In one sense, this comment...
is holding Japan in a great light
but also looking down on it
as though Europe is in a position to confer honor
a Western point of view
is holding Japan in a great light
but also looking down on it
as though Europe is in a position to confer honor
a Western point of view
It is then up to any japanese / non-western readers whether they give a shit about the honour conferred by some westerners.
Honour (like most things) is subjective and varies from culture to culture. Perhaps the day a universal register of honour is established you can post your comment again when some westerner applies to give honour to the japanese again.
>[that is] a Western point of view
???
People in the west like to think that.
After one has lived for a while in an Asian, African, Latin American etc country, they get to see that billions of people, the 80% of the global population, could and don't give a fuck about the going's on in the west -- except when they're forced to deal with it (e.g. militarily).
E.g. the Chinese might care for selling to US/Europe -- but that doesn't mean they also care for our beliefs, history, philosophy, moral outrages, outlook on life, charts, stars, concerns, or any other such thing that we take as some kind of "physical law".
Even so, Mexico is next to the states and has some millions of US immigrants and wannabe immigrants, and still -- they have their own culture, morals, etc, and the typical western concerns are not their thing.
So, I was talking more about the cultural and societal aspects. They'll still watch some popular Hollywood movie or have teenagers listening to Cardie B, but they live in their own, different, world, as oblivious to the West as a Oklahoman farmer or a NY gallery owner is oblivious to them and their world.
Geopolitically it just refers to US/Canada and Europe (and perhaps Japan).
Mexico and Columbia belong to the Latin American world -- which has diversity within it, of course, but Europe for one, also has.
It's a quite old distinction that's used all the time.
See how Wikipedia maps the "Western world":
"(...) what is known today as described by the term "The West": United States of America and Canada, European Union and European Free Trade Association member states, Israel, Australia and New Zealand"
and:
"The term "Western world" is sometimes interchangeably used with the term First World or developed countries, stressing the difference between First World and the Third World or developing countries." (which also doesn't include Mexico and Columbia)
All I can collect from your comment is that what defines West is capitalist economy (which is not a bad thing per se) and a vague self referential form of identity that blends money and religion.
UK voted to leave EU et al, and even though they wont really be leaving in a literal sense of the word, does their having preferred to leave not make them also leave the "state of mind" you mention? Is the UK thus less "Western" now?
Well, we've mentioned Economy, religion, culture -- what else do you think should have been included and is missing?
It's like saying all that defines a chair is shape, size and its use (for sitting).