File talk:West.png

Latin America, but not Africa?
How come Latin America is included, but Africa isn't? Why don't people remember Sierra Leone, Liberia and all the other parallel societies to Europe? Why is this map Eurocentric anyways? Are not Arabs and Africans Western? Does not Hip Hop and Rap have its widest circulation throughout all typically Western nations? Is not Islam a Western religion? IP Address 01:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Obviously, if every country in the world were to be included, the point of defining "the west" would be pointless. Latin America was settled from western countries and are therefore included. There are no western countries in Africa except perhaps for South Africa which was settled by europeans, i.e. westerns. The map is Eurocentric because "the west" is essentially Europe and the countries settled by people from that area. Arabs and Africans are NOT Western. Hip Hop and Rap certainly is widespread throughout the West. Although mainly a product of African-Americans it cannot in any event be considered anything else than a Western phenomenon. African-Americans don't retain any heritage from Africa, they are 100% westerns, although they've developed a subculture within the West (rap, hip hop etc). Islam is not a Western religion. Although it has spread to a large area of the West, it har not spread to a large amount of the Western population, and most of the muslims in the West are immigrants who retain their own culture, thus not being westerns.Jonmagne 20:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

well, if north america is there, obviously latin america has to be there too, since Latin America was already a part of the western world while north america was still savage. Actually, in some aspects, Latin America is even more "european" than North America. But yes, it is unfair that countries as "westernized" as Liberia, Cape Verde and Sierra Leone are not considered part of the west. but i don't think the comparison with Latin America is correct.201.78.181.196 01:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

colours?
What is the meaning of the different colours used? -- Astrokey44 |talk 16:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Me 3! What do the different colors stand for? Please provide a key, legend, or caption. Kim Bruning 13:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I put a caption there, feel free to edit if thats not what was intended --Astrokey 44 04:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks cool! :-) Kim Bruning 14:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Eastern Europe
I have no idea why Hungary and Croatia and Slovenia are pictured in yellow while Poland, Slovakia and Baltics - in blue. Could somebody explain or change the image?--Nixer 10:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * croatia and hungary are shown in blue here, but im not sure why it is colored that way anyway. Perhaps EU membership? --Astrokey 44 13:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No, obviously not. May be, religion - catolicism/protestantism vs orthodoxy? Anyway I have no idea why Azerbaijan painted yellow while it is non-European Islamic country.--Nixer 07:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I think there are a few irregularities with this map. Why, for example, is Greece included, but the rest of Southeastern Europe isn't? Why is Croatia included but Romania isn't? We can look at this as a Western Christian-Eastern Orthodox divide, but then Greece shouldn't be included, and in any case the Western world is not about religion. In Romania, for example, French values, including those of liberalism, were highly-influential in the 19th century, while in Greece these were less pronounced. [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] Ronline ✉ 09:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have never heared Greece to be called a part of Easrtern Europe (may be because it entered NATO and never had communist government). By the way I have never heared Russia (or Belarus etc) to be called "Western" in any sence. Can anybody cite any source where Russia called "western"? So why it is painted yellow? By what definition it is "western"?--Nixer 07:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I propose that Russia be coloured grey, along with Belarus and Ukraine. On the other hand, Romania and Bulgaria should be coloured blue (since they will be members of the EU from 2007), if countries like Croatia and Poland are also to be coloured blue. What difference is there, in terms of "Westerness", between Croatia and Romania, for example? Greece is not part of Eastern Europe, but then again Eastern Europe is mainly an economic-political term rather than a cultural term such as "Western culture" or "the Western world". Rather, I was using Greece as an example, since I was presuming countries like Croatia and Poland were included because they were "majoritarily Western Christian/Catholic". In this case, Greece should be excluded, since it's majority Eastern Orthodox. My point was that this map shouldn't be about religion, since Western world doesn't equal any particular religion. So, if Greece is included, then so too should Romania and Bulgaria be included (though Western influences are more pronounced in Romania then Bulgaria). [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] Ronline ✉ 08:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe that either the map is totally wrong or the definition it represents is totally wrong. Why isn't Romania, a country with western roots, values and a romance language not included as a western civilization? Meanwhile its neighbouring countries with fewer ties to western culture (i.e. Roman culture) are included. This is extremely insulting to Romanians who place their origins at the base of a Roman civilization, which survived in an unforgiving part of Europe. I strongly urge the claimers either to change the map in order to include Romania as a western cultured nation or change the legend (by not stating culture), in order to correct this rather insulting error. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.59.199.182 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC).

Most East European countries are not considered "Western" by a lot of observers. The Czech Republic and Hungary can be included, but definitely not Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, the Baltic states and the Balkans (except Greece).These countries were Communist until quite recently, are not highly developed, and can be considered 'emerging' at best.


 * Romania will be politically and economically, a country of the Western World (starting January 1. 2007 with the EU accession), but if you look at the cultural level, differences are high. Renaissance and Englightment had only a limited influence on Romania. Greece can be considered as part of the West because the West was born some 2500 years ago in the Greek states and because it is a EU/NATO member. But today's Greek culture may not be considered a Western culture.--Arado 23:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, my point exactly. While I would consider Greece western, I don't see how contemporary Greece is any different from the other states of Southeastern Europe, aside from economics. As a high-income country, Greece can be seen as part of the West from an economic point of view. It is also part of all of the Western institutions (so is Romania from 2007). Culturally, it's contribution to Western culture has been significant in ancient times, but the current culture of Greece, which is what we should be looking at, has arguably been less influenced by the West than Romania, which at least had a substantial cultural influence from France during the 19th century, and which has generally been very Western-oriented (except the Communist period). If we look at ancient times, then Romania also qualifies because it was part of the Roman Empire, and its people have Latin heritage, which is undoubtedly western. In this context, I would argue that Romania is more Western than most of the former Eastern Bloc (with the exception, perhaps, of Hungary and Czechia). [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] Ronline ✉ 02:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm confused about why the Balkans are not considered Western especially noting the inclusion of Croatia and not Serbia. Of course predominately they practice seperate religions but the lanuages are so closely linked that from my perspective it is difficult to divide the countries on the grand scale of "Western Culture."  I'd also like to argue against the assertations that former Communist bloc countries should not be included in Western society.  The establishment of Western Culture has taken over two millennia to mature and Communism's short 45 year seclusion of Eastern Europe should not be punishment to supress these countries' heritages.  I agree that these countries might be less than developed by current standards, but what other countries are projected to shake this stigma faster than the geographically European countries that are underdeveloped? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.133.34.118 (talk) 15:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC).

Culturally, Greece shouldn't be considered a Western country. The only reason it is considered one is because of the role ancient Greece played in influencing Western culture (in which case the Middle East should be considered Western, too), and its status during the Cold War era. Greece has historically been a part of Eastern Europe ever since the Great Schism. Medieval Byzantine Greek culture has a much more pronounced influence on Eastern Europe than ancient Greek culture has on Western Europe... As for the Western World originating in ancient Greece, I'd argue it started in Rome.

Asia
I can see why Japan and South-Korea are painted blue as they are industrialized and may therefore somtimes be considered "western". But why the Phillipines? Is it because they are Catholic or because they were a European colony for such a long time?Ormur 18:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Japan and South Korea are not 'Western' by any stretch of the imagination. They retain their own distinctive culture and heritage which does not have Christian or Greco-Roman roots by any means. Simply having a high GDP/capita does not imply that a country is Western.(203.112.72.11 10:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC))

From the map legend (cyan): "Developed countries in east asia and Oceania, sometimes considered western" - Japan and South Korea are economically very strong but how can one call the Philippines being developed? --Anggerik 15:22, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. I'm a Filipino myself, and better that a Filipino says it than a foreigner. The Philippines can't yet be considered "developed", meaning that if it is to be called "Western", it's for cultural reasons. But even there I disagree. The Philippines has a unique culture and cannot be considered Western, though probably more West-influenced than other non-Western countries. Again, there are problems even with that idea. For example, notice that the Philippines has been colonized by Western countries (Spain and the US) for around 400 years, yet we managed to retain Filipino as our national language. Compare that to many countries in Africa and Latin America which have English, Spanish, Portuguese, or French as national languages even though the majority of their people are not Western racially. Concerned Filipino

I'm a Filipino. And, I believe our country is the most westernized country of all of Asia. But, I think this Westernization definition in this article is wrong. You do not have to be rich to be part of the West! And by the way, Filipino is inspired by the Spanish languagee.... --The Filipino-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.108.97 (talk) 10:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Factual Accuracy Disputed
My concerns are almost the same as those users above who already mentioned them. --Heilme 15:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * EUROPE: Western Europe does not include Poland, Czech, Slovakia, Hungary, etc. Western Europe should only include all the way from Iberian peninsula until Germany, Swizerland, and Italy eastern boundary lines. Plus, even if the geography is disputed, they are definitely not "developed" economies. Emerging developing countries best fit their economic status. I think if the term "Western Europe" is dropped in favor of simply "Europe" then there should not be any problems. But then all countries considered European (cultural and/or geographical) should be considered as "The West". In other words, even the Balkans should be included. The current picture somewhat indirectly depicts that ONLY rich, developed countries "deserve" to be considered as "The West". Superiority/inferiority?
 * ASIA: Philippines????? Micronesia and Pacific Islands countries???? Developed??!!! That set aside, Taiwan's and Hong Kong's and Macau's status as a country is also disputed. A special kind of color shade to represent its correct political standing should be used. As for developed Asian economies such as those of Korea, Japan, and Singapore, they are usually considered "western" in the economic fundamentals (as in "modernized") but not culturally, or geographically western. I don't think I have read a statement in the main article where "being rich" is a criteria (or automatic) membership of becoming part of "The West".
 * AFRICA: May be the weakest of my concern, but is South Africa ever considered western??

WESTERN WORLD VERSUS THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD -now those two thing may correlate well together, but they are not one and the same thing. in that matter i cannot see how japan and south korea is considered part of the western world. they may to some extent be westernized, but is by far overwhelmed by its own traditions and culture.

Yes, your right Western Europe does not include Poland, The Czech Republic, Slovakia Hungary or in fact even Germany(Central European) This is about the Western World, not Western Europe if it was Scandinavian countries, Spain, Portugal, Italy and others would have to be removed from your list too. If you feel comfortable changing it to "Western and Central Europe.." go ahead. --64.229.66.67 00:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * True geologically, the eastern part of England, the Benelux, Switzerland, Autria, Italy, Greece, Germany, and Scandinavia would not be Western Europe as they are technically in the eastern hemisphere. Yet they are part of the western world. The western world is not a synonym for Western hemisphere. The former is a culutral, sociological and geo-political concept while the latter is simply geographical.  Signature brendel HAPPY HOLIDAYS 21:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Eastern Europe
Eastern Europe needs to be in a different color than Western Europe. Germany, Austria and Switzerland should not be colored the same as Bulgria and Slovakia. There are, greatly due to the cold war, great differences between Eastern and Western Europe. Additionally there has always been a culutral and linguistic difference between Germanic Europe and Slavic Europe, further illustrating the profound differences between Western and Eastern Europe. Even if the EU includes Hungary and Denmark that doesn't mean both are culutrally the same. These differences are culutral (Eastern Europe is more religious), economical (mostly blue collar industry and agriculture), political (Democracy is new thing and still needs to become more established). These differences need to be reflected upon in the map. Regards,  Signature brendel HAPPY HOLIDAYS 21:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * There is also a cultural and linguistic difference between Southern and Northern Europe, yet both are Western. In fact, I could argue that the Germany and Austria are culturally closer to the Czech Republic than they are to Portugal or Greece, and that Finland is definitely closer to Estonia than, say, Italy. So, in terms of core culture, the difference between Central/Eastern Europe and Western Europe is not particularly pronounced. In terms of religiosity, there aren't really any clear trends to show that Eastern Europe is more religious. The Czech Republic and Estonia are the least religious countries in the EU. Of course, Poland is among the most religious, but then again Italy and Greece are also religious, more religious than Hungary, Bulgaria and Slovakia. Economically, a gap remains, but even that gap is not considerable: the Czech Republic and Slovenia have a higher GDP than Portugal and at about the same level as Greece. Slovakia, Hungary and Estonia are only slightly behind. In terms of economic structure, the Eastern European economies are also rather industrialised, even though, in comparison to Western Europe, the service sectors tend to be less developed and the agricultural sectors larger (then again, there are significant exceptions: Greece and Portugal's agricultural sectors are larger than those of Czechia and Slovenia). Politically, some of the Eastern European countries are at Western European levels: all of the new EU members are rated by Freedom House as having reached the best indicators of Freedom (1 on the 1-7 scale), just like all of Western Europe. In terms of press freedom, Eastern Europe also does just as well. Some countries, however, continue to lag behind, namely Poland and Latvia. Then again, Italy also does just as poorly on some indicators, such as press freedom.
 * Consequently, I think it would be rather superficial to colour all of Eastern Europe one colour, and Western Europe another, since Eastern Europe itself is very diverse, and the differences between Eastern European countries are larger than the difference between Eastern Europe as a whole and Western Europe as a whole. [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] Ronline ✉ 01:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes Austria may be culturally closer to Poland than Portugal. But is Austria closer to France, England, the Neatherlands or Poland? Half a century of the iron curtain have created severe cultural differences between Western and Eastern Europe. There are even considerable differences today between East and West Germans. Furthermore Eastern Europe remained agricultural while Western European nations such as Germany, Switzerland, England and Denmark engaged in the industrial revolution. There has always been a difference between Western and Eastern Europe-and yes there has also always been a difference between Teutonic and Mediteranean Europe. If we continue, we could eventually narrow the culural circle down to the family nucleus. The most independent culutral entity is the individual anyways. Nonetheless we are talking about recent Geo-politics and modern day culture. Eastern Europe is usually not seen as part of the west, becuase: Regarding culture for example, for the past fifty years Eastern Europe has been a collective society while the west has been an individualistic society. The collective mind-set, formed through past communist regimes remains in Eastern Europe. Slovakia and Switzerland need to be colored differently. The color line in this map does need to run along the former outline of the iron curtain (though we probably couldn't divide Germany). I do have a reference to support a different coloring of the map if that's the problem. Regards,  Signature brendel HAPPY HOLIDAYS 05:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Economic differences
 * 2) Recent history
 * 3) Culural differences in the sense that Eastern European countries do not share the norms, folkways, mores and values that constitute the basic premise of western culture.


 * Thanks for your response. I think that it's rather arbitrary to divide contemporary Europe into east and west, since the reality is actually more complex and can be seen as a continuum of differing economies and cultures. My point is that there is more diversity within Western Europe, and within Eastern Europe, then there is between the two. If we take the Czech Republic as an example, we can see that economically, it is quite close to Western Europe. It's GDP per capita is on par to that of Portugal, and its economic composition is very industrial, with a very small agricultural sector. Social attitudes, which are very hard to measure anyway, are also Western - the country has world-class political freedom, press freedom, civil liberties, etc. And there's no evidence that collective mentality is more pronounced in the Czech Republic than in, say, Italy, Greece or Portugal, or even Austria or France. So, I don't see any reason why the Czech Republic is less western than its neighbours. Similarly, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia have also adopted Western political systems and, beside the converging income gap, have most in common with the Western countries. Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltic states are also rooted in the Western tradition, with Western values having had an impact there before communism (perhaps less so in Bulgaria).


 * On the map, there is already a colour for Eastern Europe (yellow-cream), which includes the CIS states and the Western Balkans. I think there is more common between Central Europe (the new EU members) and Western Europe than there is between those and Eastern Europe (CIS/Balkans). [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] Ronline ✉ 05:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes the Czech Republic certainly is much closer to the West than the Western Balkan states. Of course, the issue is arbitrary but I'm just saying that 50 years of iron curtain have left a cultural divide. Ture, there are great differences between Italy and Denmark, there are also great differeces between San Francisco, California and Crawford, Texas. Hungary, Poland and Slovakia may have progressed to becoming more Western but can they be considered fully Western coutries yet. Consider the sociological definition of a society: "people who live in a specific geographic territory, interact with one another, and share many elements of a common culutre"- the definition of culutre is a, "learned set of beleifs, values, norms, and material goods shared by group members. (Thompson & Hickey, Society in Focus, 2005, Pearson publishing) Considering these two definitions, it is my opinion that countries like Poland (I, a German-American am actually 1/8 Polish) ought to be colored in such a manner that reflects their unique status as quasi-western countires. I agree that the Czech Republic may very well be more western than say the Ukraine, but isn't West Germany either. Thus I still beleive that the more western Eastern European nation need to be colored a bit differently. Perhaps they should feature blue and yellow-cream stripes, reflecting their affiliation with the Western World. Regards,  Signature brendel HAPPY HOLIDAYS 06:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

My eyes are rolling...
...at this map. It's supposed to be a map of the Western World, right? The last time I checked, Japan was an Eastern country. I could go on and on, as others have above. How does one nominate an image for deletion on grounds of inaccuracy? RobertAustin 16:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * As you have perhaps failed to notice, Japan is listed in a different colour to the "core Western countries". It is labelled as part of "Developed countries in east asia and Oceania, sometimes considered western". Due to its economic integration with the West (i.e. its status as a developed country), as well as the impact of Western culture on Japanese life, Japan is indeed sometimes considered part of the Western world, particularly from a contemporary, political, non-historical perspective. The beauty of this map is that it incorporates several layers and definitions of "Westernness", utilising different colours to denote this. [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] Ronline ✉ 00:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * IMHO, the sometimes statement (of Japan and other East Asian Tigers being called Western) is a little OR. I think one user above has made a good point to distinguish Western world vis-a-vis Industrialized world. In this sense, Japan and Korea are industrialized but not western. They may have imported certain western cultural imports (e.g. breads, pop musics, etc) but these do not displace the traditional culture of these countries, rather these western cultural imports act as "supplements". Similarly, if a western country imports certain eastern cultural imports such as Japanese anime, you can't call them the Eastern world, right? Heilme 07:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Caucasus
I think Georgia and Armenia should be coloured in some way. I'm not sure exactly how. Perhaps other former Soviet republics too. Turkmenistan, definitely not, but Kazakhstan, maybe? I don't know enough about them to tell, really. Does anyone feel qualified enough? Krum Stanoev 15:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan should be coloured yellow, definitely. The tag for the colour yellow even says "Eastern Europe, Balkans, Caucasus". As to the Central Asian republics - I don't think they should be coloured at all. Even though Kazakhstan is developing fast, it is not integrating into Western culture in any way, but rather pursuing a distinct Central Asian direction. Other than their ties to the Soviet Union, which wasn't even wholly "Western" itself, these republics never had any real Western influence. [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] Ronline ✉ 00:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 22:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd say they should be coloured the same colour as Turkey. They are about as European as it as far as culture and territory are concerned. Their history, especially that of Armenia and Azerbaijan, is closely intertwined with that of Turkey. In addition to that, these countries are not included into Eastern Europe, according to official definitions. --217.172.29.5 04:22, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Philippines, Islands, Azerbaijan and Georgia
How come is Philippines one of the "Developed countries in east asia and Oceania, sometimes considered western" (light blue)??? It's GDP(PPP) per capita is $4,923, while nominal is $1,168 (120th). Its HDI is medium. It is a developing country. Same arguments can be made about the Ocenian islands such as Fiji. And Azerbaijan and Georgia is listed under Western Asia, not under Eastern Europe according to United Nations geoscheme which is the standart geoscheme Wikipedia uses. Lukas19 01:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah I do agree. Philippines perhaps has undergone thorough western (cultural) influences, but it certainly is not western. Meursault2004 00:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Developed Countries in the Far East
I think the description "Developed countries in east asia and Oceania, sometimes considered western, especially in economics" or something like that which emphasized their wealth and modernity (because culturally they are not Western) would clarify some stuff, IMO. Lukas19 01:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Croatia
I think that Croatia isn't a western country. It isn't even a member of EU or NATO (but only a candidate). Though it has christianity as a main religion I still believe that isn't just enough for being "western". --86.61.15.110 09:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)