James Griffin: First world problems

What are we meant to call problems that are universal problems? Photo / Thinkstock

A couple of weeks back I wrote a column about living in the suburb I live in, which was fair enough I thought, because the things that happen in my suburb interest me, as they should. Anyway someone much less open to my whimsical musings on fruit flies left the following comment on line: "First Word Problems. Stop complaining. Would you have preferred to be in Christchurch?"

I quite liked the concept of having First Word problems; as in 'from your very first word I have problems with what you write'. I too have First Word problems with some stuff I read, so I would totally get that as an idea, even at the same time as I was being mortally wounded that First Word issues were being applied to my stuff.

I suspect, however, that the comment was meant to read 'First World Problems' which is short-hand these days for 'you have it easy, stop complaining'. This, of course, rendered the second part of the comment rather redundant. Still, point made and point taken.

Except what, actually, are First World problems? And why are they somehow of less significance than, say, Third World problems? And who the hell lives in the Second World and what sort of problems do they have? Are their problems more problematic than First World problems but not quite as problematic as Third World problems?

As I understand it - and I'm sure there will be those out there who will correct me, even if I'm right - the concept of First, Second and Third Worlds is all about whose side you were on during the Cold War. Everyone who loved America (i.e. us) was lumped together as the First World. All the Godless Communists who cheered for Russia were the Second World. And everyone else, who didn't really have a side or who changed sides depending on who was paying the bills, they got lumped together as the Third World. Just to make things even spicier a Fourth World was later added to describe the indigenous peoples of the world who get screwed over by everyone.

Nowadays, of course, these arbitrary delineations have been rather lost in the march of history, as the Second World imploded and everyone went rushing over to the First World. Nowadays the Second World would seem to consist of China, which is more First World than most of the First World, and North Korea which is about as Third World as they come. Meanwhile, the actual Third World just carried on being poor, which is where the definition seems to have landed.

Therefore First World problems are, apparently, trivial and not really problematic. The news series of True Detective is kinda crap, should I keep watching in case it gets better? Third World problems, meanwhile, are doozies, as problems go. My over-crowded refugee boat is sinking, how do I stay alive?

This is the perception, but surely Third World people can have First World problems too, right? I live in a suburb of Ciudad Juarez in Mexico and I want to watch True Detective to see if it as crap as people say but my satellite dish was shot off in a gunfight between the police and the drug cartel, what do I do? Do we call that a First/Third World problem?

And what are we meant to call problems that are universal problems? I hate getting out of bed on cold mornings. It is a problem for me. I bet there are people in Shanghai and Ciudad Juarez who hate getting out of bed on cold mornings too; who would rather stay under the covers where it is warm and think about how kinda crap this new season of True Detective is. Is this called a First/Second/Third World problem?

It is our basic human need to put things into boxes that fascinates me here. The term 'First World problem' says it's not really a problem, not compared with the real problems of the (economic) Third World. But then people living in the so-called Third World surely must have their fair share of so-called First World problems too, right? So that doubly sucks for them. Or triply sucks, or something. And what the hell sort of problems are Second World problems these days? When you wake up one morning and the system of government you grew up with has gone? That could be a problem.

Maybe the answer to my confusion here lies in the very thing that sparked it; the comment that reads: "First Word Problems. Stop complaining. Would you have preferred to be in Christchurch?" Is Christchurch the word? Is Christchurch the world where First meets Third, by way of Second? Quite frankly, it would not surprise me.

Not that I'm complaining, by the way.

- Canvas