A big aspect of colonization, of course, was all about getting resources to the First World countries (and also cheap). During the decolonization process a number of leaders emerged throughout the Third World who wanted to challenge this. The decolonization process was an impetus for revolution, one that never happened in the First World obviously because they were the ones doing the colonizing.

Thinking of Marx and his theorization. I think that the peasantry (historically) has actually proven to be more radical than the working class in many nations. The percentage of First World populations involved in agriculture, I think has probably been dropping for a long time (perhaps it’s flattened out or even taken a slight uptick in recent history considering I believe that some young New Age/neo-hippie-types, for lack of a better characterization, seem interested in organic agriculture/farming).

I’ve perceived that if we take the Third World as a whole I think that the plurality of countries during the Cold War viewed communism and Russia/the Soviet Union more favorably than capitalism/the United States. Perhaps why the CIA worked so vigorously — and with so many national elites, to install autocrats that allowed very little dissent, and social and political organization that could even be capable of bringing about a revolution. Of course, many revolutions (or potential revolutions) were likewise aborted/curtailed by the overthrow of populist, socialist and/or communist leaders as well; and it was once again the aforementioned CIA that was spiritedly instrumental in this process, for certainty, very much also.