation over the past 30 years.

The U.S. Department of State estimates that about 600,000 to 800,000 people - mostly women and children - are trafficked across national borders annually. 6 [Note: This estimate does not include those trafficked within national borders.]

Eleven countries score very high as countries of origin for trafficking victims. The countries are Belarus, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation and Ukraine (Commonwealth of Independent States), Albania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Romania, China, Thailand, and Nigeria.

India:

More than 2.3 million girls and women were believed to be in the sex industry, and experts believed that more than 200,000 persons were trafficked into, within, or through the country annually. There were approximately three million trafficking victims in the country, and two thousand rescues a year. Women's rights organizations and NGOs estimated that more than 12,000 and perhaps as many as 50,000 women and children were trafficked into the country annually from neighboring states for commercial sexual exploitation. According to an International Labor Organization (ILO) estimate, 15 percent of the country's estimated 2.3 million prostitutes were children, while the UN reported that an estimated 40 percent of prostitutes were below 18 years of age. Tribal persons made up a large proportion of the women forced into sexual exploitation.

USA:

From fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 2005, the Civil Rights Division and United States Attorney's Offices filed 91 trafficking cases, a 405% increase over the number of trafficking cases filed from fiscal years 1996 through 2000. In these cases, Department attorneys charged 248 trafficking defendants, a 210% increase over the previous five fiscal years. In addition, 140 defendants of trafficking related crimes were convicted, a 109% increase over the previous five years.

Despite an estimated prevalence of 100,000 to 150,00010 slaves in the U.S., fewer than 1,000 victims have been assisted through the efforts of federal, state, and local law enforcement since 2001, when services for trafficking victims were first made available.

The sex industry in the Netherlands is estimated to make most $1 billion each year. 15 It is a major Western European destination country for trafficked women with 2,000 brothels and numerous escort services, using an estimated 30,000 women. 16 Moreover, 68-80% of women in its sex industry are from other countries, a factor highly indicative of sex trafficking.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You do realise that "Uncivilized" appears to some to be an excuse for "Racism". Tarring an entire people because they aren't the same as you or follow the same laws you do doesn't exactly prove you are any more civilized than them.

In essence there has been no "uncivilized" people in millenniums en-mass. There might be a few hermits that lack social skills or prefer to be away from people, but even that doesn't necessarily make them uncivilized.

It probably would have made more sense to ask questions like:
Who are the most evil people?
Who are the most cruel people?
Who are the most corrupt people?
Who are the most rude people?

But state that "People" just means a collective of individuals that aren't necessarily directly affiliated with one another, let alone related.
 
It probably would have made more sense to ask questions like:
Who are the most evil people?
Who are the most cruel people?
Who are the most corrupt people?
Who are the most rude people?

But state that "People" just means a collective of individuals that aren't necessarily directly affiliated with one another, let alone related.
Click to expand...

that's something an adult should already realize and the point i was making. it's so obvious that there are both civilized and uncivilized people in every country.

when people consider what is 'uncivilized people' they usually go by a government and it's level of societal corruption but in reality there will be both humane and inhumane people in any society.
 
As we can see this is a difficult question. But why is it easy, as I note that no one has disputed it, to state that the Amish et al, are the most civilized?
 
Stryder said:
You do realise that "Uncivilized" appears to some to be an excuse for "Racism".
Click to expand...
If you read cosmictraveller's definition you'll see this is to do with cultural sophistication or rather lack of it.

Being civilized does not mean being non-violent. To rats we might appear as barbarians when we exterminate them, or any creature for that matter which threatens us, but that does not make us uncivilized or lacking sophistication.

There are some people in the world who are both culturally unsophisticated and barbaric, if we define barbarianism as acting violently towards other forms of life without sound rational reasons.

To have the rational reasons, of course, you have to be civilized in the first place, and the judgement of what is sufficiently rational must rest with the most advanced culture, ie, the most civilized.

It seems like a loop but it isn't, one just needs to avoid the pitfalls of liberal relativism.
 
tablariddim said:
football hooligans
Click to expand...

Yep, I totally agree. Football hooligans are beyond uncivilised, they stir up my vitriol and I wouldn't mind to see them skinned alive, hung, drawn and quartered...fucking right!

Anybody who thinks that any particular country contains the 'most uncivilised people on earth', must be a racist nutter.
 
Does the civility of government have a correlation to the civility of the population?

Also are there double standards in how we see civility? So if a non-western nation were to wage an unjustified war, they would be considered barbaric. But if the UK/USA were to do it, they have already earned a standard baseline of civility, therefore when they are uncivilized it slips under the radar?
 
There aren't a whole lot of uncivilized people, and by that I mean:

"People living completely independently of the global economy by lack of inclusion or choice."

If by uncivilized, you meant "Who has the cruelest cultural practices?" there's a lot of places that have pretty horrific cultural practices.

Infibulation(Sudan?) dying rooms (China), no birth certificate for females so they can be disappeared by their families (Saudi Arabia), honor killings (Pakistan, India et al) Killing people suspected of "witchcraft,(parts of Africa), stoning (Afghaninstan), uncontrolled prison rape (the US)....

Should have known better than to click on Alex's link, but morbid curiosity got the better of me (shudder). How anyone could do that to another human being, I just don't know.

As far as lacking culture, and sophistication try Texas.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm not white trash! I'm caucasian recycling. ;)
 
WillNever said:
Most of Southeast Asia.

Some really horrible countries:

China
Taiwan
Hong Kong
Korea
Malaysia
Phillipines
Viet Nam
Thailand
Singapore
And yes, those scamming bastards in Nigeria

Basically, these countries are some of the world's worst human rights abusers currently. They also have hands down some of the highest rates of human trafficking in world history.
Click to expand...

lol taiwan? hong kong? don't list countries when you have no idea what it's like there
 
Oh, I didn't notice Willnever had posted Taiwan in there...doesn't Taiwan have single-payer health insurance that covers everyone?

Which might lead you to think they were more civilized than the U.S....

Maybe he is just horrified by anywhere that considers dogs, monkeys and/or rice rats to be on the menu...
 
he's a typical 'asians are most exotic (different) to me, therefore must be the most uncivilized' bs.

it really is a social meme for average westerners to consider asian countries to be the worst for everything. it's hard to understand and they must really use some powerful cognitive dissonance with every other country and culture in the world. there are far more scarier places to go than on that pathetic list. all those places are pretty nice and malaysia is beautiful. i can't believe he/she mentioned singapore of all places. what a complete load of arbitrary crock!

actually it's downright idiocy.

but still in general it does have a bit to do with racism. if asians look most different than the majority demographic, they will be more scrutinized as well as those countries with their military occupation will be more widely known such as vietnam, korea, japan and china because for obvious reasons and which is constantly on the news.

also, more personal differences such as eating habits, looks etc tend to color widely how people view degrees of differences and similarities between other cultures. those who eat dog are going to be viewed as more uncivilized by those societies which view them as sacred family members or those who use chopsticks are obviously curiously different (everyone else uses a fork), therefore more markedly distinct so easily pigeonholed and scrutinized (and thus remembered). for instance, another culture that might kill a girl for talking to a teenage boy or marry off a five year old to a grown man or wash their face in urine or torture eachother due to religion or drug cartels the basis of one's economy is less important because they don't give a shit as much as a culture that would eat their beloved pets, right? that's what is going to get people's passions going to create a cultural vendetta and is a favorite target to sensationalize and caricaturize as "uncivilized and barbaric." so therefore, any and all aspects of their culture will be scrutinized in detail to be the marked "polar" other category for reference while everyone falls somewhere in an undefined hazy middle of nowhere of unimportance. this means that 'any' faults will be pegged to this one category more than another. issues such as racism, sexism, barbarism, poliltical corruption and even uncouth behavior will be placed in this category en masse even if one were to visit mexico and perhaps view the disgusting sexist behavior of males and oppression of females or if one were to visit the middle-east where women wear veils and strictly controlled by their husbands, it is the "east" asian female that has the priviledge of the most oppressed woman or the east asian male who is labeled the most sexist etc. as for racism, even though there are more organized groups which kill people for being a different race in russia or more organized supremist and racist groups in america, it's asians that will be labeled the most 'racist'. even though in reality, there are poorer, corrupt, and barbaric countries etc, it is usually east or southeast asia that will be pegged as the most again in this category. even though there are places that flog, castrate, murder, mutilate and torture people in myriads of ways all over the world, even routinely and horrificly, it will be east asia or south east asia that will be pegged as the most barbaric. why? because people are that amazingly lame--asians look the most different from everyone else. thank you west and i hope one will return the favor you so richly deserve. oh wait, they are doing that. it's the 'i hate america' campaign around the world.

think about it and randomly ask people what countries they think are the most corrupt and most will mention some asian country. this is pretty strong evidence of a social prejudice because in reality there are a hell of a lot of corrupt and/or barbaric/primitive places. um, has israel been anything but a pain in the ass? how about mexico? has the war in the middle-east and killings ever stopped? no. do westerners think they are the most corrupt? of course not. the dog-eating slant-eyed people must be.

if you ask most people about these other countries such as albania, krygstan, bulgaria, poland, myanmar, afghanistan, uzbekistan, turkmenistan, chad, burundi, tajikistan, romania, libya, netherlands, india, peru, panama, russia etc, they either have never heard of them or know nothing about them as if it doesn't even exist. nothing stands out in there collective knowledge about these people or places. but when it comes to east-asians and south-east asians, they do. they are the dog-eating barbarians who have slanted eyes and look strange. oh, they eat scorpions and all kinds of weird things etc. basically, they are admitting that asians are the most fascinating to them while everyone else is too boring to bother with demonizing. also, when most of these people from western/eastern europe, south america, middle-east or even india immigrate to western countries, because they tend to look white or caucasoid, they never really show up on the society's radar. looks are the dominant factor in how people gauge similarities or demonize those that are different. in the mind of the average westerner; middle-east is arabs and all they know is they have oil, africa is poor and wild, europe is nice but not as powerful as america, and east asian countries are the wierdest and worst.

africa shows up constantly on the news due to famine and relief going on all the time(they are not worth demonizing because they are too pathetic in the view of the collective west) and china due to it's global emergence. but east-asians simply would look most different than everyone else in a western country so anything negative would be pegged to them more than anyone else simply due to a complete ignorance of anywhere else as well as the soldiers who went to war in vietnam and korea are the freshest in recent memory even though there are tons of countries out there. it really does boil down to racism more than anything which is fine as long as that is understood as what it is.

but as far as uncivilized behavior, practices or corruption or poor countries there is a big world out there with many countries with these problems.

pegging certain countries with these problems as the worst because they are the only ones one is aware of is poor logic or no logic. maybe even borderline retardation.
 
Last edited:
Singapore is more civilized than here-if you litter you get fined...I'd go so far as to call them draconian...but quite tidy and orderly.

Many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa are probably where life is cheapest...although that's far from universal even there.
Afghanistan is pretty unpleasant and dangerous right now. Haiti is very unpleasant too...less shooting, but no food, and there seems to be a kleptocracy firmly in place...

If eating monkey squicks you out, my sociology professor was taking a tour in the Phillipines...One of his fellow bus tour members had some barbecued monkey on a stick, then tossed it up when he found out what it was he'd eaten...which seems a bit silly-if you eat meat, why not that particular meat?
I'm under the impression that, other than the third-world driving style (stop signs and traffic signals are decorative; you will get rear-ended if you stop) the Philippines are a nice place.
Lots of Filipina nurses here in the U.S.
 
Last edited:
HAVING WORKED IN MOST OF THE CESSPIT COUNTRIES IN THE PAST 20YEARS ON MY RAPE & PILLAGE OIL CAREER THE MOST UNCIVILIZED I HAVE TO REITTERATE IS

N I G E R I A :wtf:

I BELIEVE THERE A FEW ACADEMIC POLITICALLY CORRECT PEOPLE ON THIS THREAD WHO DO NOT HAVE A CLUE WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT, ONLY WHAT THEY READ OR SEE ON TV !! :bugeye:
 
alexb123 said:
What about George Bush and others going to war in Iraq? What about Hitler? Can a country be classed as civilized when there is so much blood on their hands?
Click to expand...

Committing atrocities and being civilised are not mutually exclusive. Also, it's hardly fair to judge entire peoples by their leaders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top