@Charlene; Point taken; Those of us who study demography have abandoned the Developed/Developing terms for Industrialized/Agricultural....kind of more "polite" and less "critical".

And to Neffi's point...the implications of "Developing"....are spot on....But that brings us to the morals of our ancestors.

There's a lot of arguments pro and con about the morals of our ancestors.

Our grandparents and great grand parents - and beyond - were definitely more ruthless about conquest....and at the same time more religious.

Yet many in the "Developing/Agrarian nations were passive and idyllic..and suffered from being "ruthlessly pillaged and systemically destabilized"

Do we "blame" them or "empathize" with their ignorance? Who were more "ignorant" the "Developed" or the "Developing"?

Will our grand, and great grand children consider us with the same tinted glasses?

How do we want our Grand and great grand children to look at us? Should we care?

When you're a demographer (as I have been for most of my science teacher life) you break down nations in to two groups; Developed and Developing. We recently learned that these terms are "offensive" so we went with "Industrialized" vs Agrarian, or Agricultural nations.

But it's clear; some nations ended up with greedy, aggressive leadership...some ended up with weak or no leadership. The Aggressive nations became developed, the weak became the "developing".

It's sad, but it's real.

So are we now "enlightened" or just "tolerant"?