The First World contains its own internal Third Worlds in its texts

Evidence

I point out these obvious determinations of Jameson’s text for three reasons. One is to strengthen my proposition that the ideological conditions of a text’s production are never singular but always several. Second, even if I were to accept Jameson’s division of the globe into three worlds, I would still have to insist, as my references not only to feminism and Black Literature but to Jameson’s own location would indicate, that there is right here, within the belly of the First World’s global postmodernism, a veritable Third World, perhaps two or three of them. Third, I want to insist that within the unity that has been bestowed upon our globe by the irreconcilable struggle between capital and labour, there are more and more texts which cannot easily be placed within this or that world. Jameson’s is not a First World text; mine is not a Third World text. We are not each other’s civilizational Others. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 207

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Postmodern First World contains its own internal Third Worlds along gender and race lines; Rushdie self-presents his novels as Third World texts. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 491

Related

• Postmodern First World contains its own internal Third Worlds along gender and race lines (similarity 0.94)
• Rushdie self-presents his novels as Third World texts. (similarity 0.85)
• The Three Worlds framework erases class and gender difference within nations (similarity 0.82)
• Any complex text is multiply determined across ideological worlds, not just one (similarity 0.81)
• No text is necessarily determined by its country of origin (similarity 0.79)
• Third World Literature is a metropolitan fabrication, not a pre-existing category (similarity 0.79)
• Jameson’s First-Third World binary is empirically ungrounded against real economies. (similarity 0.79)
• Non-Western literature’s exclusion from the canon is a translation problem, not literary exclusion (similarity 0.78)
• Globalist frameworks can reproduce the imperial binary they oppose (similarity 0.78)
• The category ‘Third World’ has polemical but no theoretical status (similarity 0.78)
• The ‘Third World Literature’ category presumed a primordial civilizational difference from the West. (similarity 0.78)