Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Western guilt (concept)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. While many contributors beoieve thatban article might be doable on this subject the clear consensus is that this one isn’t that. The advice to start a draft and not bring this back to mainspace until the text has been reviewed for SYNTH makes sense. Spartaz Humbug! 07:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Western guilt (concept)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I strongly urge editors to read this discussion before voting. This is not a simple case of quickly voting "per sources, per GNG". The comments by Pincrete and Malik Shabazz summarized most of the issues with this essay (not an encyclopedic article) better than I could. In particular, I recommend these comments by Pincrete which help explain some of the most blatant forms of synth and original research I have seen. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought; what we have here is not a notable concept but rather a crude selection of quotes that sometimes (surprisingly not always) happen to use "western" and "guilt" with no indication that they are related to one another. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. There may be a notable encyclopaedic topic lurking here in the form of postcolonial guilt. Some of the references might also be salvaged for white guilt. But in its current form, this article consists entirely of politically-slanted original synthesis that needs to be blown up and started over. 's approach to sourcing clearly leaves a lot to be desired―there's a lot of keyword-search cherry picking, misrepresentation of what the sources say, and poor citation practices (e.g. broken links, unnecessary links to paywalls, citations to books without page references) that make verification difficult―but he is often successful in producing a veneer of thorough research that passes a casual inspection. I'd therefore second in urging editors to look closely at what the references actually say, and read the discussions on the talk page, before !voting. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 12:34, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Please WP:AGF and do not fling unsubstantiated accusations at fellow editors, especially not accusations based on a nomination at AfD. I assure you that I have indeed read Pascal Bruckner's The Tears of the White Man, Christopher Caldwell's Stranger in a Strange Land, Richard Wolin's  The New Republic, Michael Walzer article in Dissent, and the other sources that I cited in creating this article. E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * What personal attack has supposedly flung at you? You consistently engage in poor citation practices and he is merely bringing it to this discussion because this is arguably your worst case yet.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 22:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if I've offended you, but I think at this point I am far from the only person who has noticed the irregularities in your use of sources. I stopped short of giving diffs because I thought that it would be taken as combative and distract from the issue at hand, but if I'm not mistaken there has been more than one ANI thread about it. In any case, I am only giving it as a reason for !voters to take a close look at the sources, which surely can't be a bad thing. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 00:47, 16 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Deletion is not cleanup, and the way to resolve a content dispute (which is what we have here) is not deleting the article. The concept itself - is clearly notable - it is the subject of books and journal papers - so clearly Wikipedia should have an entry on this political/cultural concept. As for the article quality - including alleged SYNTH and OR - this should be addressed by editing the article. If need be - this article could be stubbed down to a five line paragraph explaining the concept (without a long list of examples) without difficulty.Icewhiz (talk) 13:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If, as you assert, Icewhiz, the concept is the subject of books and journal papers, I have two questions. First, why is not a single one of those books or journal article cited as a source in the article or recommended as further reading? Second, could you please identify a few of those books and journal articles for me, because I'm too stupid to find them. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The epithet you chose does not describe you at all. Some sources:
 * Equality, the Third World, and Economic Delusion, Peter T. Bauer, 1981
 * Bauer, Péter Tamás. "Western guilt and Third World poverty." Commentary 61.1 (1976): 31.
 * Sanneh, Lamin. "Christian missions and the Western guilt complex." The Christian Century 104.11 (1987): 330-334.
 * Leys, Ruth. From guilt to shame: Auschwitz and after. Princeton University Press, 2009.
 * Diamond, Larry. "The democratic rollback: the resurgence of the predatory state." Foreign affairs (2008): 36-48.
 * Akinade, Akintunde E. "The precarious agenda: Christian-Muslim relations in contemporary Nigeria." Journal of Islam and Christian Muslim Relations (2002).
 * Ajami, Fouad. "The Global Logic of the Neoconservatives." World Politics 30.3 (1978): 450-468.
 * The Control Factor: Our Struggle to See the True Threat, Bill Siegel
 * Western Christians in Global Mission: What's the Role of the North American, Paul Borthwick.
 * From Subsistence to Exchange and Other Essays, by Lord Peter Tamas Bauer
 * Writing Anthropology: A Call for Uninhibited Methods, F. Bouchetoux
 * War, Guilt, and World Politics after World War II, Thomas U. Berger.
 * And of course google-news shows contemporary usage of this term in this context by many different people.Icewhiz (talk) 07:25, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * That the term is sometimes used is not disputed, but is it used in a coherent way, such that it has a defined, or definable meaning? The 3 or 4 sources above which I looked at, had no more than passing mentions, which never defined the term. Nor is it clear that the various users are using the term in the manner defined in the article. For example, the brief mention in the The Christian Century, basically says Christian missions should feel "western guilt" for past presumptiousness and cultural arrogance, but should nonetheless continue to "spread the gospel". Does this bear any relationship whatsoever to the definition and examples in our article? This example sounds to me like typical christian contrition, (let's repent and do better) and to have nothing to do with a political concept. Pincrete (talk) 20:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm very disappointed, Icewhiz. That's a classic bait and switch. You wrote that "Western guilt" "is the subject of books and journal papers", but you haven't identified a single book or peer-reviewed academic journal paper about "Western guilt". (Commentary and The Christian Century are not journals by any stretch of the imagination.) Instead, you provided books, magazine articles, and journal papers that mention the phrase "Western guilt". That demonstrates that the concept is not notable. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize I do not live up to your lofty expectations, but I wouldn't call the long tracts by lord Peter Thomas Bauer (e.g. chapter 6 of which is a 2000 Princeton University Press reprint of the 1976 commentary magazine piece (which is, actually, cited by quite a bit)) - a mention. By extension, your characterization of some of the others sources is not comprehensive.Icewhiz (talk) 08:57, 17 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep A patently notable topic, which is why I created the article. No SYNTH required.    Clear and congruent definitions of "western guilt" by Richard Wolin, Pascal Bruckner, Douglas Murray, Shelby Steele, and Sohrab Ahmari are already on the page.  If editors want to argue that these definitions are not properly summarized in the lede, that discussion belongs on the talk page.  However, Deletion is not cleanup and I just don't like it is not a valid argument for deletion.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note - I never nominated this essay for deletion for cleanup or because I don't like it. Those are straw man arguments. If any of the keep !voters cared to read it, my nom statement asserts this essay falls under what Wikipedia is not. Gregory created this personal essay by synthing together sources that sometimes use the term for different meaning and misrepresented others to push a POV. There is no established term known as "Western guilt" except in the mind of the essay's creator.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You both really should address content, not each other. Even if all you are saying about this article is true - the subject itself would still merit an article as it is clearly notable. It would be trivial to stub this down to a form that is not contestable.Icewhiz (talk) 22:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete If the term exists in any coherent form, it is clearly as a pejorative term used to denigrate the motives of those one disagrees with, rather than an objective phenomenon. I am not persuaded that it does have a commonly understood meaning, even in that limited pejorative sense. The article is simply a ragbag of uses, occasionally of the term, more often of related terms like "post-colonial guilt" which have been synthed together. Needless to say, none of the uses ever say "this is bunkum, the entirety of western liberal thinking and policies are NOT motivated by 'guilt' anymore than all conservative policies are motivated by racism and avarice". Pincrete (talk) 22:54, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Performing a web search on a phrase and quoting the single occurrence of that phrase in a dozen books and articles is not a sound basis for an encyclopedia article. There has been no significant coverage of the concept of "Western guilt", which is why the subject fails the notability requirements. I recommend that editors read WP:NEO:"Some neologisms can be in frequent use, and it may be possible to pull together many facts about a particular term and show evidence of its usage on the Internet or in larger society. To support an article about a particular term or concept, we must cite what reliable secondary sources say the term or concept, not just sources the term . An editor's personal observations and research (e.g. finding blogs, books, and articles that use the term rather than are about the term) are insufficient to support articles on neologisms because this may require analysis and synthesis of primary source material to advance a position, which is explicitly prohibited by the original research policy."Unfortunately, this is a compilation of sources that use the term "Western guilt" without a single source about "Western guilt". — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The editor is an avid writer, who researches his material very well. His work is of great importance to this venue, IMHO. Naturally, whenever one conceives of an idea for a valid entry in this online encyclopedia, the first thing that he does is research the topic, perusing through the available sources that treat on the topic, and brings this information together by putting it into a readable form. There's nothing amiss in doing so. The sources cited are good; the subject-matter under discussion notable.Davidbena (talk) 03:13, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm an avid writer too but I wouldn't use that as an excuse to create my own concept for an encyclopedic article. Can you explain what you meant by your comment? There is no established phenomenon called "Western guilt"; Wikipedia is not a publisher of personal essays. The sources were brought together by synth and misrepresentation. As I recommended in my nom statement, I strongly urge you to review the sources and the talk page discussion. The synth and OR is too blatant to ignore.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 03:47, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * "Shame" culture and "Guilt" culture were articulated by Dodds (1951). Discussing ancient Greek epics and drama, he traced an increasing sophistication in their development, from a conception of the world and the moral order as arbitrary and subject to the whim of the gods, through to a later understanding of the limits of moral responsibility. You may also wish to see JSTOR on this subject. Better still, check the search engine for its notability. Our co-editor apparently only wished to discuss one aspect of this "guilt" culture, namely, that found in western societies. It's legitimate.Davidbena (talk) 05:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So any 'collective sense of guilt' found in, (or perceived by others to be 'found in') western societies, is, by definition 'Western guilt' is it? Regardless of cause? Jewish survivor guilt? People who feel UK and Europe should have done more in the 1930's to stop Nazism? German guilt over WWII? US citizens who don't feel good about the Vietnam war or UK citizens who are not proud of Bloody Sunday? Who decides what's in and what's out, because the sources don't seem to agree that this is a single defined, or definable entity. Pincrete (talk) 21:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete this is an essay comprised of original research, not an encyclopedic article. Lepricavark (talk) 06:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * keep - icludes books as sources. meets wp:gng XavierItzm (talk) 12:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:44, 17 November 2017 (UTC)


 * delete per TNT would need to be completely written to comply with NPOV and SOAP. From a policy perspective, what is wrong with this page is that it is completely and narrowly POV.  It treats the notion of "western guilt" from a single perspective that "Western guilt" is some self-flagellating and self-destructive notion that exists only in the minds (and cultural products of minds) of left wingers in the West.   The sources were cherry-picked to accomplish this, so of course that is all it does.  There is almost nothing here about the actual substrate of racist/sexist/colonial/postcolonial abuse that is the basis for the "guilt", and actually nothing from the POV of objects of "the West"'s actions (where is for example the voice of people like Frantz Fanon in this "article"?)  There is almost no POV from people in "the West" and in the ROW who seek constructive ways of engagement that acknowledge the past and don't abnegate it.
 * What is driving people to call this an "essay" and to discuss SYN is the stringing-together of a narrow range of sources to generate this POV content. This is useless to anybody trying to think about the whole of "western guilt" (including the POV here). This has no place in WP as it stands.
 * It is as wrong-headed from stem to stern as many of the pages created by that Environmental Justice class we had to deal with last spring, that came here with a resolutely anti-Trump "message" to sell. We ended up deleting a bunch of them as well. Jytdog (talk) 21:56, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * As it stands, it is really a kind of POV fork of White privilege, Male privilege, Colonialism, Postcolonialism, etc all wrapped up in one POV package. Like I said, would need to be completely rewritten to be dialogue with the rest of WP instead of sticking out like a sore thumb. Jytdog (talk) 00:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Certainly the article can be improved, but Note that there is a great deal of serious scholarship cited in the article, and more can be added.
 * For example, Imperialism, Marxism and the Western Sense of Guilt, a subsection in Philosophy, politics and conservatism in the thought of Elie Kedourie, in which political philosopher Noël O'Sullivan unpacks Elie Kedourie's an analysis of the impact of western guilt on decolonization in the post-WWII era. (Kedourie thought empire had some positive aspects, and that nationalism and Marxism were radically dangerous.) He regarded Franz Fanon as representing a "fusion of nationalism and Marxism," But he was very specifically critical not of the fact of the end of empire, but of the fact that the then new phenomenon of western guilt over imperialism led France and Britain to wrap up their Empires in a   "hasty and irresponsible" manner that led to bloodshed, economic collapse, and enormous suffering for the colonized peoples (in Algeria and elsewhere) that might have been averted.
 * The assertion that the concept of Western guilt lacks sources is simply mistaken. Nor can it be subsumed under white guilt; the two concepts intersect, but western guilt is broader, and, often as in O'Sullivan's analysis of Kedourie, about guilt as a driver of colonial and foreign policy.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Here, for example is a discussion of Frantz Fanon's thought on western guilt (the topic is the exploitation of the bodies of brown and black women and boys,) "According to Fanon, it was not enough to assign guilt to monstrous racism in Europe and North America, it was also necessary to face the shame of bourgeois barbarism in Africa and Asia..." p. 52, Sex Shame and the Single Life," Daniel McNeill, a chapter in American Shame: Stigma and the Body Politic,'' Myra Mendible, editor,  Indiana University Press, 2016.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:10, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You will note that my !vote did not call into question whether an article could be written on this. It could.  This page would have to be completely rewritten to make it encyclopedic, specifically with regard to NPOV and SOAP.  As it stands it is an essay that makes an argument that should be called "Why Western Guilt is a Bad Thing" and it should be deleted.
 * Perhaps you would be willing to draftify it and submit it through AfC when you think you have made it actually something approaching neutral? Perhaps the nominator would then agree to withdraw the nomination. Jytdog (talk) 15:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Deletion is not cleanup. Do note that  Frantz Fanon and Elie Kedourie - the sources I brought just above - are on opposite sides of this debate.  The sources now in the article, distinguished academics with whom you disagree, are valid sources.  The topic meets WP:SIGCOV.  A content dispute is NOT an argument for deletion.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:54, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No one is saying deletion is cleanup. If you will not comprehend what Jytdog is discussing, that is fine. Wikipedia will be better off without this POV essay.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:51, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The thing is a pig's ear and we cannot make a purse out if it. This is not like a stub that needs building out. It needs a teardown and rebuild. Jytdog (talk) 22:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Also it's far from clear to me that there is significant coverage. What the keep !voters have presented is a disparate collection of sources that use the term in passing (and some that don't use the term at all), and a few works by fringe, conservative authors that cover it as a coherent concept. I think it would be difficult to write an article that conformed to WP:NPOV unless additional, mainstream sources were found. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 23:15, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Whoa The article and my comment above cite to SIGCOV by Fritz Stern, Richard Wolin, Pascal Bruckner, Douglas Murray, Shelby Steele, Elie Kedourie, Sohrab Ahmari, Noël O'Sullivan, Bruce Thornton, Frantz Fanon, Bernhard Schlink, Paul Collier, Colin Kidd. This is more than "a few" sources, and they are not "fringe".E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:39, 20 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Additional sources are myriad and include:
 * Lewis Samuel Feuer, Imperialism and the Anti-Imperialist Mind, Chapter IV: "The Imperialist Spirit and the Anti-Imperialist Mind", subhead "The Ideology of Imperialist Guilt", First section of chapter IV, p, 104 "Western peoples, it has been noted, have been peculiarly susceptible to feelings of guilt concerning their imperialist role. The guilt, it has sometimes been suggested, derives form the Christian myth of guilt and sin..." An entire chapter on imperialism and western guilt ensues.  1989, Routledge.
 * John Hobson, The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics; Western International Theory, 1760-2010   discusses ''"the West's 'colonial-racism guilt syndrome,' or what has been termed, 'post-imperial cringe.'  In turn, the emergence of this syndrome was due in part  to a series of intra-Western developments, which comprised the internalist critique of scientific racism within the academy." and more analysis of the "Western-racist imperialist guilt complex." p. 320, Cambridge University Press 2012.
 * Sarah Maddison, Postcolonial guilt and national identity: historical injustice and the Australian settler state, Journal for the Study of Race, Nation and Culture, Volume 18, 2012 - Issue 6
 * guilt has changed how European history is being taught'' January 2017 Hindustan Times.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:36, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Derrr .... almost none of these refer to 'Western guilt', and when they do, it is merely in passing. None of them tells us what it supposedly is, except of course it's a Very Very BAD thing. As M Shabazz says, these are sources USING the term not ABOUT the term.Pincrete (talk) 09:34, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Here Pincrete concretely insists that if a source such as Lewis Samuel Feuer's detailed 12-page section on "The Ideology of Imperialist Guilt" (in a book on The Imperialist Spirit and the Anti-Imperialist Mind, varies his language, sometimes using phrases like "Western peoples," or just plain "guilt" to discuss this concept in the course of a complex, scholarly discussion of Western guilt.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:08, 22 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TNT / WP:ADVOCACY. The page, as written, is not about the concept of Western guilt, but seems instead to innumerate types and instances of “Western guilt” without a coherent structure. The concept itself is multi-faceted, as it appears, referring at varying times to perceptions relating to colonialism, Holocaust, Christian missions, current migrant crisis, etc. The article is a mish-mash of these concepts and examples, resulting in WP:SYNTH. This leads me to conclude that it’s best deleted at this time, until it can be completely rewritten.
 * Separately, the argument “includes books as sources” is not convincing; I could probably find any combination of words in a book and synthesise an article out of them, or, alternatively, write an article about "Post-colonial guilt", based on the same sources. There’s also some fringe element to the subject, as in: The Control Factor: Our Struggle to See the True Threat - Page 94 by Bill Siegel – 2012: “White or Western Guilt usually involves large wealth transfers. Whether it is directed at Great Society programs or aid for lesser-developed countries, much of the game of guilt revolves around extracting money.” Etc.
 * So, I would be especially careful when developing such an article. In summary, there may be a notable topic here somewhere, but this article ain’t it. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that Siegel is not cite din the article, and that fringe thinkers can be removed from articles.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:42, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Coffman, Far from being SYNTH, the concept of Western guilt was articulated by Pascal Bruckner in two books (both have been translated into English), The Tears of the White Man (1983) and The Tyranny of Guilt, 2006. The Definitions of Western guilt subhead begins with a 2010 essay exploring this topic by Richard Wolin, in The New Republic.  Wolin is Distinguished Professor of History and Political Science at the CUNY Graduate Center.  While the definitions that follow vary, they all follow Bruckner's concept of a Western culture of remorse within which historic events, including Western imperialism, black slavery and the Holocaust, produce an emotional response of guilt requiring self-abnegation, penitence, and acts of penance or reparation that can affect political and policy outcomes.  Do Note that all complex political concepts have complex definitions, which is why this article follows the standard pattern set on such topics inhaving a "definitions" section (sc.f.: Social class, or Postcolonialism.    Bruckner and those who like the concept are, of course, not fans of postcolonial theory.  Nevertheless, this article has had a subhead Western guilt (concept) from the time it was created.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:42, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is still SYNTH. For example, this belongs on the article about the book, The Tears of the White Man:
 * Writing in Foreign Affairs in 1987, Fritz Stern described "the rise of a guilty conscience in Europe" as a "major topic".


 * K.e.coffman (talk) 05:43, 26 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. A Google Scholar search of "Western guilt" -"western guilt culture" (which brings up too many false positives which refer to works following Ruth Benedict's classification schema), brings up 900 academic papers which use the term, and from a quick perusal of some of them, many of them do use in a cohesive way, which would point towards this meeting WP:GNG (e.g. . Problems with articles on notable topics should be kept and the problems resolved through talk page discussion/editing, and if the synthesis is really that big of issue, cutting it down.. Patar knight - chat/contributions 08:04, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, as noted above, this is potentially a useful topic. The current article though is unsalvageable WP:SYNTH.  If deleted, there should explicitly be no prejudice against the creation of a new article on the topic that follows the reliable sources on the subject more closely.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC).
 * Keep. Looking at the books and other RS retrieved by "western guilt culture" Google searches convince me that the subject does exist and can be properly developed. The concept has been discussed in a number of books, like here. My very best wishes (talk) 18:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * But how can it possibly be developed from this POV essay? All this is is a synthed collection of white guilt, German collective guilt, postcolonialism, Australian guilt, and environmental guilt. You had it right the first time -- this article is just a coat rack, and, even if the term exists, it is not being appropriately described here; a total restart is required and this current essay is just damaging to the encyclopedia.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:20, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I do not think that deleting a page is the way to improve it. My very best wishes (talk) 01:20, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * We don't call completely rewriting pages "improving" them. Again this would be need to be completely rewritten and restructured to meet NPOV. Right now it is just an essay filling a hijacked page in the encyclopedia. "Improvement" is not relevant here.  This not like a stub that can built on.  Jytdog (talk) 02:02, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, your response doesn't address the concerns. This isn't a stub with a minor issue; the essay as a whole needs to be completely rewritten so it can be considered an article. We can't simply "improve" a POV essay that isn't even clear on what it is trying to describe and often synths material. As I said before, your original assessment was correct and it is unfortunate you stepped away from it.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 03:41, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, after looking at the books on the subject in general (like here), it appears they do describe some content that is currently included on the page, for example German collective guilt (see pages 73-77 of the book). so, annihilating the page does not seem to be the best option to me. My very best wishes (talk) 04:01, 25 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment by article creator. This discussion has been useful.  I wrote the article focusing on this topic as it has developed in the post WWII period as Pascal Bruckner and others have written extensively about "Western guilt" as a unique cultural phenomenon with impact on government policy.  Revisiting this body of writing, I can see that major contemporary thinkers support the idea of this modern phenomenon as resulting from and old and uniquely Western guilt culture with deep roots in Christianity.  Whereas I had separated the contemporary concept form the historic Christian thought tradition.   See: The Emergence of a Western Guilt Culture, 13th-18th Centuries, Jean Delumeau, translated into English 1990,  St. Martin's Press for the depth of scholarship on the concept of "Western guilt culture."  Certainly I can expand the article to inculde this sort of scholarly historical depth.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:37, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - I have to agree that the only way this article can be improved is to nuke it, and start over. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 22:52, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. An essay, and one with the focused clarity of a cloud of squid ink. Anmccaff (talk) 06:16, 26 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.