Talk:Western world/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Western world, Western culture, Western civilization

This page seems to have a fair amount of overlap with Western culture and History of Western civilization. Western civilization currently redirects to Western culture, but it's unclear to me how the scope of this article differs from Western culture. I get the sense that authors tend to use the terms pretty much interchangeably, and some of the citations on this page refer to Western civilization rather than the Western world. In my opinion, we should do one of the following:

1. Merge the most relevant parts of this page into Western culture and History of Western civilization. Delete this page and make Western world redirect to one of those two.
2. Delimit the scope of this article more clearly. I think that it would make sense to keep this article focused on the historical formation of the Western identity and the "othering" of Orientalism. This would mean trimming a lot of the content that seems like a general history of Western civilization and keeping only the content about Western identity—that is, the history of people viewing themselves as Western, and how Westerners have intentionally distinguished themselves from "the Orient".

I'm leaning toward the second, and I could help with the trimming, but let me know if you have different thoughts.      — Freoh 18:09, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Article has been improved accordingly, you may undo the WP:NPOV tag now. Rim sim (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

That tag was about the POV issue mentioned in § Civilization is based on Western culture?. My proposal in this section has not been addressed. Do you have any thoughts about my proposed trimming?      — Freoh 15:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

What are the points that need to be trimmed? Rim sim (talk) 15:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The content that's not directly related to Western identity, for example:

• Most of § Introduction. This is not describing the Western cultural identity, it's just describing culture identified as Western.
• A lot of § Historical divisions, especially before the idea of "the West" began to emerge. Some of this section is about the historical distinctions between East and West, but a lot of it is just a history of Western civilization.
• A lot of the lead. It's way too many paragraphs.

I think that this article should stay focused on the ways that Westerners have distinguished themselves from "the Orient". More general content belongs in Western culture and History of Western civilization.      — Freoh 17:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Greece

Greece isn't in dark blue in the map? Greece which contributed the most on the current Western Civilization Nlivataye (talk) 17:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

For one thing, how can one say that the Western tradition begins in Greece? After all, if we’re speaking in cultural terms, the people alive today most similar to ancient Greeks are obviously modern Greeks. Yet most of those who celebrate the "Western tradition" don't even think modern Greece is part of the West anymore—Greece apparently having defected back around A.D. 600 when they chose the wrong variety of Christianity.
— Graeber, David (2013). "'The Mob Begin to Think and to Reason': The Covert History of Democracy". The Democracy Project: A History, a Crisis, a Movement. New York. ISBN 978-0-8129-9356-1. OCLC 769425385.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

There is no one universally agreed-upon definition.  — Freoh 16:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Problematic recent edits

Rim sim recently added several sentences into the lead that come across to me (and another editor) as heavily problematic. The majority of which:

• Only relates to certain parts of what is considered to be Western civilization.
• Is completely off-topic/debatable/not mentioned elsewhere in the article.

"List of countries ranked by ethnic and cultural diversity level. List based on Fearon's analysis."

"Since the late 1960s, the Western world has been noted for its diversity"

This sentence is problematic in of itself. What is this claim supposed to connotate or denote? Many metrics of ethnic, cultural, and social diversity predominately rank the Western World among the lower range of mean/median values. For example, the chart to the right.

"Earlier, many prominent western countries were once envisioned as homelands for whites"

When? This certainly hasn't been a unifying idea throughout the course of Western history. Additionally: The boundaries of who is "white" or not has also frequently shifted. (Hitler and the Slavic peoples; Lebensraum.) This isn't to downplay things like the White Australia policy, African enslavement or indigenous displacement, et al. But this is a particular conception of the West that was only prominent in certain areas of the Western World between 1600/1700-1960s.

It's true that ethnic/racial issues in the United States are predominately focused on race (although ethnic divisions between Germans, Southern Italians, and Irish also happened). But in many European countries... ethnicity/religion played an equivalent to far bigger role than the dominance of a "pan-European racial/ethnic group".

"Westerners have historically justified colonialism with the values of individualism and enlightenment"

There's multiple problems with this sentence:

• It seemingly implies that these ideals (as it's the first mention of the subjects "individualism", "colonialism", and "Enlightenment" in the article) arouse out of colonialism.
• This is incorrect. Individualism was already predominant in Catholic (and later, particularly Protestant) areas before.

Women in the West are considered to be the liberated and independent subjects compared to women in 'other cultures'. Feminism is often criticized for being inherently white and western

I'm not sure why we're including criticism of feminism... without any other context. There were non-Western feminists as well. This belongs either in the body or deleted altogether.

Transformed from a directional concept to a socio-political concept, the idea of the West was temporalized and rendered as a concept of the future bestowed with notions of progress and modernity

Certain people saw it this way. Others didn't. Seems undue. KlayCax (talk) 23:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Tagging involved editors: @Moxy: @Rim sim: @Macmmmiller:. KlayCax (talk) 23:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

This whole article needs a major rewrite in my opinion.  — Freoh 01:42, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

All the sentences have their sourced references and are included in the lead as per WP:LEAD. Not personal opinions; Just because they seem controversial doesn't mean you have to remove them. Rewrite for more

WP:NPOVHOW Rim sim (talk) 07:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Even the revised wording has significant problems. @Rim sim:. That's why the sentences were removed entirely, not just revised. KlayCax (talk) 18:58, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree. The entire last paragraph is full of WP:FRINGE views given WP:UNDUE weight. Khirurg (talk) 19:38, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Yep. None of this is salvagable. This is going to have be reverted and taken to RFC. At best, the current wording only applies to certain parts of the West in certain parts of history. Poland is one of the most ethnically homogeneous countries in the world. While religiosity in the Western World - similar to the Eastern World - varies drastically. (Japan v. Thailand, Poland v. Denmark, et al.) The wording was already bad (and often inaccurate) before Rim sim's edits. The new wording makes it even worse. Bringing up feminism/human rights for women, individualism, liberalism, et al. and connecting it immediately to "colonialism" is... uh, problematic, to say the least. WP: NPOVHOW and WP: Preserve doesn't apply here. KlayCax (talk) 21:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Text has been improved as per all the contested points. Women's rights and religious freedom (irreligious affiliation) that are taken for granted in the west are alien in much of the world. Women in Afghanistan are banned from entering school after 6th grade, and there's no need to talk about religious freedom there or in much of the middle East, south asia, sub Saharan Africa etc. Placed the points about women's rights and irreligious affiliation as an example for the progressive nature of human development in the west. Removed the point regarding colonialism and individualism, enlightenment which is not clear in the reference. Text of the points regarding colonization and diversity have been improved. Hope the NPOV tag is removed soon. Rim sim (talk) 08:58, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

This article is about the Western world. All of this stuff belongs on Western culture/history.

A lot of this stuff is still generalizable to only certain parts of the Western world + factually problematic to say the least. KlayCax (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Sources referenced in the article have the term "Western world" mentioned in them; generalizing text has been improved for better clarity. Also don't think anything is factually problematic here, people with an Anti-Western sentiment will anyway find everything about the West as a problem. Rim sim (talk) 08:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

"Racism was cited to have been a contributing factor in the westerners' colonization of the new world, which today constitutes much of the geographical West."

Was cited or is cited? The current text implies that racism is not cited as a contributing factor of colonization anymore. Almost as if racism doesn't exist today. Not to mention that the term "new world" originates from a colonialist perspective.

Also, maybe the summary should include a critique of the term "Western world" instead of a critique of feminism. This is just strange.

Just wanted to point some things out, I also think there are many problematic parts here. This is not Anti-Western sentiment, this is realizing that Pro-Western sentiment is the prevailing norm. 145.254.142.124 (talk) 11:27, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Micro-states

Would the micro-states of Andorra, Monaco, Liechtenstein, San Marino, and Vatican City not be included under the modern definition of "The Western World"? They're not listed, and even though they are small and easy to forget, I feel they would be included. EnglishPackets (talk) 04:16, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Where in the article would you like to include these microstates? Do you have reliable sources supporting a specific change to the article?  — Freoh 11:33, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I would have included them under the section "Modern definitions" where the wikipedia page says the US, Canada, EU, UK, Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Australia and New Zealand are the West. I guess the website they pulled that definition from doesn't include the microstates, likely since they're so small, so I guess we can't really add them to the page. Though I feel it's common sense that those five countries are western. EnglishPackets (talk) 01:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Correct Misinformation

All of America is part of the western world. This is extremely inaccurate to believe the western hemisphere, recreated by European countries isn't the west Guyanastar (talk) 02:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Why is Latin America in Cyan?

The map doesn't reflect the cultural and political reality of Latin America, which is as Western (or more!) as, say, Romania or Poland. Nor it reflects the text of the article. poldavo (talk) 22:22, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Consensus blue map

Current map, with Orthodox and Latin America equated and other minor differences.

Admitting there's agreement on the blue map equating Eastern Europe to Latin America, the author could have never: to understand south America and orthodox Europe any matching is plain christian culture that is, an unreferenced unpublished saying. it's not encyclopedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.1.132.188 (talk) 15:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Point noted Rim sim (talk) 10:09, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree that for this reason, Latin America should have a different color, as the author of Clash of Civilizations does. A new sock of The basis of recently raised concerns that the color assigned to the "core" Western civilization are too similar to the United Nations colors, which are probably baseless but worth considering as well. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Also of note is that Kazakhstan is not colored cyan on this map, but the CoC map groups it with the Orthodox countries. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:04, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

And since the image is not SVG, I will need to create and upload a new file. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

New SVG map.

I have uploaded a new version of the map with distinctly colored "civilizations" and which is more faithful to the source. Some countries in CoC are divided between civilizations, but these are not indicated due to technical reasons. I would recommend using stripes, if possible, for French Guiana and the Philippines. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03 Huntington is a laughing stock in academia. His ideas are presented in grad school as an example of attractive but unfounded theories. He cherrypicks evidence. He is only famous because neocon used his arguments in early 2000s geopolitics and because there is so much scholarship citing his work but to criticize it.

Latin America is 100% Western. Those denying it show little direct knowledge of the region. I have lived in 2 and worked in 17 countries there and can attest to it. Otherwise remove Portugal, Spain and Italy from your idea of the West, please, as there are not very substantive differences with modern Latin America. poldavo (talk) 22:26, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree, the article and map reference Huntington's work, but upon closer inspection of his source, it becomes evident that Huntington merely uses the term 'either a part of the West or distinct civilizations intimately related to the West' in the context of Latin America. There is no substantial discussion regarding a close relationship between the Orthodox and the West aside from Quigley's civilizational flowchart describing the Islamic, Western and Orthodox worlds as originating from Classical Antiquity and Canaanite (Abrahamic) civilization. He does mention Orthodoxy has been both becoming westernized, losing territory to the West ever since the 19th century, and under the brink of complete westernization if Russia ever falls as a world power.

The inclusion of the Orthodox World in the map appears to be unsupported by Huntington's actual writings and may reflect bias from the image maker. We should either accurately represent Huntington's work if it's our chosen reference or seek an alternative source connecting Latin America, the Anglosphere, Europe, and the Orthodox World.

Regarding the colors, Huntington originally used grayscale on the map: solid black for the West, horizontal black stripes for Latin America, and medium light gray for the Orthodox world. 181.176.8.230 (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2023

I would suggest changing "Modern-day Western world essentially encompasses the nations and states where civilization or culture is considered Western[9][10][11]—the roots of which some historians have traced back to the Greco-Roman world.[12][13]" to "The modern-day Western world essentially encompasses the nations and states where civilization or culture is considered Western[9][10][11]—the roots of which the majority of historians have traced back to the Greco-Roman world and Christianity.[12][13]" This is uncontroversial as it contains no value judgements, and is to maintain consistency with the cited sources as well as the linked article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_culture), i.e. "Western culture originates from the mixing of Greco-Roman culture, Christian culture and Germanic culture.[2]" Thank you for reviewing my request. 2603:7000:9900:3000:ED9E:710F:A3FF:7D7E (talk) 09:26, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done -Lemonaka‎ 12:07, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Strange Sentence

Here it is "The East Roman Empire, later called the Byzantine Empire, continued for a millennium, while the West Roman Empire lasted for only about a century and a half. This caused people in the Latin West to envy the Greek east and consider the Christians over there as heretics." The implication that the Great Schism was caused by "envy" for the Byzantine Empire is bizarre, and not reflected in the source cited at the end of that second sentence. The Pope officially excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople (and vice versa), which is a far cry from "people" considering the Christians "over there as heretics." Needs to be rewritten or struck entirely. 198.137.18.173 (talk) 19:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done Rim sim (talk) 13:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

What „aformentioned country“?

Running parallel to the rise of the United States as a great power and the development of communication–transportation technologies "shrinking" the distance between both the Atlantic Ocean shores, the aforementioned country became more prominently featured in the conceptualizations of the West.

Do they mean the US? Why would they be so convoluted about this? I'd just correct it, but I'm unsure if I'm missing something. Julia947 (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Orthodox civilization is not part of the West

Some people (especially newly registered user:Wrehhn try to remove tat sources/referenced material, just because they don't like the content.

"The earliest concept of Europe as a cultural sphere (instead of simple geographic term) was formed by Alcuin of York during the Carolingian Renaissance of the 9th century, limited to the territories that practised Western Christianity at the time. "European" as a cultural term did not include much of the territories where the Orthodox Church represented the dominant religion until the 19th century"--Pharaph (talk) 12:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Firstly, the statement was about Europe, not the West. It was removed because it is insignificant, and not a widely-held perspective. It oversimplifies the vast and complex history of European culture. Notably, it overlooks the substantial contributions of the Eastern Roman Empire to wider European culture. It also favours a Western European perspective of European culture over an Eastern European perspective, and implies Eastern Europe's perception of itself as part of wider European culture was somehow invalid. The influence of cultural movements such as the Italian Renaissance extended to parts of Eastern Europe, including Russia, and the Baroque style which emerged in the 17th century, influenced architecture in eastern parts of Europe. In part due to the westward migration of Slavic tribes, eastern Central Europe shares strong cultural affinities with countries to its East, and the migrating tribes brought with them cultures from further East. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth witnessed significant cultural exchange over the course of its existence. Futhermore, Greece significantly influenced the conceptualisation of Europe, and the contributions of Greece were integral in the development of wider Western culture and thought. Wrehhn (talk) 12:26, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

It is not a perspective, but the only perspective. Orthodox countries were not considered European by cultural terms, due to the fact, that they are Eurasian or Semi-Asian countries culturally, transition between European and Various asian cultures.

The culture of Byzantine Empire slowly moved away from the classical European Greco-Roman traditions and increasingly adopted Asian styles and customs, which is reflected in its administrative system, clothing, architecture, fine arts and sculpture. A medieval Western European would have seen Byzantines as part of a completely foreign culture, half-Asian. Renaissance has never extended to Orthodox Eastern Europe, but stopped at the Western Christian Central Europe. There was no Renaissance naither humanism in Russia in the original sense of the term. See Gary Saul Morson: Russian Literature article of the Encyclopedia Britannica LINK: https://www.britannica.com/art/Russian-literature

" Baroque style which emerged in the 17th century, influenced architecture in eastern parts of Europe." Just because Peter the Great imported some French architects to design palaces and some churches in the great cities? The first really Russian designed (not French German or Italian architects) baroque buildings appeared in the late 18th century.

What about the Balkan states Romanian principalities Bulgaria Serbia? They adopted Western architecture in the second half of the 19th century as JAPAN.

Japan culture adopted some Western architectural styles , but it does not make it part of Western culture.

There are English Baroques buildings in India too. See: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=591216765&sxsrf=AM9HkKny8F4OoFpYhoFYw9v8g2d0urmX6A:1702647837924&q=baroque+buildings+in+India&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjw-bm8yZGDAxUhiP0HHcgYCsgQ0pQJegQIEBAB&biw=1559&bih=2068&dpr=1#imgrc=XOYxFLnrFAjBEM

Does it make India a Western country?

"eastern Central Europe shares strong cultural affinities with countries to its East" Itself the simple fact "sharing a common Slavic language " does not make the culture of Central European Czech Republic similar to Russian or Serbian.

"Commonwealth witnessed significant cultural exchange" The real extent and intensity of that cltural exchange is debatable, it worked well only in the territories where Western Christian communities lived as a majority in Lithuanian territories.--Pharaph (talk) 13:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

What about real Urbanization, industrialization and literacy? In Orthodox countries real urbanization started with the cheap Soviet style ferro-concrete block-of-flat building programmes in the communist period. Real industrialization also happened during the communist period.

Literacy: Early 20th century was the era of submarines, aeroplans, theory of Relativitry, the Radio, Telephone and Automobile

In contrast: in the eve of the First World war, vast majority of the population of Orthodox countries could not even read and write in their own mother tongues! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pharaph (talk • contribs) 14:00, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Your ideology is false. There is plenty of overlapping between these cultures, and based upon your knowledge of various topics, I imagine you are in fact well aware of this. I am struggling to understand your motivation for denying the fascinating history of cultural exchange between these various regions. Dividing Europe culturally along the lines of Eastern and Western Christianity is just one perspective, with countless limitations. The Eastern European origins of Slavic Central European countries shouldn't be reduced to their language. For many, these roots are of cultural relevance in the present day, even though this may not appeal to your ideology. Moreover, not only were there historical Slavic migrations in Central Europe, there were also Turkic and Eurasian migrations to southeastern Central Europe, and southeastern Central Europe became part of the Pannonian Avar Khaganate in the early Middle Ages. Southeastern Europe, Eastern Europe and southeastern Central Europe also have a rich history of Romani migration. Furthermore, eastern Central Europe has a long history of Jewish settlement. Despite being predominantly Catholic, the countries of Croatia and Slovenia have a history within the Balkans cultural region that consists of predominantly Orthodox and Islamic countries. Central Europe has long been a point of interaction between Eastern and Western cultures, and Orthodox and Islamic European countries are part of the wider mosaic of European culture. Wrehhn (talk) 16:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Calling simple facts, hard facts as ideology means you must read the mening of these words: First article: ideology Second article: fact. For example: Panslavism is an ideology, based on racist belief systems.

"culturally along the lines of Eastern and Western Christianity" It is not about the religion itself, but the civilization which crystalized around them.

Orthodox is a separate civilization according to historians and social scientists. There are thousands of books mention that simple fact, take a Google Books search: [1]]

"these roots are of cultural relevance in the present day" Panslavist and pan nationalist ideologies are quite young, they appeared in the 19th century. However pannationalism could not change the long historic differences in economic infrastructural cultural societal technological legal etc.. developments between Slavonic speaker countries.

For better understanding the huge differences, learn about it in this short essay, especially memorize the 16 points. [2]

Do you know what Europeanization meant in Orthodox countries in the 19th and early 20th century? Read about the term in Google Books: https://www.google.com/search?q=europeanization+orthodox&client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=591263652&tbs=cdr:1,cd_max:1990&tbm=bks&sxsrf=AM9HkKnxqaORtGgztuDDJvof7JB8BLbrUA:1702663178597&ei=CpR8ZcH8I-GlwPAPkpyemAI&start=10&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwjBqbrPgpKDAxXhEhAIHRKOByMQ8NMDegQIDhAW&biw=1559&bih=2073&dpr=1

Europeanization also mean an experiment and trend in Orthodox countries (Russia and the Balkans) catching up with and becoming similar to the Western Europe in terms of political system, social system, culture, dress codes, artistic styles, economy, infrastructure, technology, and basic rules of behaviour from the 19th century to first half of the 20th century.--Pharaph (talk) 18:13, 15 December 2023 (UTC)