The 'Western' World

[Leoreth]

Anyways we ought to be,

"The Good Guys"

I'm sure the Bad Guys in the east will agree with me.

Even the West doesn't agree on that

 

[luiz]

Sorry, but the scale of urban poverty in Brazil doesn't compare with Europe, especially Western Europe. Yes, you can find some pretty miserable places in Eastern Slovakia, but these are very small gypsy settlements of a few hundred people. There are Roma-dominated neighbourhoods in some towns that look pretty bad, but nowhere is the situation as bad as in the Brazilian slums. (I mean, people are not running around with automatic rifles.)

The fact is that even relatively less developed European countries are better at taking care of their poor than most countries in Latin America (except perhaps Chile and Uruguay, I am not sure). There is probably some cultural difference in how eextreme poverty is perceived in Latin America as compared to Europe - Europeans won't stand it, while in Latin America it is accepted as a normal part of life.

Of course the scale is different. Brazil has 40 times the population of Slovakia. Rio alone is more populous than Slovakia; greater São Paulo is over 3 times as populous as Slovakia. If we take that gyspsy slum and multiply it by 40, it would look just like a favela (minus the snow of course).

As for automatic rifles, that's not related to poverty. Peru and Bolivia are much poorer than Brazil, their slums make the favelas look nice and yet they're both quite safe countries. Nobody runs around with automatic rifles in them either. Brazil is ultra-violent for its position on international drug trade and above all because of the fundamentally immoral nature of its society, where crime is tolerated if not admired.

That said, I only chose Slovakia as an example to show that ugly poverty exists in Europe too. Obviously, Slovakia is far more developed than Brazil and surely the poverty problem there is much smaller. But what about Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, and other european countries which are poorer than Brazil? I think their problems would be similar, though in much smaller scale and without the violence.

Now, the notion that in Latin America nothing is done about poverty is wrong. Every single person you see on a favela is receiving money from the government just by virtue of being alive. A middle class Brazilian pays more than 50% of his income in taxes. The results may be poor, but we do pay for them.

 

[mitsho]

Regarding the opening post, let's compare your map:

with this one:

So, I'd say if you don't want to use "the West", use "the OECD-countries". And of course, it always depends on what you want to display. If you are looking for the market system, South Korea and Japan absolutely belong to the group, one could even say to a certain degree culturally. If you go for demographics, you need to explain to me why Spain and Portugal are part of the group, but not Brazil or Argentine... If you go for cultural, there's also big differences between the Anglo-Saxon countries and the Protestant Northern Europeans and the Catholic South Europeans on the Continent...

So, I guess, OECD fits. Or else Liberal Democracies with Capitalististic or Social Democratic Economies.

 

[aronnax]

Regarding the opening post, let's compare your map:

with this one:

So, I'd say if you don't want to use "the West", use "the OECD-countries". And of course, it always depends on what you want to display. If you are looking for the market system, South Korea and Japan absolutely belong to the group, one could even say to a certain degree culturally. If you go for demographics, you need to explain to me why Spain and Portugal are part of the group, but not Brazil or Argentine... If you go for cultural, there's also big differences between the Anglo-Saxon countries and the Protestant Northern Europeans and the Catholic South Europeans on the Continent...

So, I guess, OECD fits. Or else Liberal Democracies with Capitalististic or Social Democratic Economies.

In Singapore, South Korea and Japan, people distinct themselves from the 'West'. They aren't westerners, they are Singaporeans, Koreans and Japanese. Those rich (mainly) white people of common European cultural descent are Westerners.

The thing is, 'The West' is a catch all term for this group of (mainly) white people of common European cultural descent. It isn't just rich countries. It isn't just European/Christian countries. It isn't just a certain democracy. It is political, cultural and social grouping of countries and not just one or the other, one that descends from first, the Colonial and Great Powers of Europe, second the Cold War divide.

The reason why I didn't initially include Latin American Nations as 'Western' Nations because the common usage never refers to them as Westerners. I also don't know exactly to what extent do most Brazilians or Mexicans consider themselves 'Westerners'. Western influenced definitely, but does the average Latin American from Mexico to Brazil think themselves as Westerners or do they think they are a separate and distinct grouping from the group of countries that includes (but not limited to) the US, UK, France and Germany? Somebody from that region has to tell me because I have never heard of Latin Americans considering themselves as Westerners or grouping themselves with 'the West' Until then, I'll just exclude them.

 

[Artifis]

How about "The White World"?

I'm actually serious here. I'll go with the countries which, prior to globalisation, had a majority Caucasian population.

 

[aronnax]

How about "The White World"?

I'm actually serious here. I'll go with the countries which, prior to globalisation, had a majority Caucasian population.

Because 'the West' hasn't been a ethnic grouping for centuries now.
Anyway, this thread has fulfilled its purpose. Anglo-European World.

 

[Artifis]

Define "ethnic". Are the Russians ethnically different from the Celts?

 

[Quackers]

Nope Aronnax I think Great Britain's Global Co-Prosperity Sphere just about covers it

 

[aronnax]

Define "ethnic". Are the Russians ethnically different from the Celts?

Probably. Given genetic variation.

I like Wikipedia's definition
An ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each other, through a common heritage, often consisting of a common language, a common culture (often including a shared religion)

 

[luiz]

The reason why I didn't initially include Latin American Nations as 'Western' Nations because the common usage never refers to them as Westerners. I also don't know exactly to what extent do most Brazilians or Mexicans consider themselves 'Westerners'. Western influenced definitely, but does the average Latin American from Mexico to Brazil think themselves as Westerners or do they think they are a separate and distinct grouping from the group of countries that includes (but not limited to) the US, UK, France and Germany? Somebody from that region has to tell me because I have never heard of Latin Americans considering themselves as Westerners or grouping themselves with 'the West' Until then, I'll just exclude them.

As I said on another post, I've never met a single Latin American who does not think of himself as Western. You'll never see anyone talking about "the West" as a foreign entity. The newspapers will frequently contrast "our" western culture with say eastern values.

The situation is completely different from that of Japan or South Korea. While those asian countries were very influenced by the West and adopted several aspects of western life, Latin American society was created by Europe. Latin Americans speak european languages, go to european (or european-inspired) churches and view the world in much the same way as europeans. The overwhelming majority of Latin Americans are descendants of europeans (even those who look black or indian will much more often than not have european blood - and not just a few drops).

That said, when someone talks about "western powers" in Brazil they're not talking about any Latin American country. But they're not talking about Portugal or Denmark either; that term is pretty much limited to the USA, England, France, Germany and sometimes Italy or Spain.

 

[aronnax]

As I said on another post, I've never met a single Latin American who does not think of himself as Western. You'll never see anyone talking about "the West" as a foreign entity. The newspapers will frequently contrast "our" western culture with say eastern values.

The situation is completely different from that of Japan or South Korea. While those asian countries were very influenced by the West and adopted several aspects of western life, Latin American society was created by Europe. Latin Americans speak european languages, go to european (or european-inspired) churches and view the world in much the same way as europeans. The overwhelming majority of Latin Americans are descendants of europeans (even those who look black or indian will much more often than not have european blood - and not just a few drops).

That said, when someone talks about "western powers" in Brazil they're not talking about any Latin American country. But they're not talking about Portugal or Denmark either; that term is pretty much limited to the USA, England, France, Germany and sometimes Italy or Spain.

Well that is an interesting thought. In Singapore (and probably all of East, South East Asia) Malta, Greece and Luxembourg are as much 'Western Powers' and 'Westerners' as France, Britain or USA.
Perhaps in Brazil, the reason why they refer to USA, UK, France etc, they refer to the large Colonial Empires of the 19th and 20th Century. Something to do with past imperialistic behaviour?

That said, I'll gladly apply Latin America to this 'the West' collective. But that means, Anglo-European won't work too well. Amero-Anglo-European is too longer... Amero-European nations...

 

[Artifis]

Probably. Given genetic variation.

I like Wikipedia's definition
An ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each other, through a common heritage, often consisting of a common language, a common culture (often including a shared religion)

I'm going superficially here. This definition of mine does not care of cultural or linguistic differences. You may have genetic variation, but so long as your country was, prior to globalisation, mostly populated by people who had paler skin, and Caucasian features, you can be considered a Western country.

 

[Racsoviale]

Oceania. The areas look the same if it would include Europe

 

[aronnax]

I'm going superficially here. This definition of mine does not care of cultural or linguistic differences. You may have genetic variation, but so long as your country was, prior to globalisation, mostly populated by people who had paler skin, and Caucasian features, you can be considered a Western country.

Find the Caucasian for me. Without looking at the image name. Only 3 out of 6 people here belong to this 'Caucasian' ethnicity. The rest are not European.








Plus. Russia is considered a "western" state?

 

[NedimNapoleon]

The blonde guy? The first guy is probably the president of Kyrgyzstan, because he has a red button of what appears to be Kyrgyzstan.

 

[aronnax]

The blonde guy? The first guy is probably the president of Kyrgyzstan, because he has a red button of what appears to be Kyrgyzstan.

It goes from up to down

Spoiler :

Armenian, Icelandic, Palestinian, Italian, Berber, Turkish

 

[Theige]

The Asian Tigers and Japan, unlike North African Poland, have little wish to identify themselves as "the West" or "Westerners". It's as much a cultural thing as it is a development thing.

I think I like the term Anglo-European World or Euro-Anglo Sphere. I shall use this world in replacement for "the west".

It is a cultural thing, which is why I would include those Asian countries.

Nobody said the people were "westerners," but those countries are certainly westernized

Most of Europe would be far more offended at being called part of any "Anlgo" world or sphere than Japan would at being called a "western" nation.

We already have an Anglosphere:

 

[Winner]

Anyway, this thread has fulfilled its purpose. Anglo-European World.

I've told you that the term is silly.

It is a cultural thing, which is why I would include those Asian countries.

Nobody said the people were "westerners," but those countries are certainly westernized

No, they're not. They're modernized. Don't confuse these two terms.

 

[Racsoviale]

But you cant modernize without westernize

 

[Theige]

No, they're not. They're modernized. Don't confuse these two terms.

To be modern is to be Western. These nations looked to the West to learn how to modernize. They modeled their political and economic systems after western countries, as well as their militaries.