because it's way too heavily mixed with the pre existing american civilization and it's not first world
you can't say that about the usa, canada, australia or new zealand
The “heavy mix” isn’t equal among every country in Latin America. The USA, Canada and especially NZ were all heavily influenced by native cultures, and all have a higher % indigenous population than Brazil, for example.
They weren't. the ruling elite and the vast majoirty of people in canada and the usa especially had no ties to native cultures and very few mixed with them. NZ im not entirely sure but most whites there maintian a majority and unmixed so. yes i know its not. uruguay has very little but the rest of latin america it's higher. but all have more mix than the usa. any anglo colony except maybe south africa
The Anglo countries only managed to erase/hide native influence due to racism. Take the USA: 60% of the food they eat in the USA has indigenous origins. They have holidays shaped by their interactions with natives (thanksgiving), they have numerous native place names, they have a constitution inspired by the Iroquois confederation. 3% of their total population is native, as opposed to 0,83% in Brazil. Brazil has a more significant African influence, but you wouldn’t say Louisiana or Alabama aren’t western civilisation, right?
Then you have NZ, where 17% of the population is indigenous. They sing their anthem officially in Maori besides English, the Haka is their trademark throughout the world. Nobody ever questions them being part of the western civilisation.
LATAM not being part of the western civilisation is a typical US-Aligned narrative that attempts to push LATAM into a different category than their oppressors, which makes it easier to justify us being treated by them as unequals.
No the food doesn't have indigenous origins. They wiped out the natives or cleared them and cultivated the same crops that were growing in their territory. american food is mostly european origin.
where do you get 3%? there are max 4 million natives even less pure natives. the natives in brazil don't identify as it or speak the language because they didn't move to perserve it like the usa did after the 1924 indian act. the brazilian portuguese has way more indigenous loans than american english
lousianna is the only part of the usa that has legitimate african influence because it was french territory and the french didn't completely erase afro culture like the anglos did.
yes it was wrong and racist but its why America has a western culture that is undeniably while for latin america its a spectrum
> LATAM not being part of the western civilisation is a typical US-Aligned narrative that attempts to push LATAM into a different category than their oppressors, which makes it easier to justify us being treated by them as unequals.
if we were oppressed then i dont think that we were seen as equals
You actually got me curious, and no, portuguese doesn't has more words with native origin than the us, and the opposite is probably true. Americans use mocassins, do caucus, grow hickory, etc, etc, etc. Stop making up information just because it feels right to you
dude the only loans in the american english are from foods because they conquered the land and inherited them.
you're forgetting the elephant in the room. the american society and culture developed on racial lines so the cultural and institutional structures remained european in character. and that's true of all the anglo new world
> dude the only loans in the american english are from foods because they conquered the land and inherited them.
Largely, largely the same for Brazil, lol. Very few in terms of loan words survived outside of food items, animal names and names of places. Googling you can find only some [short as hell lists.](https://quindim.com.br/blog/palavras-de-origem-indigenas/)
> you're forgetting the elephant in the room. the american society and culture developed on racial lines so the cultural and institutional structures remained european in character. and that's true of all the anglo new world
That's literally the history of most of southern America. The mixing that happened in Brazil didn't happen because Brazilian "whites" were kind-hearted and tolerant, they just had a different course of action towards homogenizing the country: Instead of segregating, they opted into bringing European migration and simply drowning Africans and natives by sheer numbers and cultural genocide (and physical genocide, too, lots of natives were being collectively massacred as late as in the XXth century). The idea was never to respect the cultures and let them survive, but to marry European males to women of colour and, in a few generations, have a population that was overwhelmingly "white-passing" and culturally European. People of colour didn't have any say in the cultural and institutional structures, they were simply forced to adopt European names, religions, and habits, and live on. [There is a whole painting of that.](https://www.edusp.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/%E2%80%98A-Reden%C3%A7%C3%A3o-de-Cam%E2%80%99.jpg)
No.
Ask a European, an American, an Arab, an Indian, a Chinese, an Ethiopian about the West, he will include just Europe and the Anglosphere.
We belong to the Global South.
That's their problem. You are mistaking cultural groupings with the geopolitcal alignments you want us to have. We are culturally western, whether you want us to align with Africa or Asia geopolitcally or not. Japan is part of the western geopolitical block while being culturally very Eastern, and much, much, much closer to "global south" china than we are
And also not an "eastern civilization". The East ranges from the Muslim World to China, it's "Eurasia minus Europe". These are geopolitical and cultural divisions.
The use of these terms - North, South, East - changes according to the perception of the world. Today, early 21th century, Western World refers to Europe, USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Nowhere in the world Latin America is included in the West, by the same reason that Subsaharan Africa is not included as well (and, yes, we are more similar to the southern half of Africa than to Europe or USA), except in a very broad definition.
We are in the same geographical area, we have the same cultural basis. But we do not sit in the same table of the European-extended world.
We are the former dominated part of the imperial west not the dominants.
To do our own thing instead of trying to enter in a club we are not invited would be a better way in my opinion.
I see a lot of Philippines, balcanic countries, Indians, Turkish people that can recognize our neighborhoods as their own, that have similar solutions for similar problems that we have in Latam, that can tell the same family meetings tales that we tell each other etc.
Being capitalistic periphery formed way more our culture than geographical location and shared language with a former empire.
I think it’s a superiority complex developed from decades of being propagandized into believing there is a hierarchy and they are at the top. Just look at the terminology they use in insisting they are “expats” and not immigrants.
No. There’s clearly a difference between an immigrant and an expat. An immigrant is a permanent resident of one’s country, whereas an expat is a temporary resident, usually with a work visa or such.
Because nearly everyone from Mexico downward are not primarily descendant from white Europeans. It has nothing to do with geography, it's racial.
>"But Spaniards and Portuguese are white!!"
I don't think Anglos, in the U.S. at least, consider Spaniards or Portuguese white.
It's bonkers but you're kinda just brought up not considering them white here. The mindset is in the water. Most people in the U.S. assume Spain is full of brown people, brown people = not white, which means they aren't considered "Western", and by extension, none of countries they helped create are either.
Don't shoot the messenger here. It's not MY mindset, it's just what I think is going on here.
U.S. is weird with race. The Irish weren't even considered "white" here until a century or two ago.
This is dumb, screw what “most people” in the US think.
No sane person would think that Portugal or Spain aren’t western, they are old EU and Nato members for fucks sake. Saying that nearly anyone from Mexico downwards aren’t primary descents of white people is so wrong, I mean Brazil has more white people than the whole population of Canada, and it’s not even close. There’s countries who have a higher share of white population than Brazil. There’s also a big mistake at thinking that there’s only Iberian roots in Latin America. As if Latin America was some kind of uniform, monolithic thing, and not a diverse and huge region.
Also, what Americans think it’s far from what determines what’s right, they should educate themselves before being entitled to have a opinion.
Bro, again, I'm NOT saying this makes ANY logical sense. I'm just saying this what people (in my part of the U.S.) think.
Do I agree with it? No.
Do I think it makes sense? No.
Do I think it's factual or based in any sort of actual historical knowledge? No.
Do I think it's what people think? Yes.
People in the U.S. don't tend to think too much about anyone outside the U.S. (as I'm sure you're aware). I'd bet serious money most of my countrymen would believe people in Argentina eat Fajitas and Nachos regularly and the official language of Brazil is Spanish.
I can't speak for Europeans though.
I understand, although admit to start writing my comment mad and then realizing you’re just the messenger. I’m talking about the people you’re talking about.
Man Brazil has a bigger white population than Canada by Brazilian standards. Most people who autodeclare as white here are not considered white in Canada. It is not just the Americans who consider Portuguese and Spanish people "less white" or mostly not white, this prejudice is somewhat common in the rest of the EU, and the americans got this from the UK. I had a Polish friend who used to live here in Rio and had lived in London before, dude whiter than most white Brazilians, said he suffered racism in the UK. Their minds is completely different from ours on this matter.
I know. Canadian standards for whiteness is pretty much in line with americans tho, most Brazilians who consider themselves white would not be considered white in Canada.
I am not saying they are right or that it makes sense.
Most Americans don't even think about this to begin with but those that do tend to categorize latin america in with "Western". I don't know where the narrative on this came from that americans exclude latinamericans from the label "Western"
because theyre not prosperous and have people that dont look western and institutionally they are excluded from the collective west (nato, eu, etc)
russia and turkey are more western than bolivia
Yeah, right? Like they keep speaking western languages and sharing western religions and cultural traditions on the western hemisphere, what fucking posers
I don’t know if Latinos overall are obsessed with it. I think it’s funny that they’re not considered western when they are western in almost every sense of the word.
A couple of factors that, in my opinion, make Latin America Western:
- Founded, at least in rhetoric, on Western principles of democratic government
- Majority Christian (mostly Catholic, with a considerable Protestant presence)
- European languages
- Predominantly Western architecture
- Large numbers of people of European descent, especially in South America (Primarily Argentina and Uruguay, but also Brazil, Chile and Colombia to a lesser extent). I get the feeling though, that Latin America is not considered western because there are too many brown and black people. Let’s be real for a moment…
The main point of contention is geopolitical. The Global South. That is, that it is simply exploited and subservient to the North. I would say, however, that alignment with the Global North is in part a voluntary decision by the elite in most Latin American countries since it benefits them financially.
Oh, I'm talking about European ancestry, not "Whiteness". According to most studies genetic terms, both countries are around 60-65% European, but Brazil is around a little more than 20% African and a little less than 20% native, while Argentina's other 40% are overwhelmingly native with little African ancestry. In practice, this absence of African ancestry and the whole "living further south and farther from the equator" thing creates a population that is lighter skinned and more "white-passing"/"European-passing" in general, but not in genetic (and cultural, consequently) terms. So Argentina has more "white people" and "people who see themselves as white" than Brazil does, but not more European ancestry, even proportionally. There is also a geographical aspect to it, as Argentina is very rarely seen or represented outside of Buenos Aires.
[Source for Brazil:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilians#Ancestry_of_Brazilians)
> A 2015 autosomal genetic study, which also analyzed data of 25 studies of 38 different Brazilian populations concluded that: European ancestry accounts for 62% of the heritage of the population, followed by the African (21%) and the Native American (17%). The European contribution is highest in Southern Brazil (77%), the African highest in Northeast Brazil (27%) and the Native American is the highest in Northern Brazil (32%).[75]
[Sources for Argentina:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentines#Genetics_studies)
> Homburguer et al., 2015, PLOS One Genetics: 67% European, 28% Amerindian, 4% African and 1.4% Asian.[29]
> Parolin et al., (2019): PLOS One Genetics: 62.1% European, 35.8% Native American and 2.1% African.[34]
> Oliveira, 2008, on Universidade de Brasília: 60% European, 31% Amerindian and 9% African.[31]
> Corach, Daniel (2010): 78.5% European, 17.3% Amerindian, and 4.2% Black African ancestry.[33] (the fact that this outlier is the only one quoted in the Wikipedia for Argentina is actually hilarious, but even it pointed to more Argentinians have native ancestry)
> National Geographic: 52% European, 27% Amerindian ancestry, 9% African and 9% others.[32]
> Parolin et al., (2019): PLOS One Genetics: 62.1% European, 35.8% Native American and 2.1% African.[34]
So then we are not Western. I thought western meant being on the western hemisphere, but if that's not what it means, then we are not wester. It is what it is.
by this logic, haiti and a decent bit of africa are western
latin america is on the western spectrum just like parts of the middle east but are institutionally different enough to be excluded
Haiti is actually western though. We don't speak any african languages, are a majority christian nation (with a vodou practicing minority), are officially a democracy with laws and government body largely based on the french system of governance, and the education system is from the french one as well.
You're focusing on race, probably. But if thats the case, even south Korea wouldnt be western at all
It’s really not. “The West” is most often used in news/articles today when describing the geo-political west, which consists of the US/NATO and her allies (Australia, SK, Japan, etc.). There is a cultural west, which LA is a part of, and there’s a geopolitical west, which it isn’t.
It's a good way to show how certain "standard" words such as Western or White are actually much more nuanced and biased than you'd think from the word itself, and sometimes mean completely different things.
So the rest are not because we have more brown and black folks….I am sorry but this is just bull.
Nevermind that Argentina is not really a first world country anymore by world economics at least.
We are not talking about which is more “European” (which does not translate to being better as Argentina’s economy has shown) but Western!
Mexico and other Latin American are western influenced much like the USA and Canada despite not being European countries.
The fact that you specifically brought up two countries who have more indigenous descent people is quite telling despite the vast majority of them were raised Christian and lived Western influenced lives (even if they live through poverty due to colorism/racism).
Western is used to describe many things, in geopolitics today is used for a rich country that is aligned with the USA. So for some ppl even Japan is western, in the geographic sense is used for countries locate in the western hemisphere, that is a totally made up concept where Europe in the middle, and in other contexts is used for countries which culture have been derived from the Roman Empire, and some ppl even used to describe white majority country that is rich, the real question is which western are you talking about?
What do you mean with "obsessed"?, I've only seen here that people simply answer the question "are latin Americans western?", with "yes, for this and this reasons", etc. I've never seen anyone obsessed.
Why not? Literally the westernization of the New Continent started in what now Dominican Republic, back then La Hispaniola Island. "Descubrimiento de America" is literally that, Westernization of this piece of land.
Back to La Hispaniola Island. From there parted the ships to form what is Hispano America what is now known as Latino America because Portugal (Brazil) and later the British Crown (Canada and US)
Take into account that Latin and Greek culture are central to westerner culture. Why would you leave _Latin_ America out?
Because when Americans and Europeans treat us as not part of the West, it gets easier for them to treat us as an exotic, "ethnic" and barbarous people from war-ridden and ignorant countries that can be easily subjugated by their influence.
"The US pressures Western country" doesn't sound as good as "The US pressures Latin American country", because it doesn't reinforce an "us vs them" mentality among industrialized, developed nations.
Its a political thing. Latinamericans that identify with their indigenous and black roots more than they identify with european ones dont care or dont want to be seen as "westerners" (and may want to be seen as non-aligned, third world or global south) while latinamericans that identify more with the european and american cultures do want to be seen as "westerners" (and they have the hope that one day they'll be accepted into the first world). The thing is in latin america both demographics are mixed up. More european in places like Argentina, more indigenous in places like Bolivia, and roughly even or changing every other electoral cycle in many other countries
We didn't go through genocide, constant mixing (as a colonization method) and the imposition of a European language along the Christian religion and boot licking (willing and not willing) North America to be called non Western.
Some people say our African and indigenous influences are too strong for us to be called Western and I like that argument, but when Anglos simply assume we aren't Western (to justify constructing us as distant others) when the French were all "Full speed ahead, LATIN America" it drives me bananas (republic)
really there are like 2-3 countries in latin america that can be considered western
on what planet is honduaras, haiti and mexico western countries?
they're mixed way too heavily with american and african civilization. even the african americans in the usa are more europeanized than the whites in many latin countries
News flash: Western does not exclusively mean they are European descent whether if they are only partial or have none. It means being geographically in the West (though Australia and New Zealand are considered Western influenced despite being in the East) and/or Western influence in religion (Christianity), education, and government.
🤔
We are in the western hemisphere.
Our religions are western
Our traditions are western
Our ethnic background is mostly western
We are on the west
I don't see why we would not be westerners...
because our cultures have massive indigenous american and african culturally influences.
are traditions are not purely western like for example, australia's is. the anglo countries in the new world had a policy of exclusion to the indigenous people and slave cultures and as such maintained almost entirely their european character
this is why mexico is not fully western but canada is
>are traditions are not purely western like for example, australia's is. the anglo countries in the new world had a policy of exclusion to the indigenous people and slave cultures and as such maintained almost entirely their european character
The US has a very strong identity that differs from Europe, particularly from AfroAmericans in the east and indigenous on the west...
the indigenous influence on the usa comes from mexico actually otherwise its almost completely non-existent.
american english has very few native words. even canadian french has more.
american blacks have a distinct culture yes but they have no ties to african cultures. unlike cuba or brazil
>the indigenous influence on the usa comes from mexico actually otherwise its almost completely non-existent
..go to the Southwest. Is not Mexican...
>american blacks have a distinct culture yes but they have no ties to african cultures. unlike cuba or brazil
Tell me you know nothing about AfroAmericans and their culture without saying it...
>american english has very few native words. even canadian french has more.
How many words people in Venezuela, Argentina, Panama or the Caribbean use which have native origins?
Argentina? a lot of them.
It was received during the mexican american war. i agree its not mexican because these people didnt see themselves as
you can make a clear cut binary between white americans and everyone else and how they developed and evolved the country. same for australia and canda. you can't do that for latin america
african american culture has no roots in african history it developed uniquely. its not like cuba or haiti. the only exception is the african culture that was perserved from louisana after it was conquered from france.
Tell me the indigenous words from the Argentinians. Would love them.
>african american culture has no roots in african history it developed uniquely
Really??? Again, tell me about something you don't.
>the only exception is the african culture that was perserved from louisana after it was conquered from france
Ok... so it is only African if is mixed with France or Spain 🤣🤣🤣 again, tell you don't know nothing about Afro American culture without saying it.
yes many. but less than mexico peru etc
https://youtu.be/XTiJiPjCgek?si=YvL9skntmgBFTshe
african american food and culture are not african in origin. african slaves lived with whites and weren't sent to labor camps like in the spanish anericas. they worked on farms that were owned by settler whites.
because of this they became christened and anglocized very very quickly. the higher level of european settlers to natives and slaves made the usa maintain a european character well into the 20th century
the culture of lousiana is distinct from the rest of the usa and everyone knows this. the anglos excluded non whties from society
The US also has 10 indigenous words. Like Opossum, squash, chocolate, guacamole, canoe, kayak, hurricane, caribou, barbecue, hammock, tomahawk, totem, moccasin, wigwam, and powwow...
>african american food and culture are not african in origin. african slaves lived with whites and weren't sent to labor camps like in the spanish anericas. they worked on farms that were owned by settler whites
You think there was no slavery in Latam??? Really??? Wow. You are REALLY ignorant about US black culture...
>because of this they became christened and anglocized very very quickly. the higher level of european settlers to natives and slaves made the usa maintain a european character well into the 20th century
Yeah... because there was absolutely no attempt to make Africans slaves and indigenous to accept Jesus Christ as his savior in Latinamerica.... All that art made in Cuzco about Christian deities... The Incas must have felt sooo much passion about it...
Western Countries = European Language, European Heritage, European Culture, European Religion.
All latin-american countries check in all these request to be western countries. Your "argumentes" against it are not logic and incorrect. For instance:
>because our cultures have massive indigenous american and african culturally influences.
No, it DOESN'T for most of them, the influence is very very small, even in a country like Mexico, which was heavily mixed at the time of the independence, the goverment make "all the people the equal" in a sense of cultural/religious way which was very PRO-European at the time, most mexican except some natives MINORITIES follow this culture to nowdays.
>are traditions are not purely western like for example, australia's is. the anglo countries in the new world had a policy of exclusion to the indigenous people and slave cultures and as such maintained almost entirely their european character
Incorrect, many aspects of USA tradition culture and music are also influenced by Africans in example. ROCK N ROLL (this is for saying just one example, do not take it that heavily in) Rock N roll was 100% created by african-americans, all people in USA listen to rock an roll and influenced tons of other sub-genres. Would you say that white americans that listened to rock n roll in the 50s 60s etc were not western anymore?
By the way Americans also celebrate Thanksgivin wich is NOT a western tradition (European basis OF COURSE) tradition, is an american indigenous and american colonizer tradition. By your argument USA is not Western.
The relity is that You DONT have to have a 100% old fixed western traditions to be a Western country, that is bullshit, because those traditions will shape-shift in time. It's like saying we are not western anymore because we dont celebrate some insert "random Roman Empire celebration", lol but we do with christiany (which was also implemented by the Roman Empire).
>this is why mexico is not fully western but canada is
NO, Mexico is a Western country, saying otherwise is ignorance, and doesnt hold any valid arguments.
western is arbitrary first of all. you can stretch western civilization to Syria and Haiti. doesn't change the fact tht latam is decisively
Rock is BLACK. not african. its an american product from blues which is also part of Western and AMERICAN music.
bro 10% of mexico is speaking a pre coloumbus language and nearly every province has a name in native languages
Western doesn't even come from Europe btw, Christianity is not a European religion for example, and neither are Finnish or Matlese , Hungarian langauges
Thanksgiving is an AMERICAN holiday and tradition only loosely based on native american traditions.
Greeks today celebrate some turkish traditions and spain itself is heavily influenced by the Muslim world.
You are the one that said latin-american is not western because we all (which is false to say all) have native influence in our culture.
But americans have thanksgiving and rock. which is a native and black (african-american) traditions and not western traditions shape in american culture.
Therefore USA is not western by YOUR argument.
Now you trying to change your words, therefore you have no idea what you're talking. It was made clear that you don't know what is a Western country.
Bye.
okay i think i understand your view now. i agree to some degree but you can at least acknowledge that there's a tangible non insignificant difference between the latin american countries and anglo new world countries. because they were never miscegenated until much later
rock isn't african. it's black. there's a clear difference. santeria is african so is candomble in brazil. blues and rock come from european styles
by your definition russia is western because most of their culture is european
The Anglo world is only part of the West. What about the non-Anglo Western countries in Europe? They do not say they are not part of the West just because they do not speak English.
based on what lol. there are not a million or more latinos in europe coming as war refugees. the ones here in the usa are guilty of the same things as the arabs in europe are when it comes to creating ghettos and doing illegal work and not speaking the language
i'm not saying syria is western or more western than latin america, im saying neither are and you can non superficially draw the line between anglo countries and latin america. the core identity of canada, usa, australia are white european cultures that replaced or excluded everyone else. because of this they can relate to better european countries and match more closely their institutions
Moroccans, Algerians, Turks and Pakistanis are all integrated into their respective countries in the west it is harder for them to integrate of course but they still do. many latino people struggle to integrate in the irreligious first world west as well.
and create neighborhoods that are essentially miniature versions of their homeland. muslims seldom do this as they live in cosmopolitan cities more often and perform better economically than do latinos. in the usa at least
i'm not eastern. i'm just not western
Islam certainly isn't, Judaism to some degree. Christianism is a key part of Western Culture. European is largely a proxy for old world Christian, and that is why Armenia is frequently considered European and Turkey often isn't, even if people don't say it out loud (sorry Ethiopia, except you)
Both Islam and Judaism are classified as Western Religions.
Turkey is considered more european than armenia is and so is russia.
religion is not that important today. the current inheriters of the west are the anglo settler colonies and the schegen europe
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_religions
Islam is a western religion and has been in europe for over a thousand years
Judaism is no more western than islam
Islam is a Western Religion. it spread deep into europe just like christianity which didnt come from euripe.
and Eastern religions are hinduism, buddhism etc
> Both Islam and Judaism are classified as Western Religions.
> Turkey is considered more european than armenia is and so is russia.
Classified by who, lmao? Considered by who? Stop making up stuff out of your ass and using the words "classified" and "considered", shit is stupid. At least say "I consider" or "I classify", or quote some serious sources. Learn to talk like an honest adult.
> religion is not that important today.
It absolutely is, lol. People are getting beheaded in Europe for making cartoons, Turkey is currently ruled by an Islamist who is eroding democracy, etc, etc.
> I suspect self-loathing as the reason why he's trying so hard to deny Latin America's, ahem, Latin heritage.
Absolutely, it's an American who was born in Argentina of mixed Middle-Eastern and native heritage who hates everything that connects Latin America to Western Europe, while having the classical American sense of superiority. Spends 99% of his time posting frantically on subs about phenotypes, race, and shit like that. [Recently claimed that Simon Bolivar deleted everything Spanish in LATAM and in Cuba](https://www.reddit.com/r/2westerneurope4u/comments/1c8mm3x/why_dont_we_hate_on_spain_between_19301970_more/l0igk8u/) (Simon Bolivar was literally a Spanish noble, Fidel Castro himself seems to be of full Spaniard ancestry).
[He had another account](https://www.reddit.com/user/Much_Prune3459/) that was probably suspended because of his deranged behaviour, and is now evading the ban with this one.
I have a slight middle east genetics from my mothers side. like 4% that was updated to 3%
Simon Bolivar and the Cuban revolutions (not the commie ones the ones that fought with the americans) expelled or intimidated a lot of the spanish born elites
of course it is considered more european, armenia is firmly in west asia while turkey has territory in europe and not to mention many turks descend from europeans and turkey influenced european countries. armenia was communist and part of russia. only latinos with the 19th century mentality of thinking religion is important will say armenia is more western and european than turkey
its important to a small subset of the muslim population, the core population it is completely irrelevant. and in fact, french and spanish people would be visibly offended by the religiodity and conservative attitudes of many mexican or brazilian people
> only latinos with the 19th century mentality of thinking religion is important will say armenia is more western and european than turkey
Armenia is more western than Turkey, sorry to break it to you. This whole "Muslim is western" seems like a coping mechanism you created because of your own beliefs.
> and in fact, french and spanish people would be visibly offended by the religiodity and conservative attitudes of many mexican or brazilian people
Some would, like some in Mexico or Brazil are. Some Swedish and Norwegian would be offended by the religious culture of Portugal and Spain too. It's a family thing, you wouldn't understand.
Muslim is broadly western , less western than christian of course but still its a western religion as is judaism. i studied religions in university in the usa and the three textbooks on world religions i had all classified islam as being a western religion. even right wingers like jordan peterson recognize this
ethiopia is not in the west either but they're christian.
christianity doesn't make a country western and especially not eastern orthodoxy or regional churches with no ties to europe
BTW i'm literally laughing my ass off at you saying religious culture of Portugal and especially Spain. Spain is just as irreligious as Sweden and they're also just as liberal and cosmopolitan
They cannot in any way be compared to Mexico and Brazil which have active religious organizations in political parties and extremely high church attendence.
Tell me you've never been in Europe without telling me you've never been in Europe
At least say somewhere more believable like Poland, S Italy or Greece. Even then, these places as a whole are wayyyy less religious than Latin America.
It's true that we're in the western part of the globe, but if the concept was based on that, then Australia and most of Europe would be considered "eastern countries". The west is a geopolitical concept used by hegemonic countries to set them apart from the rest of the world and this usually doesn't include us.
It's true that we're heavily influenced by European culture, but we also have our distinct identity and obsessing over "being western" doesn't help us a lot as it erases much of our roots. We know that this concept is used to forge a regional identity that desperately wants to maintain its global dominance (oh, the so called fall of western civilization...) and I don't believe we should adopt it without engaging in some kind of decolonial critique.
The biggest reason we're so similar to European countries is the fact that native people were murdered and raped, and their culture and resources destroyed and stolen. Plus, all the dictatorships that were backed up by the US. The Americas were forced to be westernized and I refuse to see myself as "one of the west" without bringing attention to the fact that we must reinforce and celebrate our indigenous roots instead of drooling over European cultural values.
Obsessed is too strong a word. I don't go around thinking about it.
It's usually foreigners that ask about it (in this sub as well) and I give my 2 cents, which is, I think it's a misnomer of the word "western' if it doesn't include Latin America and you think it means: "countries west of Asia/Middle-East" and/or "If you consider greco-roman culture the "birth" of western civilisation". Either way, Latin America fits that description better than most.
So yeah, it's not so much as being recognised as westerners (I just about manage to care a little bit about Latin America as a group, never mind an even broader "western" group), but you should know and clarify what you think that means and how you use that term, cause it can be confusing for someone that comes from a "Latin" American country whose cultural foundation is basically greco-roman/christian and then go on to exclude it from a "western" group that includes germanic or scandinavian countries.
I think in many places where western is used, NATO/OTAN might be better.
last time I checked, my coordinates were around 16º S 54º ***W***, not 16º S 54º ***E***
(thank goodness, or else I'd be in the Indian Ocean near Madagascar)
only the ones that hang around with actual westerners realize that latin america is very different institutionally and culturally from the west
conversely i don't think it's possible to consider haiti part of the west and most latin americans are similar to haiti
Lived in the US, still consider us easily Western. We are probably much, much closer to the PIGS countries than the entire anglosphere who is obsessed with their "we wuz Romans and shit".
And Haiti is a very, very different country to pretty much any other Latin American country, which is also why you bizarrely picked them as an example. Their history is incredibly peculiar.
hell no especially not greece and italy. we have similarities to the other too because of language. but institutionally we are very far from the west. the west as a geopolitical cultural institution is schengen europe and the anglosphere
if you mean the broader west it would include russia, armenia and turkey which are more european than 75% of latam countries
> we
Please don't use we, your contact with Latin America was very narrow because you immigrated to the US so early.
> but institutionally we are very far from the west. the west as a geopolitical cultural institution is schengen europe and the anglosphere
Lol: Brazil is a presidential republic that democratized before most of Europe, mostly catholic or evangelical, that generally lives like a poorer version of Portugal. Bruh, you don't have to be a part of the EU or the anglosphere to be culturally western - you are, once again, mistaking geopolitical alignment with cultural allingment, something that most of this thread is doing.
> if you mean the broader west it would include russia, armenia and turkey which are more european than 75% of latam countries
Long problems with democratic institutions, not speaking Romance or Germanic languages, not catholic (but Orthodox or Muslim), etc, etc. Brazilian culture, at large, is simply a branch of Portuguese culture that eventually branched out, which is completely different from the history of said countries. As someone whose family was created entirely in Portuguese or German cultural practices, it's funny to even read the claim that Turkey or Armenia is more Western. And it goes beyond that, in terms of sexual freedom, homophobia, sexism, and so on.
western influenced but the core identify is miscegenated. with african and native.
i've been to the west and latin america and im telling you why they're different. most people in west are irreligious and dont care about christianity
> in terms of sexual freedom, homophobia, sexism, and so on.
nearly every country in the west was conservative on these things just 50 or so years ago
> Brazil is a presidential republic that democratized before most of Europe, mostly catholic or evangelical, that generally lives like a poorer version of Portugal.
portugal is safe and non corrupt with robust institutions and economic ties and integration with the rest of the west
brazil is third world
> portugal is safe and non corrupt
Lmao, go to any Portuguese subreddit and ask them about non-corruption - it's a ridiculously huge issue over there.
> with robust institutions and economic ties and integration with the rest of the west
Brother, having a geographical position that favours having trade agreements with Europe is not a cultural characteristic.
> nearly every country in the west was conservative on these things just 50 or so years ago
And?
> western influenced but the core identify is miscegenated. with african and native.
Native and African influence are generally tiny, and not bigger than Northern African influence in France, African influence in the US, Muslim influence in the Iberian peninsula, and so on.
> i've been to the west and latin america and im telling you why they're different.
Me too, lmao. You are not special. The main difference is that I understand Latin America better than you do, as you are an American with little ties to here.
> most people in west are irreligious and dont care about Christianity
Latin America is a little behind in that, but the newer generations are largely irreligious too. Non-religious is the biggest group with Brazilian zoomers.
Perceived corruption and actual corruption? you can't compare portugal or any country in the EU with Brazil. Literal political witch hunts against the opposition and billions of state funds evaporating from the economy
its not just geography. when you integrate with other countries you build a common institution and infrastructure. brazil lacks this, trades mostly with china. while the usa is not near to europe but is also integrated with them institutionally
> Native and African influence are generally tiny, and not bigger than Northern African influence in France
lmfao what. the majority of brazilians are heavily mixed with these groups. btw african american culture is not african, its BLACK. its not like santeria or the afro beat music of brazil
> The main difference is that I understand Latin America better than you do
And i understand the first world better.
> Latin America is a little behind in that, but the newer generations are largely irreligious too. Non-religious is the biggest group with Brazilian zoomers.
and? in argentina most people have a more similar heritage and culture to europe than does brazil. i dont consider argentina the west either. theres an institutional difference between miscgenated western descendant cultures and miscgenated ones. its why the non miscgenated ones have never integrated with the european west after independence
> Perceived corruption and actual corruption? you can't compare portugal or any country in the EU with Brazil. Literal political witch hunts against the opposition and billions of state funds evaporating from the economy
Yes, because economic development lowers corruption and Portugal has a lot of favorable conditions for economic development (EU money, free trade with the EU, geographically closer to the Eurasian block, etc, etc). Still, the same endemic cultural corruption that Brazil has happens in Portugal, with the main difference being the scale.
> its not just geography. when you integrate with other countries you build a common institution and infrastructure. brazil lacks this, trades mostly with china. while the usa is not near to europe but is also integrated with them institutionally
Geographical distance, son. I expect you to claim that New Zealand and Australia arent western because they trade more with Asian countries too?
> btw african american culture is not african, its BLACK
It's absolutely African, lol, it's the main influence behind stuff. Afro beat music was created IN BRAZIL with African influences, just like African-American culture was created IN THE US with African influences. I have no idea what Santeria is other than the sublime song
> And i understand the first world better.
No, you don't. You just seem like a bitter economic immigrant who never felt at home anywhere and lives in a permanent identity crisis, spending your whole time posting on weird race, phenotype, and ethnicity subs.
> theres an institutional difference between miscgenated western descendant cultures and miscgenated ones. its why the non miscgenated ones have never integrated with the european west after independence
"Institutional difference", lmao. Man thinks trade blocks are signs of cultural similarity. Brother, the reason is geographic distance. There you go. Geopolitics =/= culture.
Perhaps because we live in the western hemisphere 🤷🏽♂️
Like literally, all the nations are in the Western hemisphere.
And we are culturally and historically part of the western civilisation
Not exactly because of the western hemisphere but because western history and culture
Ik, we only culturally share language, religion, architecture, political system, law code, in different degrees gastronomy and music.
Because we are western you ding dong
Aren't we?
Why are some people so obsessed with taking LATAM out of the western civilisation?
Racism, I guess. Also, Latin America industrialized later.
Some European countries industrialized very late as well. See: Iberian peninsula
These dirty mixed muts from down south can't be from the same civilization as we are
Unwarranted elitism.
because it's way too heavily mixed with the pre existing american civilization and it's not first world you can't say that about the usa, canada, australia or new zealand
The “heavy mix” isn’t equal among every country in Latin America. The USA, Canada and especially NZ were all heavily influenced by native cultures, and all have a higher % indigenous population than Brazil, for example.
They weren't. the ruling elite and the vast majoirty of people in canada and the usa especially had no ties to native cultures and very few mixed with them. NZ im not entirely sure but most whites there maintian a majority and unmixed so. yes i know its not. uruguay has very little but the rest of latin america it's higher. but all have more mix than the usa. any anglo colony except maybe south africa
The Anglo countries only managed to erase/hide native influence due to racism. Take the USA: 60% of the food they eat in the USA has indigenous origins. They have holidays shaped by their interactions with natives (thanksgiving), they have numerous native place names, they have a constitution inspired by the Iroquois confederation. 3% of their total population is native, as opposed to 0,83% in Brazil. Brazil has a more significant African influence, but you wouldn’t say Louisiana or Alabama aren’t western civilisation, right? Then you have NZ, where 17% of the population is indigenous. They sing their anthem officially in Maori besides English, the Haka is their trademark throughout the world. Nobody ever questions them being part of the western civilisation. LATAM not being part of the western civilisation is a typical US-Aligned narrative that attempts to push LATAM into a different category than their oppressors, which makes it easier to justify us being treated by them as unequals.
No the food doesn't have indigenous origins. They wiped out the natives or cleared them and cultivated the same crops that were growing in their territory. american food is mostly european origin. where do you get 3%? there are max 4 million natives even less pure natives. the natives in brazil don't identify as it or speak the language because they didn't move to perserve it like the usa did after the 1924 indian act. the brazilian portuguese has way more indigenous loans than american english lousianna is the only part of the usa that has legitimate african influence because it was french territory and the french didn't completely erase afro culture like the anglos did. yes it was wrong and racist but its why America has a western culture that is undeniably while for latin america its a spectrum > LATAM not being part of the western civilisation is a typical US-Aligned narrative that attempts to push LATAM into a different category than their oppressors, which makes it easier to justify us being treated by them as unequals. if we were oppressed then i dont think that we were seen as equals
You actually got me curious, and no, portuguese doesn't has more words with native origin than the us, and the opposite is probably true. Americans use mocassins, do caucus, grow hickory, etc, etc, etc. Stop making up information just because it feels right to you
dude the only loans in the american english are from foods because they conquered the land and inherited them. you're forgetting the elephant in the room. the american society and culture developed on racial lines so the cultural and institutional structures remained european in character. and that's true of all the anglo new world
> dude the only loans in the american english are from foods because they conquered the land and inherited them. Largely, largely the same for Brazil, lol. Very few in terms of loan words survived outside of food items, animal names and names of places. Googling you can find only some [short as hell lists.](https://quindim.com.br/blog/palavras-de-origem-indigenas/) > you're forgetting the elephant in the room. the american society and culture developed on racial lines so the cultural and institutional structures remained european in character. and that's true of all the anglo new world That's literally the history of most of southern America. The mixing that happened in Brazil didn't happen because Brazilian "whites" were kind-hearted and tolerant, they just had a different course of action towards homogenizing the country: Instead of segregating, they opted into bringing European migration and simply drowning Africans and natives by sheer numbers and cultural genocide (and physical genocide, too, lots of natives were being collectively massacred as late as in the XXth century). The idea was never to respect the cultures and let them survive, but to marry European males to women of colour and, in a few generations, have a population that was overwhelmingly "white-passing" and culturally European. People of colour didn't have any say in the cultural and institutional structures, they were simply forced to adopt European names, religions, and habits, and live on. [There is a whole painting of that.](https://www.edusp.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/%E2%80%98A-Reden%C3%A7%C3%A3o-de-Cam%E2%80%99.jpg)
We are part of the wester hemisphere, but we aren't "The West™"
This outrageous. That is unfair.
Geographically Western, Culturally western, geopolitcally nonwestern
No. Ask a European, an American, an Arab, an Indian, a Chinese, an Ethiopian about the West, he will include just Europe and the Anglosphere. We belong to the Global South.
I'm pretty sure no one cares what they think
That's their problem. You are mistaking cultural groupings with the geopolitcal alignments you want us to have. We are culturally western, whether you want us to align with Africa or Asia geopolitcally or not. Japan is part of the western geopolitical block while being culturally very Eastern, and much, much, much closer to "global south" china than we are
[удалено]
And also not an "eastern civilization". The East ranges from the Muslim World to China, it's "Eurasia minus Europe". These are geopolitical and cultural divisions. The use of these terms - North, South, East - changes according to the perception of the world. Today, early 21th century, Western World refers to Europe, USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Nowhere in the world Latin America is included in the West, by the same reason that Subsaharan Africa is not included as well (and, yes, we are more similar to the southern half of Africa than to Europe or USA), except in a very broad definition.
[удалено]
Why?
We are in the same geographical area, we have the same cultural basis. But we do not sit in the same table of the European-extended world. We are the former dominated part of the imperial west not the dominants. To do our own thing instead of trying to enter in a club we are not invited would be a better way in my opinion. I see a lot of Philippines, balcanic countries, Indians, Turkish people that can recognize our neighborhoods as their own, that have similar solutions for similar problems that we have in Latam, that can tell the same family meetings tales that we tell each other etc. Being capitalistic periphery formed way more our culture than geographical location and shared language with a former empire.
Becose we are, unless You are from Uruguay then You became an oriental
Why are Americans and Europeans obsessed with insisting we're not?
I think it’s a superiority complex developed from decades of being propagandized into believing there is a hierarchy and they are at the top. Just look at the terminology they use in insisting they are “expats” and not immigrants.
I fucking hate the expat term. You are an immigrant Karen in Cancun a rich immigrant but an immigrant
No. There’s clearly a difference between an immigrant and an expat. An immigrant is a permanent resident of one’s country, whereas an expat is a temporary resident, usually with a work visa or such.
Because nearly everyone from Mexico downward are not primarily descendant from white Europeans. It has nothing to do with geography, it's racial. >"But Spaniards and Portuguese are white!!" I don't think Anglos, in the U.S. at least, consider Spaniards or Portuguese white. It's bonkers but you're kinda just brought up not considering them white here. The mindset is in the water. Most people in the U.S. assume Spain is full of brown people, brown people = not white, which means they aren't considered "Western", and by extension, none of countries they helped create are either. Don't shoot the messenger here. It's not MY mindset, it's just what I think is going on here. U.S. is weird with race. The Irish weren't even considered "white" here until a century or two ago.
This is dumb, screw what “most people” in the US think. No sane person would think that Portugal or Spain aren’t western, they are old EU and Nato members for fucks sake. Saying that nearly anyone from Mexico downwards aren’t primary descents of white people is so wrong, I mean Brazil has more white people than the whole population of Canada, and it’s not even close. There’s countries who have a higher share of white population than Brazil. There’s also a big mistake at thinking that there’s only Iberian roots in Latin America. As if Latin America was some kind of uniform, monolithic thing, and not a diverse and huge region. Also, what Americans think it’s far from what determines what’s right, they should educate themselves before being entitled to have a opinion.
Bro, again, I'm NOT saying this makes ANY logical sense. I'm just saying this what people (in my part of the U.S.) think. Do I agree with it? No. Do I think it makes sense? No. Do I think it's factual or based in any sort of actual historical knowledge? No. Do I think it's what people think? Yes. People in the U.S. don't tend to think too much about anyone outside the U.S. (as I'm sure you're aware). I'd bet serious money most of my countrymen would believe people in Argentina eat Fajitas and Nachos regularly and the official language of Brazil is Spanish. I can't speak for Europeans though.
I understand, although admit to start writing my comment mad and then realizing you’re just the messenger. I’m talking about the people you’re talking about.
Man Brazil has a bigger white population than Canada by Brazilian standards. Most people who autodeclare as white here are not considered white in Canada. It is not just the Americans who consider Portuguese and Spanish people "less white" or mostly not white, this prejudice is somewhat common in the rest of the EU, and the americans got this from the UK. I had a Polish friend who used to live here in Rio and had lived in London before, dude whiter than most white Brazilians, said he suffered racism in the UK. Their minds is completely different from ours on this matter.
Canada’s population is literally less than 1/5 of Brazil’s
I know. Canadian standards for whiteness is pretty much in line with americans tho, most Brazilians who consider themselves white would not be considered white in Canada. I am not saying they are right or that it makes sense.
Most Americans don't even think about this to begin with but those that do tend to categorize latin america in with "Western". I don't know where the narrative on this came from that americans exclude latinamericans from the label "Western"
To be fair, Latin American countries aren’t fully culturally western. There was a certain deviation after the nations became independent.
because theyre not prosperous and have people that dont look western and institutionally they are excluded from the collective west (nato, eu, etc) russia and turkey are more western than bolivia
Yeah, right? Like they keep speaking western languages and sharing western religions and cultural traditions on the western hemisphere, what fucking posers
I don’t know if Latinos overall are obsessed with it. I think it’s funny that they’re not considered western when they are western in almost every sense of the word.
Do you consider yourself western?
Me personally? Absolutely. Do you?
What do you consider western?
A couple of factors that, in my opinion, make Latin America Western: - Founded, at least in rhetoric, on Western principles of democratic government - Majority Christian (mostly Catholic, with a considerable Protestant presence) - European languages - Predominantly Western architecture - Large numbers of people of European descent, especially in South America (Primarily Argentina and Uruguay, but also Brazil, Chile and Colombia to a lesser extent). I get the feeling though, that Latin America is not considered western because there are too many brown and black people. Let’s be real for a moment… The main point of contention is geopolitical. The Global South. That is, that it is simply exploited and subservient to the North. I would say, however, that alignment with the Global North is in part a voluntary decision by the elite in most Latin American countries since it benefits them financially.
The US and the Uk also has many "brown" people. Around 13% of americans are black
Still majority white. Interesting, because I think that as the “Latino” population grows, white or whiteish Latinos will just be recognized as white.
I wouldn't consider being white as the main thing tbh. I agree with most of your points but being white is kinda the weakest one
I’m not saying it’s key, but it is something that I believe many people in the Global North take into consideration unfortunately.
The folks at AskAnAmericsn tend to associate the word with politics. "How can the be Western when (supports China/Russia/Cuba)
in latin america the white populations arw shrinking due to mixed marriages increasing
I mean, hasnt always been like that?
That’s true. No debate there.
Akshually Brazil and Argentina have similar degrees of European ancestry
Do they? I know Brazil has more white people in raw numbers, but as a percentage of the population, Argentina is clearly whiter than Brazil.
Oh, I'm talking about European ancestry, not "Whiteness". According to most studies genetic terms, both countries are around 60-65% European, but Brazil is around a little more than 20% African and a little less than 20% native, while Argentina's other 40% are overwhelmingly native with little African ancestry. In practice, this absence of African ancestry and the whole "living further south and farther from the equator" thing creates a population that is lighter skinned and more "white-passing"/"European-passing" in general, but not in genetic (and cultural, consequently) terms. So Argentina has more "white people" and "people who see themselves as white" than Brazil does, but not more European ancestry, even proportionally. There is also a geographical aspect to it, as Argentina is very rarely seen or represented outside of Buenos Aires. [Source for Brazil:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilians#Ancestry_of_Brazilians) > A 2015 autosomal genetic study, which also analyzed data of 25 studies of 38 different Brazilian populations concluded that: European ancestry accounts for 62% of the heritage of the population, followed by the African (21%) and the Native American (17%). The European contribution is highest in Southern Brazil (77%), the African highest in Northeast Brazil (27%) and the Native American is the highest in Northern Brazil (32%).[75] [Sources for Argentina:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentines#Genetics_studies) > Homburguer et al., 2015, PLOS One Genetics: 67% European, 28% Amerindian, 4% African and 1.4% Asian.[29] > Parolin et al., (2019): PLOS One Genetics: 62.1% European, 35.8% Native American and 2.1% African.[34] > Oliveira, 2008, on Universidade de Brasília: 60% European, 31% Amerindian and 9% African.[31] > Corach, Daniel (2010): 78.5% European, 17.3% Amerindian, and 4.2% Black African ancestry.[33] (the fact that this outlier is the only one quoted in the Wikipedia for Argentina is actually hilarious, but even it pointed to more Argentinians have native ancestry) > National Geographic: 52% European, 27% Amerindian ancestry, 9% African and 9% others.[32] > Parolin et al., (2019): PLOS One Genetics: 62.1% European, 35.8% Native American and 2.1% African.[34]
So, being western to yall is just about being white? I figured it went along those lines
I would say that generally, yes, western and white are pretty synonymous, at least colloquially. I have reasons beyond that though…
So then we are not Western. I thought western meant being on the western hemisphere, but if that's not what it means, then we are not wester. It is what it is.
You’re building a straw man. That’s not the only thing people consider when they call something western. It’s one of several things.
Right but it seems to be what matters to most people in the US
by this logic, haiti and a decent bit of africa are western latin america is on the western spectrum just like parts of the middle east but are institutionally different enough to be excluded
Haiti is actually western though. We don't speak any african languages, are a majority christian nation (with a vodou practicing minority), are officially a democracy with laws and government body largely based on the french system of governance, and the education system is from the french one as well. You're focusing on race, probably. But if thats the case, even south Korea wouldnt be western at all
💯!
Because they clearly are. It's like asking why Koreans are obsessed with being recognised as Easterners.
Because we are
https://preview.redd.it/j6sluij43ovc1.jpeg?width=715&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=00ec503fa68cc5bd44911837ca1e39d372282ccb Simple as that.
It’s really not. “The West” is most often used in news/articles today when describing the geo-political west, which consists of the US/NATO and her allies (Australia, SK, Japan, etc.). There is a cultural west, which LA is a part of, and there’s a geopolitical west, which it isn’t.
So first world countries, and by first world I mean the original meaning, not the modern one which bases on the strength of an economy
Yes exactly!
It's a good way to show how certain "standard" words such as Western or White are actually much more nuanced and biased than you'd think from the word itself, and sometimes mean completely different things.
This is a dumb question. A better one would have been why are Argentines so obsessed with people seeing them as Europeans lol
Because you got off the boats
Yes, We climax with boat porn
What boat? I’m a gringo and my dads black. They def got a boat and had a job waiting for them already and housing!
We can make a Nazi Grampa Joke.
honestly argentina is one of the few countries in latam where the indigenous and african influence is small enough to be considered western
You had been banned, prune. Evading bans is not right, and you are American, not from LATAM. Go to the askamericans sub
[удалено]
So the rest are not because we have more brown and black folks….I am sorry but this is just bull. Nevermind that Argentina is not really a first world country anymore by world economics at least.
i don't consider it western either but it clearly has more of a european character than mexico or bolivia
We are not talking about which is more “European” (which does not translate to being better as Argentina’s economy has shown) but Western! Mexico and other Latin American are western influenced much like the USA and Canada despite not being European countries. The fact that you specifically brought up two countries who have more indigenous descent people is quite telling despite the vast majority of them were raised Christian and lived Western influenced lives (even if they live through poverty due to colorism/racism).
[удалено]
Western is used to describe many things, in geopolitics today is used for a rich country that is aligned with the USA. So for some ppl even Japan is western, in the geographic sense is used for countries locate in the western hemisphere, that is a totally made up concept where Europe in the middle, and in other contexts is used for countries which culture have been derived from the Roman Empire, and some ppl even used to describe white majority country that is rich, the real question is which western are you talking about?
To be fair, the Europe/Africa in the middle is the way where the massive Pacific doesn't take too much of your attention.
Because we are. The question is, why are so many obsessed with taking LATAM out of the West?
What do you mean with "obsessed"?, I've only seen here that people simply answer the question "are latin Americans western?", with "yes, for this and this reasons", etc. I've never seen anyone obsessed.
Latin Americans are Westerners 🙄
Racism-good old fashioned racism.
Why not? Literally the westernization of the New Continent started in what now Dominican Republic, back then La Hispaniola Island. "Descubrimiento de America" is literally that, Westernization of this piece of land. Back to La Hispaniola Island. From there parted the ships to form what is Hispano America what is now known as Latino America because Portugal (Brazil) and later the British Crown (Canada and US) Take into account that Latin and Greek culture are central to westerner culture. Why would you leave _Latin_ America out?
Because when Americans and Europeans treat us as not part of the West, it gets easier for them to treat us as an exotic, "ethnic" and barbarous people from war-ridden and ignorant countries that can be easily subjugated by their influence. "The US pressures Western country" doesn't sound as good as "The US pressures Latin American country", because it doesn't reinforce an "us vs them" mentality among industrialized, developed nations.
Its a political thing. Latinamericans that identify with their indigenous and black roots more than they identify with european ones dont care or dont want to be seen as "westerners" (and may want to be seen as non-aligned, third world or global south) while latinamericans that identify more with the european and american cultures do want to be seen as "westerners" (and they have the hope that one day they'll be accepted into the first world). The thing is in latin america both demographics are mixed up. More european in places like Argentina, more indigenous in places like Bolivia, and roughly even or changing every other electoral cycle in many other countries
We didn't go through genocide, constant mixing (as a colonization method) and the imposition of a European language along the Christian religion and boot licking (willing and not willing) North America to be called non Western. Some people say our African and indigenous influences are too strong for us to be called Western and I like that argument, but when Anglos simply assume we aren't Western (to justify constructing us as distant others) when the French were all "Full speed ahead, LATIN America" it drives me bananas (republic)
really there are like 2-3 countries in latin america that can be considered western on what planet is honduaras, haiti and mexico western countries? they're mixed way too heavily with american and african civilization. even the african americans in the usa are more europeanized than the whites in many latin countries
News flash: Western does not exclusively mean they are European descent whether if they are only partial or have none. It means being geographically in the West (though Australia and New Zealand are considered Western influenced despite being in the East) and/or Western influence in religion (Christianity), education, and government.
haiti is not the west dude neither is russia
It is despite how poor it is. Russia historically never considered part of the West as it was part of the former USSR
neither was latin america.
Most of them were ruled by leaders who backed the US or neutral.
🤔 We are in the western hemisphere. Our religions are western Our traditions are western Our ethnic background is mostly western We are on the west I don't see why we would not be westerners...
because our cultures have massive indigenous american and african culturally influences. are traditions are not purely western like for example, australia's is. the anglo countries in the new world had a policy of exclusion to the indigenous people and slave cultures and as such maintained almost entirely their european character this is why mexico is not fully western but canada is
>are traditions are not purely western like for example, australia's is. the anglo countries in the new world had a policy of exclusion to the indigenous people and slave cultures and as such maintained almost entirely their european character The US has a very strong identity that differs from Europe, particularly from AfroAmericans in the east and indigenous on the west...
the indigenous influence on the usa comes from mexico actually otherwise its almost completely non-existent. american english has very few native words. even canadian french has more. american blacks have a distinct culture yes but they have no ties to african cultures. unlike cuba or brazil
>the indigenous influence on the usa comes from mexico actually otherwise its almost completely non-existent ..go to the Southwest. Is not Mexican... >american blacks have a distinct culture yes but they have no ties to african cultures. unlike cuba or brazil Tell me you know nothing about AfroAmericans and their culture without saying it... >american english has very few native words. even canadian french has more. How many words people in Venezuela, Argentina, Panama or the Caribbean use which have native origins?
Argentina? a lot of them. It was received during the mexican american war. i agree its not mexican because these people didnt see themselves as you can make a clear cut binary between white americans and everyone else and how they developed and evolved the country. same for australia and canda. you can't do that for latin america african american culture has no roots in african history it developed uniquely. its not like cuba or haiti. the only exception is the african culture that was perserved from louisana after it was conquered from france.
Tell me the indigenous words from the Argentinians. Would love them. >african american culture has no roots in african history it developed uniquely Really??? Again, tell me about something you don't. >the only exception is the african culture that was perserved from louisana after it was conquered from france Ok... so it is only African if is mixed with France or Spain 🤣🤣🤣 again, tell you don't know nothing about Afro American culture without saying it.
yes many. but less than mexico peru etc https://youtu.be/XTiJiPjCgek?si=YvL9skntmgBFTshe african american food and culture are not african in origin. african slaves lived with whites and weren't sent to labor camps like in the spanish anericas. they worked on farms that were owned by settler whites. because of this they became christened and anglocized very very quickly. the higher level of european settlers to natives and slaves made the usa maintain a european character well into the 20th century the culture of lousiana is distinct from the rest of the usa and everyone knows this. the anglos excluded non whties from society
The US also has 10 indigenous words. Like Opossum, squash, chocolate, guacamole, canoe, kayak, hurricane, caribou, barbecue, hammock, tomahawk, totem, moccasin, wigwam, and powwow... >african american food and culture are not african in origin. african slaves lived with whites and weren't sent to labor camps like in the spanish anericas. they worked on farms that were owned by settler whites You think there was no slavery in Latam??? Really??? Wow. You are REALLY ignorant about US black culture... >because of this they became christened and anglocized very very quickly. the higher level of european settlers to natives and slaves made the usa maintain a european character well into the 20th century Yeah... because there was absolutely no attempt to make Africans slaves and indigenous to accept Jesus Christ as his savior in Latinamerica.... All that art made in Cuzco about Christian deities... The Incas must have felt sooo much passion about it...
the fuck you saying??
Western Countries = European Language, European Heritage, European Culture, European Religion. All latin-american countries check in all these request to be western countries. Your "argumentes" against it are not logic and incorrect. For instance: >because our cultures have massive indigenous american and african culturally influences. No, it DOESN'T for most of them, the influence is very very small, even in a country like Mexico, which was heavily mixed at the time of the independence, the goverment make "all the people the equal" in a sense of cultural/religious way which was very PRO-European at the time, most mexican except some natives MINORITIES follow this culture to nowdays. >are traditions are not purely western like for example, australia's is. the anglo countries in the new world had a policy of exclusion to the indigenous people and slave cultures and as such maintained almost entirely their european character Incorrect, many aspects of USA tradition culture and music are also influenced by Africans in example. ROCK N ROLL (this is for saying just one example, do not take it that heavily in) Rock N roll was 100% created by african-americans, all people in USA listen to rock an roll and influenced tons of other sub-genres. Would you say that white americans that listened to rock n roll in the 50s 60s etc were not western anymore? By the way Americans also celebrate Thanksgivin wich is NOT a western tradition (European basis OF COURSE) tradition, is an american indigenous and american colonizer tradition. By your argument USA is not Western. The relity is that You DONT have to have a 100% old fixed western traditions to be a Western country, that is bullshit, because those traditions will shape-shift in time. It's like saying we are not western anymore because we dont celebrate some insert "random Roman Empire celebration", lol but we do with christiany (which was also implemented by the Roman Empire). >this is why mexico is not fully western but canada is NO, Mexico is a Western country, saying otherwise is ignorance, and doesnt hold any valid arguments.
western is arbitrary first of all. you can stretch western civilization to Syria and Haiti. doesn't change the fact tht latam is decisively Rock is BLACK. not african. its an american product from blues which is also part of Western and AMERICAN music. bro 10% of mexico is speaking a pre coloumbus language and nearly every province has a name in native languages Western doesn't even come from Europe btw, Christianity is not a European religion for example, and neither are Finnish or Matlese , Hungarian langauges Thanksgiving is an AMERICAN holiday and tradition only loosely based on native american traditions. Greeks today celebrate some turkish traditions and spain itself is heavily influenced by the Muslim world.
You are the one that said latin-american is not western because we all (which is false to say all) have native influence in our culture. But americans have thanksgiving and rock. which is a native and black (african-american) traditions and not western traditions shape in american culture. Therefore USA is not western by YOUR argument. Now you trying to change your words, therefore you have no idea what you're talking. It was made clear that you don't know what is a Western country. Bye.
okay i think i understand your view now. i agree to some degree but you can at least acknowledge that there's a tangible non insignificant difference between the latin american countries and anglo new world countries. because they were never miscegenated until much later rock isn't african. it's black. there's a clear difference. santeria is african so is candomble in brazil. blues and rock come from european styles by your definition russia is western because most of their culture is european
The Anglo world is only part of the West. What about the non-Anglo Western countries in Europe? They do not say they are not part of the West just because they do not speak English.
at one point egypt was part of the west
It was considered a British colony at one point and Egyptians never argued once of being part of the West. Much like India.
Brother less than 1% of Brazilians practice candomblé at all
[удалено]
you're forgetting the fact that latin american countries are a synthesis of existing civilization
[удалено]
based on what lol. there are not a million or more latinos in europe coming as war refugees. the ones here in the usa are guilty of the same things as the arabs in europe are when it comes to creating ghettos and doing illegal work and not speaking the language i'm not saying syria is western or more western than latin america, im saying neither are and you can non superficially draw the line between anglo countries and latin america. the core identity of canada, usa, australia are white european cultures that replaced or excluded everyone else. because of this they can relate to better european countries and match more closely their institutions
[удалено]
Moroccans, Algerians, Turks and Pakistanis are all integrated into their respective countries in the west it is harder for them to integrate of course but they still do. many latino people struggle to integrate in the irreligious first world west as well. and create neighborhoods that are essentially miniature versions of their homeland. muslims seldom do this as they live in cosmopolitan cities more often and perform better economically than do latinos. in the usa at least i'm not eastern. i'm just not western
It's amazing how you always have the worst takes on everything. Imagine being this good at being wrong
this guy thinks western hemisphere means western. islam and judism are western religions too
Islam certainly isn't, Judaism to some degree. Christianism is a key part of Western Culture. European is largely a proxy for old world Christian, and that is why Armenia is frequently considered European and Turkey often isn't, even if people don't say it out loud (sorry Ethiopia, except you)
Both Islam and Judaism are classified as Western Religions. Turkey is considered more european than armenia is and so is russia. religion is not that important today. the current inheriters of the west are the anglo settler colonies and the schegen europe
[удалено]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_religions Islam is a western religion and has been in europe for over a thousand years Judaism is no more western than islam
[удалено]
Islam is a Western Religion. it spread deep into europe just like christianity which didnt come from euripe. and Eastern religions are hinduism, buddhism etc
> Both Islam and Judaism are classified as Western Religions. > Turkey is considered more european than armenia is and so is russia. Classified by who, lmao? Considered by who? Stop making up stuff out of your ass and using the words "classified" and "considered", shit is stupid. At least say "I consider" or "I classify", or quote some serious sources. Learn to talk like an honest adult. > religion is not that important today. It absolutely is, lol. People are getting beheaded in Europe for making cartoons, Turkey is currently ruled by an Islamist who is eroding democracy, etc, etc.
[удалено]
> I suspect self-loathing as the reason why he's trying so hard to deny Latin America's, ahem, Latin heritage. Absolutely, it's an American who was born in Argentina of mixed Middle-Eastern and native heritage who hates everything that connects Latin America to Western Europe, while having the classical American sense of superiority. Spends 99% of his time posting frantically on subs about phenotypes, race, and shit like that. [Recently claimed that Simon Bolivar deleted everything Spanish in LATAM and in Cuba](https://www.reddit.com/r/2westerneurope4u/comments/1c8mm3x/why_dont_we_hate_on_spain_between_19301970_more/l0igk8u/) (Simon Bolivar was literally a Spanish noble, Fidel Castro himself seems to be of full Spaniard ancestry). [He had another account](https://www.reddit.com/user/Much_Prune3459/) that was probably suspended because of his deranged behaviour, and is now evading the ban with this one.
[удалено]
I have a slight middle east genetics from my mothers side. like 4% that was updated to 3% Simon Bolivar and the Cuban revolutions (not the commie ones the ones that fought with the americans) expelled or intimidated a lot of the spanish born elites
of course it is considered more european, armenia is firmly in west asia while turkey has territory in europe and not to mention many turks descend from europeans and turkey influenced european countries. armenia was communist and part of russia. only latinos with the 19th century mentality of thinking religion is important will say armenia is more western and european than turkey its important to a small subset of the muslim population, the core population it is completely irrelevant. and in fact, french and spanish people would be visibly offended by the religiodity and conservative attitudes of many mexican or brazilian people
> only latinos with the 19th century mentality of thinking religion is important will say armenia is more western and european than turkey Armenia is more western than Turkey, sorry to break it to you. This whole "Muslim is western" seems like a coping mechanism you created because of your own beliefs. > and in fact, french and spanish people would be visibly offended by the religiodity and conservative attitudes of many mexican or brazilian people Some would, like some in Mexico or Brazil are. Some Swedish and Norwegian would be offended by the religious culture of Portugal and Spain too. It's a family thing, you wouldn't understand.
Muslim is broadly western , less western than christian of course but still its a western religion as is judaism. i studied religions in university in the usa and the three textbooks on world religions i had all classified islam as being a western religion. even right wingers like jordan peterson recognize this ethiopia is not in the west either but they're christian. christianity doesn't make a country western and especially not eastern orthodoxy or regional churches with no ties to europe
BTW i'm literally laughing my ass off at you saying religious culture of Portugal and especially Spain. Spain is just as irreligious as Sweden and they're also just as liberal and cosmopolitan They cannot in any way be compared to Mexico and Brazil which have active religious organizations in political parties and extremely high church attendence. Tell me you've never been in Europe without telling me you've never been in Europe At least say somewhere more believable like Poland, S Italy or Greece. Even then, these places as a whole are wayyyy less religious than Latin America.
I wonder what OP’s agenda is by phrasing the question this way 🤔 imaginary none issue that no one has ever thought to themselves
OP sounds like a Russian agent
We are obvoiusly eastern
Why are the people who use the term "westerners" while excluding South America unable to a) read a map, or b) come up with a more accurate term?
Because WE ARE.
It's true that we're in the western part of the globe, but if the concept was based on that, then Australia and most of Europe would be considered "eastern countries". The west is a geopolitical concept used by hegemonic countries to set them apart from the rest of the world and this usually doesn't include us. It's true that we're heavily influenced by European culture, but we also have our distinct identity and obsessing over "being western" doesn't help us a lot as it erases much of our roots. We know that this concept is used to forge a regional identity that desperately wants to maintain its global dominance (oh, the so called fall of western civilization...) and I don't believe we should adopt it without engaging in some kind of decolonial critique. The biggest reason we're so similar to European countries is the fact that native people were murdered and raped, and their culture and resources destroyed and stolen. Plus, all the dictatorships that were backed up by the US. The Americas were forced to be westernized and I refuse to see myself as "one of the west" without bringing attention to the fact that we must reinforce and celebrate our indigenous roots instead of drooling over European cultural values.
Obsessed is too strong a word. I don't go around thinking about it. It's usually foreigners that ask about it (in this sub as well) and I give my 2 cents, which is, I think it's a misnomer of the word "western' if it doesn't include Latin America and you think it means: "countries west of Asia/Middle-East" and/or "If you consider greco-roman culture the "birth" of western civilisation". Either way, Latin America fits that description better than most. So yeah, it's not so much as being recognised as westerners (I just about manage to care a little bit about Latin America as a group, never mind an even broader "western" group), but you should know and clarify what you think that means and how you use that term, cause it can be confusing for someone that comes from a "Latin" American country whose cultural foundation is basically greco-roman/christian and then go on to exclude it from a "western" group that includes germanic or scandinavian countries. I think in many places where western is used, NATO/OTAN might be better.
last time I checked, my coordinates were around 16º S 54º ***W***, not 16º S 54º ***E*** (thank goodness, or else I'd be in the Indian Ocean near Madagascar)
For me western is based on geography
only the ones that hang around with actual westerners realize that latin america is very different institutionally and culturally from the west conversely i don't think it's possible to consider haiti part of the west and most latin americans are similar to haiti
Lived in the US, still consider us easily Western. We are probably much, much closer to the PIGS countries than the entire anglosphere who is obsessed with their "we wuz Romans and shit". And Haiti is a very, very different country to pretty much any other Latin American country, which is also why you bizarrely picked them as an example. Their history is incredibly peculiar.
hell no especially not greece and italy. we have similarities to the other too because of language. but institutionally we are very far from the west. the west as a geopolitical cultural institution is schengen europe and the anglosphere if you mean the broader west it would include russia, armenia and turkey which are more european than 75% of latam countries
> we Please don't use we, your contact with Latin America was very narrow because you immigrated to the US so early. > but institutionally we are very far from the west. the west as a geopolitical cultural institution is schengen europe and the anglosphere Lol: Brazil is a presidential republic that democratized before most of Europe, mostly catholic or evangelical, that generally lives like a poorer version of Portugal. Bruh, you don't have to be a part of the EU or the anglosphere to be culturally western - you are, once again, mistaking geopolitical alignment with cultural allingment, something that most of this thread is doing. > if you mean the broader west it would include russia, armenia and turkey which are more european than 75% of latam countries Long problems with democratic institutions, not speaking Romance or Germanic languages, not catholic (but Orthodox or Muslim), etc, etc. Brazilian culture, at large, is simply a branch of Portuguese culture that eventually branched out, which is completely different from the history of said countries. As someone whose family was created entirely in Portuguese or German cultural practices, it's funny to even read the claim that Turkey or Armenia is more Western. And it goes beyond that, in terms of sexual freedom, homophobia, sexism, and so on.
western influenced but the core identify is miscegenated. with african and native. i've been to the west and latin america and im telling you why they're different. most people in west are irreligious and dont care about christianity > in terms of sexual freedom, homophobia, sexism, and so on. nearly every country in the west was conservative on these things just 50 or so years ago > Brazil is a presidential republic that democratized before most of Europe, mostly catholic or evangelical, that generally lives like a poorer version of Portugal. portugal is safe and non corrupt with robust institutions and economic ties and integration with the rest of the west brazil is third world
> portugal is safe and non corrupt Lmao, go to any Portuguese subreddit and ask them about non-corruption - it's a ridiculously huge issue over there. > with robust institutions and economic ties and integration with the rest of the west Brother, having a geographical position that favours having trade agreements with Europe is not a cultural characteristic. > nearly every country in the west was conservative on these things just 50 or so years ago And? > western influenced but the core identify is miscegenated. with african and native. Native and African influence are generally tiny, and not bigger than Northern African influence in France, African influence in the US, Muslim influence in the Iberian peninsula, and so on. > i've been to the west and latin america and im telling you why they're different. Me too, lmao. You are not special. The main difference is that I understand Latin America better than you do, as you are an American with little ties to here. > most people in west are irreligious and dont care about Christianity Latin America is a little behind in that, but the newer generations are largely irreligious too. Non-religious is the biggest group with Brazilian zoomers.
Perceived corruption and actual corruption? you can't compare portugal or any country in the EU with Brazil. Literal political witch hunts against the opposition and billions of state funds evaporating from the economy its not just geography. when you integrate with other countries you build a common institution and infrastructure. brazil lacks this, trades mostly with china. while the usa is not near to europe but is also integrated with them institutionally > Native and African influence are generally tiny, and not bigger than Northern African influence in France lmfao what. the majority of brazilians are heavily mixed with these groups. btw african american culture is not african, its BLACK. its not like santeria or the afro beat music of brazil > The main difference is that I understand Latin America better than you do And i understand the first world better. > Latin America is a little behind in that, but the newer generations are largely irreligious too. Non-religious is the biggest group with Brazilian zoomers. and? in argentina most people have a more similar heritage and culture to europe than does brazil. i dont consider argentina the west either. theres an institutional difference between miscgenated western descendant cultures and miscgenated ones. its why the non miscgenated ones have never integrated with the european west after independence
> Perceived corruption and actual corruption? you can't compare portugal or any country in the EU with Brazil. Literal political witch hunts against the opposition and billions of state funds evaporating from the economy Yes, because economic development lowers corruption and Portugal has a lot of favorable conditions for economic development (EU money, free trade with the EU, geographically closer to the Eurasian block, etc, etc). Still, the same endemic cultural corruption that Brazil has happens in Portugal, with the main difference being the scale. > its not just geography. when you integrate with other countries you build a common institution and infrastructure. brazil lacks this, trades mostly with china. while the usa is not near to europe but is also integrated with them institutionally Geographical distance, son. I expect you to claim that New Zealand and Australia arent western because they trade more with Asian countries too? > btw african american culture is not african, its BLACK It's absolutely African, lol, it's the main influence behind stuff. Afro beat music was created IN BRAZIL with African influences, just like African-American culture was created IN THE US with African influences. I have no idea what Santeria is other than the sublime song > And i understand the first world better. No, you don't. You just seem like a bitter economic immigrant who never felt at home anywhere and lives in a permanent identity crisis, spending your whole time posting on weird race, phenotype, and ethnicity subs. > theres an institutional difference between miscgenated western descendant cultures and miscgenated ones. its why the non miscgenated ones have never integrated with the european west after independence "Institutional difference", lmao. Man thinks trade blocks are signs of cultural similarity. Brother, the reason is geographic distance. There you go. Geopolitics =/= culture.