Just one thing I'd like to point out here, most of all. To quote : "I have no issues in still calling India, a Third World nation- rather be politically incorrect and cover up our failures by calling ourselves, a developing nation" You might like to know that India is most certainly a developing nation and is also a third world country. The term 'developing economy' and its substitutes- 'developing nation' and developing country'- are essentially economic terms, calculated on the basis of very clear indicators of material progress, and calculated in comparison to other economies. A 'third world country' on the other hand, has come to denote everything from a country with a poor standard of living, to an asian country to a country which has political instability. However, the "Third world" essentially consisted of those nations who refused to take sides in the US-Russia standoff during the Cold war. They consisted of several small nations who would be adversely affected by either super power and therefore the third World took an alternate economic stand, as well as an alternate stand on war itself [opting for disarmament]. India, then, was nation fresh and confident from her new-found independence. Now however, matters are different. With neocolonialism and neoliberalism putting the sovereignty of several small nations in question and their economies in jeopardy, there probably will be no "Third World", consumed as it may be by the Superpowers. To conclude, the terms "Third world" and developing economy" are not conflicting, but are actually complimentary. Regards.