Do you consider Central/South America part of the west? If not, you might be a racist

[Rod1]

I suppose the key question is, do they?

Not in the definition used in here.

 

[Black Helicopters]

No. They never really had democracy, rule of law, strong institutions, or capitalism. Now they’re somewhat democratic and capitalist nowadays but they’re still corrupt with weak governments

More importantly they just were never a part of the West. They’re just people that were colonized by some of the shittiest Western countries

 

[ironfist05]

But what you haven't told me is what about Latin American culture sperates them from Spanish culture, or how you could offer a definition of the west that excludes Spain.

Spain is western.

Look through my old posts. Latin America's history as a colonized society, with forced racial mixing and interaction, as well as greater wealth inequality (and generally greater poverty) contrast with Europe in many ways, as does the overwhelming Catholocism, as opposed to the wests decidedly mixed Christianity. Finally, constant conflict post-WWII and subjugation under the US has left it in a different position from that of Europe in the modern world. There's a lot going on here, it's not just one factor or another. But Latin America is certainly different from western civilization, even if the west is part of its roots.

I think you're just playing dumb at this point.

 

[Rod1]

No. They never really had democracy, rule of law, strong institutions, or capitalism. Now they’re somewhat democratic and capitalist nowadays but they’re still corrupt with weak governments

More importantly they just were never a part of the West. They’re just people that were colonized by some of the shittiest Western countries

Northern Europeans managed to get ahead for a few centuries and now call everyone else shitty.

I wonder why the so called "superior Europeans" vehemently admire and always want to steal southern European cultural achievements?

Just look at the neoclassical obession in architecture and the forced inclussion of latin and greek words into their languages.

The Spanish Empire was the largest and spread the fastest until the English got ahead of them through naval supremacy, if England was connected to Europe we would be speaking either Spanish or French.

 

[Ruprecht]

"The West" is used interchangeably as a cultural, political and economic term.
On here I tend to use it in the political/economic sense where it's essentially the same as "First World" or developed countries, and includes Japan and South Korea, but excludes Latin America.

 

[Seaside]

Those who did the colonizing didnt disappeared just because they decided not to pay taxes or loyalty towards the parent country.

Do you think the US as different to Canada because it kicked the British out?



Yup, and the same applies to a lot of places in Europe, i mean its not like democracies were flourishing in Europe, it took a World War to bring down autocratic governments, the whole iberian peninsula was autocratic.



I dont disagree if you consider "the west" as France, Germany, England and the US.

Once you put Spain in there you cant simply ignore its colonies, at least those that were created as functional viceroyalties.

it does not matter you guys can make this technical definition. Because ultimate we wont change it because to most of world and how it is defined and how Putin and Xi and world leaders address it. They mean ´´´THE West´´´to mean Anglosphere, and EU or at least the core powers of the EU, western europe and namely france and germany etc.

check alternative media and google it. West to them is ´´EU proper and Anglosphere´´. Also when putin talked about g7 he might say west but when he talks about japan in general he does not ever consider it ´west´. Japan is seen as it own thing. Same thing when talk about nato but nobody really considers turkey to be west despite it being in NATO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world#Economic_definition

https://www.globalresearch.ca/russian-exodus-from-the-west/5634121

even US cfr seems to link ´´west´´´to europe, and US allies and NATO.

https://www.cfr.org/expert-brief/risks-and-rewards-sco-expansion

 

[Seaside]

Northern Europeans managed to get ahead for a few centuries and now call everyone else shitty.

I wonder why the so called "superior Europeans" vehemently admire and always want to steal southern European cultural achievements?

Just look at the neoclassical obession in architecture and the forced inclussion of latin and greek words into their languages.

The Spanish Empire was the largest and spread the fastest until the English got ahead of them through naval supremacy, if England was connected to Europe we would be speaking either Spanish or French.

or Russian. If things had gone little different. Or it would be split half french or spanish, half Russian. You can thank the British and then the americans for preventing that united europe.

 

[Rod1]

Spain is western.

Look through my old posts. Latin America's history as a colonized society, with forced racial mixing and interaction, as well as greater wealth inequality (and generally greater poverty) contrast with Europe in many ways, as does the overwhelming Catholocism, as opposed to the wests decidedly mixed Christianity. Finally, constant conflict post-WWII and subjugation under the US has left it in a different position from that of Europe in the modern world. There's a lot going on here, it's not just one factor or another. But Latin America is certainly different from western civilization, even if the west is part of its roots.

I think you're just playing dumb at this point.

1.- Spain is overwhelmingly catholic.

2.- Spain was conquered by the French at the time of latin american independence movements, in fact a lot of the independence movements in Latin America were caused precisely because the regional nobility
didnt recognized the authority of the French.

3.- The "constant conflict" in latin America had a lot to do with the cold war, which is again something that Europe wasnt free of.

4.- Racial mixing is basically the main difference, since culturally whatever existed in America was turned into dust.

 

[Judoka1532]

So hemisphere is North/south. Not sure how North/South has anything to do with the West.

What is it about Latin American culture do you think separates them from the cultural identity of the west?

There's North,South, East, and western hemispheres. What I'm about to say is an overall assessment of the differences of e.g. USA, Canada, UK.......vs Latin America.So don't think I'm saying latin America is inferior or less cultured.

For one language. Latin America speaks mostly portugese and Spanish. The big 3 (as I will say) speak majority English. #2 education system. Let's face it...it's different in the big 3. #3 music/movies/pop culture is different than latin America. #4 Poverty levels and gross domestic product. The big 3 have more money and purchasing power per capita. #5 Food/cuisine is generally different #6Healthcare is a little more advanced partly due to more money to use better equipment, fund research, and afford the best doctors. #7 Industry-there's a lot more industrialization in the big 3 than in latin america #8 fashion-and this is a minor one. But generally the choice of clothing and public appeal is different between the big 3 and LA. #9 national defense with America, uk, and Canada having stronger militaries.

Overall it just adds up to having major differences. Since these differences are so prominent, it just means that people develop their own culture. I don't think this is a bad thing by no means. It just means that western culture has distinguished itself from the rest of world by developing it's own set of beliefs and practices. You can still be an advanced society and not be considered a western society.

 

[Rod1]

it does not matter you guys can make this technical definition. Because ultimate we wont change it because to most of world and how it is defined and how Putin and Xi and world leaders address it. They mean ´´´THE West´´´to mean Anglosphere, and EU or at least the core powers of the EU, western europe and namely france and germany etc.

check alternative media and google it. West to them is ´´EU proper and Anglosphere´´. Also when putin talked about g7 he might say west but when he talks about japan in general he does not ever consider it ´west´. Japan is seen as it own thing. Same thing when talk about nato but nobody really considers turkey to be west despite it being in NATO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world#Economic_definition

https://www.globalresearch.ca/russian-exodus-from-the-west/5634121

even US cfr seems to link ´´west´´´to europe, and US allies and NATO.

https://www.cfr.org/expert-brief/risks-and-rewards-sco-expansion

Yes, thats why i said we are not part of "The West" in english, despite using "Cultura occidental" to refer to ourselves.

Western culture refers to modern, northern european culture, not traditional continental europe culture.

 

[ironfist05]

Those who did the colonizing didnt disappeared just because they decided not to pay taxes or loyalty towards the parent country.

Do you think the US as different to Canada because it kicked the British out?



Yup, and the same applies to a lot of places in Europe, i mean its not like democracies were flourishing in Europe, it took a World War to bring down autocratic governments, the whole iberian peninsula was autocratic.



I dont disagree if you consider "the west" as France, Germany, England and the US.

Once you put Spain in there you cant simply ignore its colonies, at least those that were created as functional viceroyalties.

You're right that they didn't just dissapear, but the history of American expansion and Latin American expansion are different. Latin America was brutal to it's indigenous populations, just like the US, but it integrated htem and left far more of them alive, whereas the United States simply displaced them time after time, eventually reducing them to miniscule parts of the population. Similarly, American slavery and Latin American slavery were different in nature, and racial mixing was far more common in Latin America than it was in America. the US stands as a colonizing country, whereas Latin America largely stands as colonized. Even though America split off from the English, it maintained many of their cultural norms. Latin America had far more cultural mixing going on.
That's all before you take into account the worse poverty, wealth inequality, caudilismo and subjugation which Latin America has seen under the United States historically. THrow in the political instability and radicalism of the post-WWII era, and it's fair to say they're quite different.

I'm not saying there's no cultural overlap whatsoever between the west and latin america, but just because spain has a shared language does not mean it's like Latin America in the modern day. It's clearly not.


Well, what parts of Europe are you talking about? Western Europe (generally regarded as "the west") hasn't had an easy history, but its democratic traditions (particularly in the post WWII era) have certainly been stronger than Latin America's. I mean, post 1975, what European nation consistently had death squads actively involved in political suppression? I can think of several Latin American nations which did, and democracy is certainly less functional in Latin America today than it is in Europe. Western Europe's wealth or racial inequality was never as bad as Latin America's either, which allowed Europe to evolve into a more democratic society, whereas the holders of power in the Americas often had to supress many to remain in power. Finally, western europe emerged from WWII battered, but certainly still on top of the world. Latin America was largely having its fate decided by outside powers, and still is to this day in many ways.


Why treat Spain's colonies as unique? Would you say Yemen is culturally similar to Britain just because it's a former colony? Is Vietnam similar to France just because France lorded over Indochina for a few decades? Is Papua New Guinea like Germany just because Gemrany once ruled part of its territories?

 

[TheGreatA]

Yes, thats why i said we are not part of "The West" in english, despite using "Cultura occidental" to refer to ourselves.

Western culture refers to modern, northern european culture, not traditional continental europe culture.

It mostly refers to Western economic powerhouses. Whoever is control of the money flow, dictates the terms.

If Spain, Greece and Italy became economic powerhouses while America, Germany and Britain fell off, they'd be considered the "West". There was a time in history when "the West" referred to them instead. Today, the centre-points of the West are elsewhere.

 

[VivaRevolution]

dont care if it racist to you i dont believe in that word or care. because again i dont live or from somewhere people cry over labels like that shit. It could be racial.. You could make argument that original spaniard people were pure mediterrnaeans indistinguishable from levant people and moroccans (excluding other north africans which derive from berbers but today are mistakenly called arabs because of similar brown complected skin and them speaking arabic, but truth is the arabs just spread islam to North africa, mauritania, etc but the people were not killed off out mixed. I think actual most arab peninsula people origins in north africa is in libya. Spain (excluding basque and galicia area) actually had its phenotype and pigment changed by europeans who came from france and colonized, moved, immigrated, invaded etc. The biggest divide can be seen south of madrid latitude.

That was not my argument mine was more on culture and direction spain has gone since Franco though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_Peninsula

What specifically since WWII, has Spain or Portagul done, either culturally or politically to separate themselves from the west?

Because I see common forms of government, economics, religion, and language, from a shared European root.

 

[Seaside]

Well, your first point seems to argue against what you're saying. Huntington argued that the western world would stick together pretty much no matter what.

What you're saying is that hte west is falling apart internally. Of course, there's a rising sense of "us versus them" in the west (wether it's conservative or progressive), but that often collapses once geopolitics come into play. I think there's certainly a part of the population that's worried about the homogeneity of their nation (not me, I don't particularly care about it, but a big portion of many countries), but people will give up on cultural ideals become secondary to strategic, political, and economic issues. Let's look at Vietnam: 30 yeras ago, you asked an American what they thought of the Vietnamese, you'd hear a long stream of racial invectives. Now, they're one of America's favorites in the region, and our necessary counter to China, even though their culture is much closer to China's than ours. Hilariously, George Friedman once predicted that by 2032, westerners would be begging for immigrants. Not because they want multicultrialism, but because the aging population demographics would simply mean too many old people and not enough young people to work. If the demographic populations hold up, I think he'll be right. Germans will suddenly find a way to praise the "hardworking Africans" and "moderate Muslims" which will come into their country once they all need somebody to look after them in nursing homes. Swedes will find a love of all the Chinese and Eastern Europeans moving into Sweden. It'll all be water under the bridge. Some will resolutely oppose it no matter what, but most will simply sigh, shrug their shoulders and do what they need to do to make sure their nation moves foward. Let's not forget there are a lot of muslims (particularly those leaving their countries of origin) who aren't particularly big fans of Islamism, and in some cases came from what were once secular countries like Iraq and Syria. That doesn't go away just because ISIS became a thing. You know the most about Central Asia, so I'll defer there, but even then hte US, China and Russia will compete over them for gas pipelines and resources. Wether or not that sees Islamists or secularists stay in power will be a functino fo the superpowers, not domestic politics

To be totally honest, I think Huntington's argument just falls short in that it doesn't really take into account realpolitik or geopolitics. Let's be honest: many of the gulf states are about as far from western civilization as you will find (I'd argue maybe even more so than say... Iran). Yet they are the wests' darlings in the region.

As for his cultural classifications. Yeah, Papua is it's own thing. the PHilippines is closer to Latin America IMO, but cna be it's own thing. Islam is too monolithic (Indonesia, Iran and a few Shia countries, Turkey/Albania/Bosnia can all be their own mini-Islamic variants).

I believe he meant they would stick together at the top level of politics. He i am guessing was smart enough to realize technocrats and the rich always end up in power and that they are usually above the common people arguing. At least that seems case in the US, canada, uk, france, germany and EU proper. Sweden i am not so sure.

The islam thing is not incorrect at all if you narrowed it down to Islam in north africa and sahel and Islam in the gulf. You would have your shiite split in Iran, azerbaijan, half of lebanon, and parts of syria. And then Turkey it own thing but ultimately sunni loyal and kiss arab ass. Azerbaijan it own thing more tied to former soviet sphere because that country shows zero sign of becoming more religious. The south asian islam times together but i think today has more and more ties to Saudi clerics and religious wahhabism. I think proof of that is how similar the hardliners are in each country.

 

[JDragon]

Not sure how ''the West" is still a relevant concept in the age of Trumpism.

 

[ironfist05]

1.- Spain is overwhelmingly catholic.

2.- Spain was conquered by the French at the time of latin american independence movements, in fact a lot of the independence movements in Latin America were caused precisely because the regional nobility
didnt recognized the authority of the French.

3.- The "constant conflict" in latin America had a lot to do with the cold war, which is again something that Europe wasnt free of.

4.- Racial mixing is basically the main difference, since culturally whatever existed in America was turned into dust.

1. yes it is. Religion is not the only factor here.

2. Yes it was, but Spain, though it declined, was still able to hold some of its colonies, it never saw the economic or political collapse Latin America did, and managed to reconstruct itself (albeit under kings and later a fascist who nearly killed my grandfather). Latin America was in a constant state of construction, destruction and identity searching. Spain's Civil War, as brutal as it was, lasted 3 years.

3. Perhaps, but Western Europe never had decades of high level warfare, nor was it being decided by foreign powers quite the way Western Europes were. You're missing the power dynamic here. During the cold war, the west (and a few others) was teh chess player, the Latin Americans were the chess pieces.

4. Racial mixing is big. REally big. Spain had ethnic inequlity, but that's different from indegnous tribes wiht nothing in common with the white man deciding things.

 

[Black Helicopters]

Northern Europeans managed to get ahead for a few centuries and now call everyone else shitty.

I wonder why the so called "superior Europeans" vehemently admire and always want to steal southern European cultural achievements?

Just look at the neoclassical obession in architecture and the forced inclussion of latin and greek words into their languages.

The Spanish Empire was the largest and spread the fastest until the English got ahead of them through naval supremacy, if England was connected to Europe we would be speaking either Spanish or French.

The Spanish we’re fortunate enough to colonize a bunch of people disconnected from the knowledge and diseases of the old world. Spain is lucky that they’re connected to Europe because they’re just existing. They were never a great military or cultural power like Italy was. I’m not shitting on Southern Europeans, just the irrelevant spanish. They were probably at the peak of their intellectual and cultural power when colonized by Arabs which is hilarious to me.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Spain is western.

Look through my old posts. Latin America's history as a colonized society, with forced racial mixing and interaction, as well as greater wealth inequality (and generally greater poverty) contrast with Europe in many ways, as does the overwhelming Catholocism, as opposed to the wests decidedly mixed Christianity. Finally, constant conflict post-WWII and subjugation under the US has left it in a different position from that of Europe in the modern world. There's a lot going on here, it's not just one factor or another. But Latin America is certainly different from western civilization, even if the west is part of its roots.

I think you're just playing dumb at this point.

But as you point out, the differences between Latin America and the US are not cultural, it is a difference of institutional corruption. Something the US and Europe certainly aren't immune to.

 

[Bacco]

Simple thought experiment here. Do you consider central and south America part of the west?

Those countries are Christian, Democratic, and mostly free markets.

By what measure other then race, would one exclude those nation's from the west?

If you think it makes sense to exclude central and south America from the concept of the west based on race, would you then also exclude Spain from the West? That would be a hard sell considering Spain's influence on Europe, and Colonial times.

Discuss.....

Honest question as foreigner, but are'nt central/south american nations much behind the standards of the "west"?

 

[Nooob]

Not to me. The West have always being refered to North America, Western Europe and Australia. The people are white of Anglo-Saxon background.

These people share nothing in common culturally, ethnically and historically. There is a reason why US distance themselves from them despite sharing the same continent. Same goes to Australia who distance themselves from South East Asia despite being right next to them.