Is Japan a Western country ?

[Maciamo]

Of course, it all depends on what we call "Western". There are several definitions.

First, the geographical opposition between Europe and Asia, but that alone has turned out to be a too simple definition, as Australia or New Zealand are more East than Asia, but definitely Western. So is it a cultural or ethnic distinction rather purely geographical ?

Secondly, Western used to refer to the Capitalist world during the cold war. The East-West opposition was especially valid for Europe, but on a global point of view, America the NATO countries laid West, while the communist world (not only the USSR, but also China and North Korea) laid East.

Finally (I think), most Europeans consider that a Western country is about the same as an industrialised/developped one.

The 2 latter points, Japan is definitely Western, and I think that's also where most Europeans would place Japan (from the opinions I have heard). Nonetheless, Japanese always stress the opposition between themselves and Westerners (or foreigners in general). They certainly not feel Western, but what if others consider them as such because they have a different definition ?

Before developping more deeply, I let you reflect on this and give your opinions.

[thomas]

Simplistic answer:

I view Japan as industrialized country, though not as "Western".

Western = Christian background (common history, values, morals, culture)

[Maciamo]

So, does that mean that non-Christian European, Americans, etc. are not Westerners ? For instance, I have absolutely nothing to do with Christians values, moral and believes, nevertheless, I am a Westerner. Nowadays, a majority of young Europeans don't care about religion or are Christian just on paper (never attend church or far from convinced that the Bible is the Truth). Among these, about 5-10% of people are atheist. Then, countries like France or the UK have about 10% of their population that is Muslim. Eventhough they were born and raised in Europe, aren't these people Westerners ? What about Caucasians muslims (Serbs...) or converts ?

Then, whith the logic Western = Christian background (common history, values, morals, culture), Filipinos should be Westerners, as they are more fanatically Christian than most Europeans, have 500 years of colonial Christian history and are culturally more Spanish-American than Asian.

Same for the 25% of Koreans that are Christians. Are they Westerners ? If so, what about the 75% left, Buddhist or Atheist ?

Are Coptic Egyptian or Christian Syrian, Iraqi or Armenian Westerners because they share all the history, values, moral than Europeans ? Anyway, culturally, there a Syrian is probably as near of a Greek than a Greek from an Irish or Finn. Greeks share so much with Turkish that only the religion and language separate them. Greeks are the historical pillar of Western values (democracy, philosophy, reason, sciences...).

That brings us to the next point : Weren't Romans or Ancient Greeks Westerners ? If not, when can we talk for the first time of Western country ?

[lineartube]

My opinion of a Western country may cahnge, depending on which way am I faced and where I might be. :)

More seriously, I thought that the whole East-West thing surfaced during the cold war. I guess there are a lot of "east-west" definitions available, wether is economically, socially or politically. As long as there are differences you can agree on the existence of a bipolar system.... with several layers of cake.

Don't mind me. Too much food on Christmas and Santa got me a cold.

:D

[thomas]

Originally posted by Maciamo
So, does that mean that non-Christian European, Americans, etc. are not Westerners ? For instance, I have absolutely nothing to do with Christians values, moral and believes, nevertheless, I am a Westerner. Nowadays, a majority of young Europeans don't care about religion or are Christian just on paper (never attend church or far from convinced that the Bible is the Truth). Among these, about 5-10% of people are atheist.

I referred to "Christian" in a strictly cultural, not a religious sense. With "background" I meant shared history, culture, arts, literature, legal & political principles, morals and ethics. I would not consider myself to be a spiritual person, but I was raised with these values, and I dare to assume that the same applies even to "Western" atheists. The environment is a vital element of socialization.

Then, countries like France or the UK have about 10% of their population that is Muslim. Eventhough they were born and raised in Europe, aren't these people Westerners ? What about Caucasians muslims (Serbs...) or converts ?

Hm, I'd subsumize European Muslims under the same global equation as above. Don't put too much emphasis on the term "Christian". It's an amalgam of the factors I quoted above, view it as common heritage.

There are certainly a lot of other population segments that can't be categorized as easily (provided there's a need for categorization, lol). Hm, perhaps also depends on if they want to be seen as Western.

Then, whith the logic Western = Christian background (common history, values, morals, culture), Filipinos should be Westerners, as they are more fanatically Christian than most Europeans, have 500 years of colonial Christian history and are culturally more Spanish-American than Asian. Same for the 25% of Koreans that are Christians. Are they Westerners ? If so, what about the 75% left, Buddhist or Atheist ?

That's true. However, what's the alternative to the "hereditary approach" mentioned above? A racial approach? Yack!

Are Coptic Egyptian or Christian Syrian, Iraqi or Armenian Westerners because they share all the history, values, moral than Europeans ? Anyway, culturally, there a Syrian is probably as near of a Greek than a Greek from an Irish or Finn. Greeks share so much with Turkish that only the religion and language separate them. Greeks are the historical pillar of Western values (democracy, philosophy, reason, sciences...).

Christian minorities in the Middle East are indeed an interesting case. The Copts view themselves as true Egyptians, combining Christian and ancient Egyptian heritage. They do not view themselves as Western, although many of their Muslim compatriots consider them as - let's put it that way - "Western elements". Let's call these minorities "Western-related".

That brings us to the next point : Weren't Romans or Ancient Greeks Westerners ?

Pre-westerners. :)

If not, when can we talk for the first time of Western country ?

This question needs further reflection.

[Hairyneville]

Like a star.

[den4]

Perhaps westerns are only for the movies... :D
seriously, I think industrialization and government types are not the leading thing to say which country is western or not, more like which nations were originally european and became the majority of that particular country, along with the language spoken...asia is predominantly asian, africans are predominantly black....Australians and New Zealanders tend to be run under British rule, so it is now a western nation with european values, and so is america (even if it became independent of British rule)...think these are what makes a country Western....and Japan is definitely not taken after the european mold, even if the government was set up by americans after the second world war...

[Maciamo]

Originally posted by den4
seriously, I think industrialization and government types are not the leading thing to say which country is western or not, more like which nations were originally european and became the majority of that particular country, along with the language spoken...asia is predominantly asian, africans are predominantly black....Australians and New Zealanders tend to be run under British rule, so it is now a western nation with european values, and so is america (even if it became independent of British rule)...think these are what makes a country Western....

That's a bit simple. I want to ask you what you'd do with a country having roughly half its population from European origin and the other not. There aren't any such well defined country nowadays, but there could be. New Zealand, with only 3,5 million people (75% Europeans), could very well "go Asian" in a not so remote future with the current immigration levels.

Let's take another, real, example. Bolivia and Peru are almost always put i the Western country group because they are in America, ex-Spanish colonies, with Spanish as official language. However, less than 15% of the population (in both countries) are from European descent. More than 60% are Ameridians, in majority Quechua or Aymara, speaking Quechua or Aymara. Their culture is still very similar to what it was during the Inca empire, religion and modernity (cars, electricity...) notwithstanding. So, can this European minority justify that these country are Western, even when life there is probably much more different than in Europe, North America, Australia or... Japan ?

If the ethny defines Westerness, few South American countries are Western (except Chile, Argentina and Uruguay). Mexico is composed of 1/3 of Amerindians and the 2/3 left are mestizo (mixed European and Amerindian descent). Honduras is 90% mestizo, 7% Indian, say my sources. Haiti is 95% African descent, 5% mulatto and European descent. Brazil only has 55% of its people from European descent. That would be absurd to divide South America's Westerness just on basis each country's ethnic composition. Or I am wrong ?


and Japan is definitely not taken after the european mold, even if the government was set up by americans after the second world war...

Japan has copied the biggest part of its political, legal, economical and educational systems on the West since the Meiji era. You refer to the Constitution imposed by the US after WWII, but that's just a detail of what has been Westernised in Japan.

[ghettocities]

Japan is just playing the role of poser, it's like calling someone a model just because they own a pair designer jeans, or a better example is like Matsui coming over and playing for the Yankees, they have baseball in Japan but wait, whats that? america has it made and this makes japan fiend to be more "western" in everything it does to the point that they are fleeing their tiny island smaller than california to try and get a piece of our rich golden-brown american pie. so this leads me to believe what i hear time and time again, that the "majority" of Japanese people want to affilate themselves with america in any way they can, thus the reason why we don't have mail order brides in the states, case closed.

God bless america,
Josh

Ghettocities Clothing (Tokyo Promo 02/03)
Free Photos, Video, Music and more.....
http://www.geocities.com/ghettocities/ghettocities.html

[SirJeannot]

eastern in my case :p

[den4]

on second thoughts, Japan is a wannabe western nation, but it's definitely eastern....it has its own convoluted system borrowed from other countries and they still can't figure out how to find their way out of a paper bag...in getting the economy back up again....but that's my impression...I'm sure it's more complicated than that, but I think they make it complicated, making excuses on why they can't implement reforms....mostly due to dat olde boy mentality still lurking in the shadows....

[samuraitora]

Japan is NOT a western nation, or at least that is my opinion. I have to agree with what Thomas said about them being "industrialized" not western. They don't have the same beleifs that we do. That is the main factor that seperates them.

[jeisan]

japan is the land of the rising sun, the sun rises in the east, therefore japan is eastern

[shao]

before and during WW II, Japan tried to make itself as "Leader of Asia" by taking the control of the whole of Asia and kicking Westerns out of Asia. Japanese said "Asia is for Asian only!"

after US took Japan, Japanese dont like the fact that they are part of Asia because most asian nations are third-world.

now... um... i only think Japan as "Being kick out of Asia"...

[karmy]

i dont know :bluush:

[Squareboy]

Japan is Different, Different than any other place on earth, it is the most technoligacally advances socity in the world while at the same time holding some of the oldest traditions. Asian a weird term, most people almost always think ""Chinese" when you say Asian. and no one considers Russia Asian, Russia is very western and takes up basically half of the contanant of Aisa. Japan is Asian but is becoming more western everyday!

[hua he]

If Japan want to become western country, they must eradicate the use of Chinese(Kanji) in Japanese.

[tasuki]

Squareboy
If you think that Japan is the most technologically advanced country in the world, you've obviously never been here.

hua he
What do kanji have anything to do with being a Western country? Greece is a Western country and uses Greek characters...

Little history lesson boys and girls. Why is it "Western"? Because the world was and still is dominated by cultures that are located in the arbitrarily called "Western" hemisphere. Even though this denomination is totally arbitrary, Japan is still not in this historically recognized hemisphere of the world and thus will NEVER be a "Western" country in that sense of the word.

For those of you who think that being "western" is more a state of mind than a geographical location, let me put this to you. What are Japanese really enamoured of: the western way of life or the IDEA of the western way of life? I stipulate that they love the IDEA, not the fact, just as most of you here (and me until living in Japan) are taken with the idea of Japan (to all of you different and unique). Again, Japan fails to become a Western country.

From where I stand, Japan may be westernized, but it will NEVER ever be a "Western" country and we should be happy about it.

[hua he]

Actually, the so called "western" and "eastern" countries was actually differentiated racially.

Just see, as long as it is a country with white in charge, this is a western country. If the country is with blacks or yellows in charge, it will be an eastern country.

THis is the view of the whole world.

[tasuki]

Sorry to disagree about your apparently set view of the world, but just as with the kanji comment, African countries are NOT and never will be Western countries. However, Brasil is a Western country... Can you explain that?

[Maciamo]

Tasuki, may I ask you :
Are Bolivia or Jamaica Western countries ?
What about South Africa, Israel, Singapore, Turkey and Russia. Feel free to develop your arguments for each of them.

[tasuki]

I feel that what hua he said is correct, but an overly broad generalisation. Traditionally, western countries are the European biggies: France, Italy, the UK, Spain and Portugal and the countries they colonized that are located in the so-called western hemisphere (don't ask me where it starts now, I don't know). However, that definition has since changed to include all the countries in the western hemisphere (excluding most if not all African countries), I believe. Yet, the term "Western" is too often used here and elsewhere to designate countries of mainly Latin, Angle, or Saxon heritage, which brings us back to the biggies above, the States, Canada, Mexico, and the South American countries conquered and colonized by the Spanish and Portuguese.

The political situations with most of the aforementioned countries since world war I has won most of them a designation of their own. Russia is a country of the former USSR, Turkey is a middle-eastern country, Singapore is and always was an Asian state, and South Africa is perceived (even if its not true) as a third world country. Another interesting concept, the third world.

I would place Bolivia in the Western lot myself, although I've never really given it any thought, nor have I ever seen Jamaica as anything else than what it is: Jamaica.

I would ask you the same question you did me. How about Australia? Do you see it as a western country?

[Maciamo]

Australia is probably the most Western in all the countries discussed here.

IMHO, Bolivia and Jamaica aren't even half Western. Bolivia and Peru are composed of more than 50% Quechua (former Inca kingdom) and still speak Quechua. I don't see why a mainly native American country should be more Western than Turkey, which used to be part of Ancient Greece, then Rome and remained a Greek speaking country till the Turl took over government in 1453. Ethnically and historically, Turkey is as European as Greece, which is laid the basis for Western civilization (without Greece, no Europe, no modern world).

Jamaica is an English speaking country with a strong black majority (like most Caribean islands) with 76% African descent, 15% Afro-European descent, 4% European, 3% East Indian & Middle Eastern, 1% Afro-Chinese & Chinese. In comparison, South Africa is also English (and Afrikaans, which is Dutch) speaking, and has a very similar ethical composition : 77% black, 10% white, 8% mixed race, 2.5% of Indian or Asian descent.
So, logically, if one is Western the other is too. Just being a part of the American continent doesn't necessarily qualify for Westerness.

Russia has always been a Western country till the 1917 revolution, and even with the same ruling family as the rest of Europe. Russia as a country was actually founded by Swedish vikings. It's not because of 80 years of communism that it's lost its Westerness. Ethnically and culturally as Western as white Europeans or North Americans. Historically more Western than America. The term Western is strange when applied to Russia because of its Eastern geographical location.

Finally, Israel is very much Western in mentality and system, but ethnically and linguistically Semitic (be it Jews or Arabs), so not European, and thus not Western. But almost anybody considers Israel as a Western country, as most of its Jewish population originates from European countries or the US.

Singapore is more Westernized than Japan because it was founded by the British and English is still the official language.

[tasuki]

I was aware of all those facts, and I'm certainly not going to argue them with you. You and I seem to have a different view of the concept of Western, that's all. In my book westernized doesn't make western. The 80 years of communism in Russia were the ones that changed it all. From my experience with Ossies and Kiwis, I'd say that a lot of them would feel somewhat annoyed at being called a western country, which would make them part of the pack, a thing they pride themselves not to be.

I'm firmly believe that the concept of "western" countries began with the fall of the Roman Empire, gained in strength during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, and then reached a relatively final state with the birth of the United States. The two world wars changed that but little. So basically, I think that for most people when one says western person or country one refers to people or countries of (as I said before) Latin, Angle, and Saxon ancestry.

Now if one were to quantify the westerness (I like that word!) by how westernized a country is, then Japan would win the crest hands down.

So I think you and I basically agree that westerness is a highly relative concept. But (not wanting to knock down my country of adoption), since Japanese like to categorize (as do a lot of other nations and peoples) I think many use the term western with only the vaguest of idea of what it means. Why west? West of what? Relative to what? We live on a ball, everything is west of something. Everything. So technically, we're all westerners AND easterners. Cool, eh?

[Onigiri]

Japan is not a western country!! I don't think you can define it western simply because it is developped. Japan still has many, many eastern traditions as regular practice. I really don't even see a point to this debate.

[Maciamo]

Originally posted by tasuki
So basically, I think that for most people when one says western person or country one refers to people or countries of (as I said before) Latin, Angle, and Saxon ancestry.


So, are you saying that Irish, Welsh, Scotish, Scandinavians, dutch and some Germans aren't Westerners because they are neither Latin nor Anglo-Saxons ? FYI, Angles and Saxons were both north Germanic tribes that, along with the Jutes of Denmark, were invited to Britain by a Celtic tribe to sort the problems between the various Celtic groups that inhabited the island. They settled and pushed all the Celts to the West (Wales, Corwall) and North (Scotland) and created their own kingdoms (Mercia, West Saxony, East Saxony, etc.). Later on, Danish and Norwegian vikings (who were not Anglo-Saxons, but other Germanic tribes) raided Britain and the rest of Europe. A group of Danish viking settled in France (Normandy), mixed with French locals, and later invaded England (William the conquerer, 1066).

You could only describe English people as Germanic (Anglo-saxon + Scandinavian ) with a bit of Latin and Celt blood.

In short, I would rather identify Westerners as being ethnically Celto-Latino-Germanic, so as to include the whole of Western and Northern Europe, but I would also add Greeks, and I can't see why Eastern Europeans (be they Slavic, Finno-Hungaric, or Baltic) wouldn't be Westerns, especially that they have mixed quite a lot with Germanic (Swedish and German) people during history.

Once again, if Westerness is only based on ethny, why not just say Caucassian instead ? Would you argue that Collin Powell or Michael Jordan aren't Westerner because they have African origins ?

[tasuki]

I agree with you a hundred percent there and I think most people include the same ethnic groups you outline here unconsciously in their definition of westerness. I don't believe that westerness is based on ethnicity, I think it has more to do with the political, geo-political, and historical impacts of Europe and North America (a European offshoot) on the world. We can argue until kingdom come, but being Western is only a concept. As I said yesterday, western relative to what? I much prefer refering to people by their country or continent, it's less of a headache.

Just as an aside, you can lay off the history lessons, I've taken a minor in European history, so I know who descends from who, where, and when.

The question was is Japan a western country. I think we can safely say that it is westernized, just as India is, Hong Kong, Singapour, Kuala Lumpur, and other parts of the world are, but its cultural heritage does not make it a western country in the common sense of the term. However, this is a pointless discussion. Why would we want Japan to be anything else than what it is (good and bad). But then, the more relevant question would probably be "what is western to you?" Until we resolve that question asking anyone whether they think if such and such a country is western and such and such a country isn't is moot.

[Maciamo]

Knowing the definition of "westernness" is also the point of the discussion. If there was a clear answer to whether Japan was a Western country or not, why should I have started the debate ?

Look at modern Japan's system (politics, economics..), pop culture, and even language - it's full of English terms. If ethny and geography isn't vital to westerness, then Japan could be considered as Western, because I believe that culturally, there is as much differenec between a Finn and an Italian, a Scot and a Greek or a Latvian and a French person than between, say, a Japanese and an Italian - very similar in mentality on more points than you could imagine ; Japanese even sometimes call themselves the Italians of Asia, and I understand it for having lived in both countries.

Now I am going to try to convince you of how similar Japanese and Italian mentalities are, and you tell me who is more similar to the Japanese, the Italian, the American or, for instance, the Swedish.

In both Japan and Italy :
- Children often live with their parents till their 30's and it's not unusual for them to continue to live with the family after marriage.
- Women traditionally stay at home after marriage and spoil their children (both Italian and Japanese mums are famous for that)
- Food is one of the most important thing and is a common discussion topic.
- Both Italians and Japanese are very sociable and care a lot about others well-being and confort.
- the Mafia and the Yakuza :D
- Both countries are long, narrow, mountainous, vlocanic, earthquake-ridden, close to the sea, enjoy a warm climate, have a lot of regional dialects and a rich history, which influence the culture and national awareness.
- Both countries are very chauvinistic in both sense of the term (towards women and in the patriotic sense)
- Both countries have suffered facism in the same pre-WWII period.


Economically and politically, they might be very different, but that's not the point, as we were talking of "cultural" or "historical" similarities.

[tasuki]

Look, this is getting somewhat tiresome. I don't need any convincing--I agree with you . But in the end, we don't agree on one thing and that's what it means to be "western" . Define to me in clear, scientific terms what makes a country or a person western, then we'll have a common basis for comparison. Until then, as I said last night, this conversation is moot. Yes, Italy and Japan have many similarities, but they have more differences than, say, Italy and France. Yes, the United States and Japan have numerous similarities, but the States have more in common with England than with Japan in term of way of life, history, ethinicity, etc. I think that's what's usually implied when categorizing western and non-western countries. The determining factor is the relative amount of shared roots. Asian countries, for all their westerness, share common ancestry, wars, bad blood, and more. Same goes for Western Europe and North America. Anyway, as I said, until we derive an exact definition of what it means to be western, we're just wasting good online time.

Now if we were talking about "industrialized" countries, we wouldn't have this problem, because you can quantify industrialization. How can one quantify westerness and how would one go about doing it? But that would bring us back to the same problem--why western and western from America, England, Finland, where? You talk about Japan being western and compare it with Italy to do so. But the fact is if the traits of "western" countries are shared by so many countries, which makes them western, then those traits are no longer western because they're shared by countries around the world that are not west of anything and west of everything. So basically, you're reasoning is circular, don't you think? As an example, let's consider the myth of American English being the common language for communication around the world. In fact, there are at present more people around the world that speak English as a second language than people that speak it as a first. Can it then still be reasonably be called "American"? "Western" is an atrociously old and outdated concept and we should strive to do away with it.

[tasuki]

I gave it a little more thought yesterday and realized that western countries all share common customs. I don't know why I didn't think about it before, but I realized it may be the most important factor in ascertaining whether a country is western or not.

Western European countries (core western countries) have developed perticular customs and traditions that were spread to certain parts of the world during their expansionist period (16th and 17th centuries) and later became dominant with the rise of the "American Empire". Of course these customs have gained regional flavouring over the centuries, but the basics remain. Western countries are, generally speaking, Christian (I'm being intentionally vague to include all sub-cults of Christianity). We all pretty much eat the same, i.e. animal meat is the main source of protein and potatoes one of the main veggies. All the western languages stem from basically the same roots and are all interlinked at some point, even the Scandinavian languages.

Westernized countries like Japan have adopted those customs and traditions, and adapted them to the local realities, as opposed to growing into them. That, in my opinion, is the key factor in denying the status of western country to Japan. Would you call Canada an Asian country if overnight all Canadians adopted the Chinese way of life? I don't think so. In more human terms, take a newly arrived immigrant (any nationality; let's say Pakistani) to, let's say, England and compare him/her to a first generation British-Pakistani. Although they share the same roots, the new immigrant has to adopt British customs, but he/she can't stop being Pakistani. On the other hand, the first generation British-Pakistani grew into British customs from birth, so he/she is now part of the whole "western" pack. One generation is all it takes. So African-Americans or Asian-Americans are as American as apple pie (pardon the cliche), but my wife is never going to stop being Japanese when we move to Canada.

So I guess in that sense there are a lot more western countries than I originally thought... Sure, Japan has been westerninzed for generations and most Japanese don't know any other way of life, but there are still myriad traditions, customs, philosophies, even as daily a thing as eating rice, that you can't find anywhere in the western world, but can find readily in the Asian world, clearly making it a highly westernized yet Asian country. In my book.

[Maciamo]

I'll really have to disagree with you on this.

Western countries are, generally speaking, Christian (I'm being intentionally vague to include all sub-cults of Christianity). We all pretty much eat the same, i.e. animal meat is the main source of protein and potatoes one of the main veggies. All the western languages stem from basically the same roots and are all interlinked at some point, even the Scandinavian languages.


You are mixing elements of the past and present and oversimplifying the diversity of Europe.

@religion
You are right about Christianity, but I am not Christian and most younger Europeans cannot really claim being "real" Christians anymore (the situation is very different in the US, except for 5% of Atheist, a few Muslim, Buddhist, etc.). If Westerness starts with Ancient Greece and Rome, than Christianity is not important. It's maybe more the systematical use "reason" (in philosophy, sciences, theology, etc.) that caracterise best Western civilization. In any case, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Celts, till Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and a lot of modern Europeans aren't/weren't Christian, but surely were Western.

@food
Food has evolved a lot over the centuries. Actually, the potatoes that your are citing first came from America. There were no potatoes, tomatoes or tobacco (the 3 "o" words) in Europe before the 16th century and potatoes took a long time to take off and be included in everyday diet. At first, people fed farm animals with them but didn't consume any. Not unitil the 18th century did it become an important nutriment.
Pre-Renaissance Italians couldn't have eaten tomato-sauce pasta, as there were neither tomatoes, nor pasta (originally from China) at that time.

Nowadays Europeans's diet is even more varied than that of Asians from Japan to India. I have been about everywhere in Europe and have lived in England, Belgium, Germany, Italy and Spain (and now France very well as a French speaker) and I can tell you that not only each country's but each region's food is amazingly diverse, especially when compared to Japan or India, where the food is pretty much the same everywhere (well, you could divide India in North, South and East, but compared to its size, it's amazingly homogeneous by European standard).

You also claim that European diet is richer in meat. In the middle ages and modern times till as late as the 18-19th century (depending where) most ordinary people could only afford to eat meat on special occassions, then more recently on Sundays, then several times a week and eventually everyday. Africans have probably been more of meat-eaters than Europeans thoughout the history. Chinese people have always been famous for eating anything that moves (even scorpions, jellyfish, dogs...). Lot's of native North-American tribes were (bison-)hunters and some didn't do any farming at all, so relying also heavily on animal matter.
In Europe, people living near the sea naturally eat more fish than meat (in Scandinavia, Celtic regions, etc). Rice is grown in Italy. Modern Mediterranean cuisine (olive oil, seafood, vegetables...) is radically different of the German one (a lot of pork, potatoes...).

@languages
It is true that European languages share common roots, but there are notable exceptions. You couldn't descredit Basques, Hungarians or Finns for not being Westerners because their language is not part of the Indo-European group at all. Then, I don't know if you've had the opportunity to read or hear Celtic languages (Welsh, Irish, Sottish or Breton Gaelic...), but not a single word seem to be similar to Latin or Germanic languages (not even country names or basic expression ; England is "Loegr" in Welsh, "hello" is "sut mae" !).

Shall we include Iranians (Persians) and Northern Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi in the Western group because their language is more related to English, French or German than Hungarian, Estonian or Basque are ? BTW, Hungarian (Magyar) and Finnish (Suomi) are part of the same group of language as Turkish, Mongol, Korean and Japanese (Ural-Altaic group) ! They are also Central Asian in origin. So I don't think language is determinant to Westerness either. It's not because Singaporian speak English and 20 million Indian (in India, not abroad) have English as their mother tongue that it makes them more or less Western than other Asians or Indians. Or does it ?

[tasuki]

OK. Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. But I think you're missing the point because we're not trying to establish the diversity of Europe, but rather to determine whether Japan is a western country.

You are mixing elements of the past and present and oversimplifying the diversity of Europe.

Well, the concept of a "western country" is by its implication a gross oversimplification, so don't you feel it's normal to generalize to be able to define it? It's the scientific method. At least it was when I was in school... If not, as you say, we'll be going back to creation to define it and find that we're all related and that there's no real point in trying to categorize the world like that anyway... Besides, the concept itself is fairly recent, so we can't go back to creation to explain it. At best, we can go back to the conditions that saw it's birth, which I would place between the 16th and 19th century. I'm just guessing here, though.

@religion

I have to agree with you there, but the fact remains that Christianity was a unifying force in the Western world and that it still remains, if only statistically the religion of most western Europeans and North Americans at present. It isn't so for the Middle East or Asia. As for Japan, despite the small pockets of it here, Christianity just didn't take root here.

@food

Also have to agree. But the patatoe became one of the main vegetables for a lot of European countries (I mean the potatoe famine in Ireland...) from its introduction. If you can't recognize that, then you're the one making an underestimation. One of Japan's main vegetables is the bean. Major difference from a lot of western countries.

Nowadays Europeans's diet is even more varied than that of Asians from Japan to India. I have been about everywhere in Europe and have lived in England, Belgium, Germany, Italy and Spain (and now France very well as a French speaker) and I can tell you that not only each country's but each region's food is amazingly diverse, especially when compared to Japan or India, where the food is pretty much the same everywhere (well, you could divide India in North, South and East, but compared to its size, it's amazingly homogeneous by European standard).

But that's the case almost everywhere. Even here in such a small country as Japan while still pretty homogenous, the variety from one region to the next can still be stunning. But you can't demistify a general concept like "western" with specifics. "western" is too broad for that. But there are common threads to European diet and that's what I was implying.

As for meat, the same general assesment applies as above, you're being too specific. At some times people ate meat only if they could afford it. Granted. But when they could, they ate meat, not fish. Big difference from Japan. Before meat cooking was introduced in Japan, there was next to not meat eating custom. (I do say NEXT to none, NOT none). By the way, as far as I know, bison is not a fish...

@languages
Yes, I've had a chance to study Celtic languages. I haven't had a chance to study their roots, though but I always thought that they were related to Norse and other Scandinavian languages... I may be wrong, though.

Iranians (Persians) and Northern Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi
Of course not. You're being too specific again. Their religious and cutltural backgrounds are completely too different from what is usually considered western. It's the combination of all or most of the aspects that we've been discussing here that make countries western, not just one...

Hungarian (Magyar) and Finnish (Suomi) are part of the same group of language as Turkish, Mongol, Korean and Japanese (Ural-Altaic group) !

Again being overspecific. Hungarians and Fins share more culturally and historically with Europe than with the Asian lot, despite their liguistic roots.

It's not because Singaporian speak English and 20 million Indian (in India, not abroad) have English as their mother tongue that it makes them more or less Western than other Asians or Indians. Or does it ?

Eh? I didn't quite catch the point there. I sort of think you're making my point for me by saying that, but I'm afraid it's a bit too convoluted.

Anyway, I still think that to explain the broad overgeneralisation that is "western" as a concept, you can't go knit-picking every detail about every culture in the world, you have to keep a broad approach. While I agree with you on most points, as a whole western countries have developed several common, general traits, amongst which are a unifying religion, similar customs (building, living, eating, sleeping, doing business, etc.), closely-related languages, common history over a prolonged period of time, to a certain extent morphology, and the list goes on. It's the combination of all or most of these factors that spawned the concept of western people and countries (to make a point a concept that I loathe for an oversimplification, oversimplication that Maciamo-san makes an EXCELLENT point of proving). However, while Japan may have adopted a lot of western traits, they are still adopted traits and can't be traced back more than a couple hundred years, if even. Japan shares more linguistically (as you've eloquently presented on a different thread) with other Asian countries, its dietary traditions and customs are different from that of western countries and more closely related to that of other Asian countries, Japanese morphology is similar to other Asian countries, so who could mistake Japan for anything BUT an Asian country?

[senseiman]

Japan is not a western country. Western countries are those with common historical and cultural roots springing from Roman civilization. Christianity, the Roman alphabet, our languages, our scientific and philosophical traditions all spring from that one source. With Japan and many other Asian countries, the root of their culture, religion, science, philosophy and language is in China. They are completely seperate.

If you are talking about Japan's modern economic and political make up, it would be more accurate to call it a northern country rather than a western country.

[Maciamo]

Originally posted by senseiman
Japan is not a western country. Western countries are those with common historical and cultural roots springing from Roman civilization. Christianity, the Roman alphabet, our languages, our scientific and philosophical traditions all spring from that one source.

So are Turkey, Israel or Syria Western countries because they were part of the Roman Empire, have a long Christian history (and still some Christians amomg the Muslim and Jewish now), have inherited Greek science and philosophy with the rest of the Arabic world, etc. The Roman alphabte is not a good argument, as Greek or Russia have their own alphabets, eventhough they are undeniably Western (Greece is even the fundament of Westerness), but countries like Indonesia (and all African languages if I ain't wrong) use the Roman alphabet. As forlanguages, I remind you that Magyar (Hungarian) and Suomi (Finnish) are actually related to Mongo, Koreanl and Japanese and Basque isn't a European language either. But I am sure you don't discuss their Westernness...


If you are talking about Japan's modern economic and political make up, it would be more accurate to call it a northern country rather than a western country.

Northern ? compared to Australia ? Check your world map, Japan is at the same latitude as the South of Europe and Northern Africa. Hokkaido (not really Japan...) is at the latitude of Northern Italy, Tokyo would be in Tangier (Morocco), Kyushu in the middle of Morocco (or Iraq) and Okinawa in the Sahara. Hardly a Northern country... I guess you could just say industrialsied, but so is North Korea (after all they have nuclear power and heavy industries), which doesn't means thery are developed in other fields or democratic.

[senseiman]

Actually, middle eastern countries like Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Egypt were part of the same mediteranean civilization as Europe in ancient times. They were conquered or had relations with the Roman empire and it was through the work of Arab scholars in Baghdad that Europe learned of the works of the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers whose knowledge had been lost for some time during the dark ages. Obviously there are deep religious, economic and political differences between Europe and the Arab world today, but historically and culturally speaking they have much more in common with each other than they do with Japan.

When I said Japan was a northern country I was referring to the great economic divide between the countries of the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere. Of course it isn't as if the wealth comes to a dead stop at the equator and everyone in the south is poor, I thought that was obvious enough that I didn't need to elaborate, my apologies. Rich countries like Australia and New Zealand are also to be found in the south, while some poor countries like North Korea are in the north. It is a generalization, not meant to have any exact geographical corroboration.

But Japan, like western Europe and North America has never been colonized. It has a powerful economy that isn't totally beholden to the whims of foreign capital like most Southern countries are. It is a constitutional democracy. It has a strong social safety net. Its citizens do not have to deal with war and violence on an everyday basis. These are the factors, shared by most (but not all) northern countries that make Japan similar to Europe and North America. Culturally and historically speaking, they are worlds apart which is why I don't consider Japan to be a western country.

[Maciamo]

@Mediteranean civilization

By the way, Most of Northern, Central and Eastern Europe wasn't part of the Roman Empire, nor was it nearly related to Mediterranean culture. Scandinavians and Anglo-Saxons used runic alphabet, not the Roman one. They didn't have philosophical or political tradition such as Greece and Rome.

When I said Japan was a northern country I was referring to the great economic divide between the countries of the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere.

It is more that a generalisation, it's near ridiculous. :sorry: Most of the world's poverty can be found in the Northern hemisphere, just because about 4/5 of the people live there. Even with that, the Southern hemisphere lives well in comparison. In Latin America, the richest countries are in the South (Argentina, urugay, Chile) and in Brazil, which is divided, the South is again much richer than the North. In Africa, there is not much difference on either side of the equator, except for South Africa, which is richer. In Asia and Oceania, poor peolpe can be found everywhere from Central Asia, China, India and South East Asia. Indonesia is divided by the equator, but it's wealthiest regions (Java, Bali...) are in the Southern Hemisphere. As for Oceania, it isn't poor at all.

But Japan, like western Europe and North America has never been colonized.

Hmm ! If North America had never been colonised, English and French would not be spoken there and it certainly wouldn't be a dominantly white and Christian country !
Japan hasn't been colonised, but neither have Thailand or Ethiopia, which doesn't make them more similar in any ways to Western countries. Moreover, we could consider the post WWII American occupation of Japan (that last till now in Okinawa) as a form of colonialism, in view of the fact that Japanese have inherited their political system, modern industry and thousands of loans words from it.

It has a strong social safety net.

Yes but Americans don't. So what ?

Its citizens do not have to deal with war and violence on an everyday basis.

But Americans do. Anyway war has never been a factor to judge a nation's Westernness. All countries on earth have their fair share of wars in history. Lots of poorer countries are virtually war free : Bolivia/Peru, some african Countries like Senegal, Mali, Mauritania..., Banglasdesh, Mongolia, and so on.

[senseiman]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to get across, maciamo, but if we are just debating for debates sake, I'm game.

Of course not all of Europe was part of the Roman empire. Again, it is a generalization. And while there may have been different alphabets in the north in ancient times, there aren't now. They use the Roman alphabet, and Arab numerals.

I'm not just making up this north/south rubric, its common in just about all contemporary literature on development issues. If you are going to be so picky, I will amend what I said to "rich" countries and "poor" countries to make things easier for you. Now, can get on to matters more worth discussing?

Of course North America was colonized by Europeans, but North American society today is directly descended from those Europeans and not the Natives they colonized. So, again, let me alter what I said to "American society that is descended from European colonists has never been colonized, while the less than 1% of America today that is of native descent has suffered the horrors of colonialism".

If you insist on splitting hairs I might like to point out that Ethiopia did in fact spend several years being run by Italian fascists, and was torn apart by a civil war instigated by the two cold war powers in the 1970s so it has in fact suffered the negative effects of outside domination.

Your point about the American occupation of Japan is well taken though. Japan did have a foreign power running the show for seven years and that did have a big impact. However, that rule was short lived, and the Americans didn't make off with all of Japan's resources like other colonial powers did in their domains. In fact, they tried to remodel Japan's political and economic system on an AMerican style model, which goes to support my original contention that Japan is only similar to other "rich" countries in those respects.

Also, your points about America having no social safety net to speak of and being a dangerous place to live are pretty good. But those are by the standards of "rich" countries, not the rest of the world. Compared to Afghanistan or Central Africa I'm sure American society holds up pretty well, even if you have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with a favourable comparison.

Anyway, to get back to the original point of this thread. I think Japan is similar to the west in terms of its economic power and political system, but very different from it in cultural and historic terms. Hence I felt the use of the term "northern" country was more correct, but you objected to that term on the basis that not all northern countries are like Japan, Europe and America. So I've changed my terminology to "rich" countries, so now I guess we agree, unless you disagree. This is getting horrendously confusing.

[Haivart]

It's a mixture, mainly Western in the political/economic area, and mainly "East Asian" in others. I'm reading "The history of Japan" by Louis Perez at the moment, and it's amazing how fast and well Japan learned from the West.

[doudesuka]

I like Jeisan's simple definition.
They don't have western mentality. Just because they are industrialized doesn't make them western.
They just try to take on the western mentality when it fits the occasion. They are purely Eastern.

[Gaki]

My View :

[Reflected]

Japan is an Asian country but politically, technologically and socially belongs to the Western World. The cultural gap between the japanese and their asian neighbours is greater than between them and the West. Most Japanese have grown up with American pop culture alongside the japanese. Many Japanese, especially the younger generations embrace more and more Western values, many even give their children western names. The older generation is more traditional. I don't know if we can call Japan a Western country, it is confusing a bit because we tend to associate advanced nations with the West. I would rather say it is an advanced Asian country, influenced heavily by the West.

[silver angel]

I think that the pop culture is Werstern, but not as much as it used to be. And what I mean by that is the influence that the US used to have on Japan. Clothing, foods (Mc Donalds), and music. Although from what I see now, Japan is going back to it's roots. Overall Japan is Eastern. n_n

[Gaki]

Japan is a developed country not a Western one.

[Maciamo]

The longer I stay in Japan and the more I realize how un-western the country still is for issues such as marriage, work, basic life values, politics, teen prostitution, openness to sex (magazines in combini...), lack of moral reflection, lack of debate, etc.

[fugue]

Actually, the so called "western" and "eastern" countries was actually differentiated racially. Just see, as long as it is a country with white in charge, this is a western country. If the country is with blacks or yellows in charge, it will be an eastern country. THis is the view of the whole world.
You hit the bull's eye.

[Golgo_13]

The longer I stay in Japan and the more I realize how un-western the country still is for issues such as marriage, work, basic life values, politics, teen prostitution, openness to sex (magazines in combini...), lack of moral reflection, lack of debate, etc.

Again, the only ones who are complaining about Japan aren't even Japanese.

Magazines in Konbini? You pick up the raunchiest magazine you can find in Japan and bring it to the U.S. and compare it to Penthouse. Penthouse is now a totally smut magazine.

Who ever said Japan has to be "Western" anyway. If the people are happy with the way they are, who has any right to dictate how tey should be any more than if the Japanese came into your own country and complained how awful your country is.

[Maciamo]

Again, the only ones who are complaining about Japan aren't even Japanese.

Who ever said Japan has to be "Western" anyway. If the people are happy with the way they are, who has any right to dictate how tey should be any more than if the Japanese came into your own country and complained how awful your country is.

Did I complain ? Just noticing differences.

[Lina Inverse]

Japan is clearly NO Western country. "Western" means the opposite from "Eastern", which in turn refers to the Asian countries (Japan, China etc.).
"Western" refers to populations from the northern half of the Eurasian continent, and to North-American populations.
"Eastern" refers to populations from the Asian contries (southern half of the Eurasian continent).
Populations from Africa and South-America are neither Western nor Eastern, but Southern populations (more frequently also called "3rd-world-countries").

[chiquiliquis]

...Populations from Africa and South-America are neither Western nor Eastern, but Southern populations (more frequently also called "3rd-world-countries").

Please be sure to run that by someone from Africa or South America... you might be surprised at what you hear in response....


Quote:
Originally Posted by hua he

Actually, the so called "western" and "eastern" countries was actually differentiated racially. Just see, as long as it is a country with white in charge, this is a western country. If the country is with blacks or yellows in charge, it will be an eastern country. THis is the view of the whole world.

You hit the bull's eye.

... Hua He left out a group (or groups?); there are more people in this world than "whites" "blacks" and "yellows". And while this statement is somewhat true, I think it is slippery.

Why again is it important (necessary?) to be able to call people "eastern" or "western"... ?

This is certainly an interesting thread :v:

[yimija]

[QUOTE=Maciamo]
Bolivia and Peru are composed of more than 50% Quechua (former Inca kingdom) and still speak Quechua.


Very good thread Maciamo, obviously lot of researches, and I'll would allow me just a small rectification if I may, mainly because I'm here today and very much concerned with it :

Quechuans are not a race but rather what is called an "ethno-linguistic familly" of about 7 millions in Peru alone. Quechuans are of different origines (some, yes from Incas, but also from the Chavin, Nazcas, Chimos a.s.o). It is like, if you want a comparison, all french speaking people. You'll have differents ethnic groups such as european, africans, oceanians, etc.
It may seems terribly futile to mention it, but I know that they would want it that way. Just like a Quebecois is not quiet a canadian and a Romand not quiet a swiss...

Now to the question is Japan a western country ? I'll only wish that Japan (as well a china, Korea a.o.) will always keep it's traditions and not burry them under tons of hamburgers, GMO, and whatever western "civilized countries" might bring. Japan has a real identity, known around the world as such, and that should stay. Let's hope that the politics will be able to wage wisely between "occidentalization" and respect of it's own civilization.

[aaronmcgrath]

Of course geographically it is...but its not really.
It is very mush so influenced by America.
of course it has japanese traditions and etc, but its not like other asian countries.

[yimija]

Why again is it important (necessary?) to be able to call people "eastern" or "western"... ?

This is certainly an interesting thread :v:

I agree with both sentences. It's an interesting thread well brought up by Maciamo. Thanks.

As for wether we are westerners or esterners will specifically depend wher you stand and wether you are facing north or south ...
Well it was intended as a joke, (and not as a stupid statement) just to shift the emphasis from a mere statement to a reality. It's just used by "whoever give some information" to sort of localize physically and geographically the subject. But since we always pick up what the Europeans say, we, in Asia, have been call the "easterner" .

It's just a name, not an insult or injurious name. It was not meant to be anyway. So let's keep it at that.

The main question asked in fact meant : Is Japan becomming too much of a "Europeanised and Americanized" country. And that somehow wouold b a shame, somewher (as I mentionned earlier)

[chiquiliquis]

It's just used by "whoever give some information" to sort of localize physically and geographically the subject.

I agree :p


The main question asked in fact meant : Is Japan becomming too much of a "Europeanised and Americanized" country. And that somehow wouold b a shame, somewher (as I mentionned earlier)

I see...

So:
What are the standards we use to measure cultural change, in terms of quality? IE: is it fair (a good idea/acceptable) to measure today's "Europeanised and Americanised" (a.k.a: "Globalised") Japan in terms of it's past alone? Do we use other standards, and what are they (if any)?

This isn't necessarily a question solely for Yimija, but something I am just throwing out... If it has alreadey been answered elsewhere in the thread, :sorry: "gomen"... but this thread is getting long, and I came in late... I admit to skimming a bit.

[yimija]

What are the standards we use to measure cultural change, in terms of quality? IE: is it fair (a good idea/acceptable) to measure today's "Europeanised and Americanised" (a.k.a: "Globalised") Japan in terms of it's past alone? Do we use other standards, and what are they (if any)?

This isn't necessarily a question solely for Yimija, but something I am just throwing out... If it has alreadey been answered elsewhere in the thread, :sorry: "gomen"... but this thread is getting long, and I came in late... I admit to skimming a bit.

Sorry, I just do not completely agree with the term "globalization", simply because, if you look in a dictionnary, it means roughly "putting everything on the same level" and the actual globalization tend to skip and put apart all the poor countries, the so called 3rd world and the non "interresting-commercially" countries.

Like for exemple : Irak is completely part of globalization because it has billions of £$£$£ worth of petrol, so we care about killing there, but Rwanda is a "non-interresting-commercially" country and so we dont give a..XXXXX (wont say the word) about the ethnic massacres, killing hundreds of thousands of people. So I believe (in fact I'm certain) globalization is a product for the riches, invented by the riches. So let's keep it "western, eastern, northern and southern" and we might know what we are talking about.

and dot worry about skimming, we all do it when it comes to a long thread.

[Maciamo]

Japan is clearly NO Western country. "Western" means the opposite from "Eastern", which in turn refers to the Asian countries (Japan, China etc.).
"Western" refers to populations from the northern half of the Eurasian continent, and to North-American populations.


So is Russian an Eastern countries, as it is clearly more East than Europe ? If not what about Turkey, Israel ? Is Morroco a Western countries because it is next to Western Europe ?


Populations from Africa and South-America are neither Western nor Eastern, but Southern populations (more frequently also called "3rd-world-countries").

Are you saying that Chile and Argentina (90% of pure European descent) are not Western countries ?

[yimija]

So is Russian an Eastern countries, as it is clearly more East than Europe ? If not what about Turkey, Israel ? Is Morroco a Western countries because it is next to Western Europe ?

Yes good remark, Maciamo ! As time goes by and that continents shifts in extremely slow motion, the countries that are built on those continents will have a tendency to move extremely fast from "east to west", strangely enough !!! Ima-Sumac only knows where Israel and Turkey stand, especially if you compare them with the Palestinian country...


Are you saying that Chile and Argentina (90% of pure European descent) are not Western countries ?

Unfortunately, they are not considered as western countries, and that is all the "funny" (i should say bizarre) part of it since that they are, geographically, just as much "west" as US & Canada. Africa is about the same as Europe and they are not not considered western.


Somewhere, and it's far from being a conclusion, it make me sick that we have to adopt a system in which we now are forced to give graduate "appreciation" of one's location and one's "wealth-by-location". I'm an optimistic person and I hope it will change. But I wont be here to see it. I'm planning a trip back home to Venus...

[chiquiliquis]

NOTE: long reply with not a lot of mention of Japan... but I'm hoping in the end it will be pertinent.

and so:

Sorry, I just do not completely agree with the term "globalization", simply because, if you look in a dictionnary, it means roughly "putting everything on the same level" and the actual globalization tend to skip and put apart all the poor countries, the so called 3rd world and the non "interresting-commercially" countries.


OK... I think I follow you...


Like for exemple : Irak is completely part of globalization because it has billions of £$£$£ worth of petrol, so we care about killing there, but Rwanda is a "non-interresting-commercially" country and so we dont give a..XXXXX (wont say the word) about the ethnic massacres, killing hundreds of thousands of people.


I can see your point here... but I think it is slippery. Ever been to Colombia? Plenty of oil (British Petrol, Occidental etc..) like Iraq... .... also, like Iraq... not the most stable source of oil (a lot of civil unrest).

And like Rwanda, a whole lot of killings... paramilitary death squads, government corruption... Interesting fact: Colombia has the worlds third largest displaced population (after Chad and Angola? Don't quote me on those..). At least last time I checked--prolly 2002.

I'll give five dollars to the first person here who remembers the Florida case where Coca Cola was brought up on accusations of using Colombian paramilitaries to murder unionists. That one never made front page here at home... How many people here can name just one of the (USDS recognized) terrorist groups in Colombia... How many can name two? Three? (Congrats... if you named all three, you ought to consider employment with the U.S. Dept. of State :cool: ).

That emerald in the ring you bought wifey? Good chance it came from Colombia. That coffee you're drinking? Good chance it came from Colombia. That gas you just put in your car? Good chance some of it came from Colombia.

I don't know about the rest of the world, but Average-Joe-American (stopping at BP for gas, with a cup of coffee in his hand) knows nothing about the Mapiripan Masacre (30 people in a small village dismembered one by one with a chainsaw in a local slaughterhouse, with the cooperation of the Colombian National Military--the same military we throw millions upon millions of US tax dollars at to take care of "our" drug problem).

I'm hoping you see my point... lots of "commercial interest", very little "awareness".


So I believe (in fact I'm certain) globalization is a product for the riches, invented by the riches.


I'm largely with you here...

But, I don't really see the point of all this.

I think what you may be trying to say is that there is a problem with the way we define Globalization: It's not really global (since it has/wants nothing to do with the third world--Colombia being an exception).

I see it thus: Japan, is NOT a third world country. The question is still valid as it pertains to Japan. While I would still pose the question to Colombia today... I will not pose it to Rwanda, as I know very little about Rwanda... and am largely inclined to agree with your objection to the definition of "globalization" (regardless).

Here is the question once more:

What are the standards we use to measure cultural change, in terms of quality? IE: is it fair (a good idea/acceptable) to measure today's "Europeanised and Americanised" (a.k.a: "Globalised") Japan in terms of it's past alone? Do we use other standards, and what are they (if any)?


And, lastly, I would put this to you: If you insist on pulling "Globalization" out of the discussion... please give me an example of a country that is being "Americanized and Europeanized" without being Globalized.

Americanized, and Europeanized.... I take these to be dynamic terms involving more than just "customs" and "traditions", but economic and political philosophies as well. These are not just labels and categories... these are things that have been described as "wiping out" cultures--replacing them with MacDonald's, Coca Cola, Democracy, Christianity (?)... I believe these are the charges that have been made.


But then... no globalization in Rwanda yet? They can drink Coca Cola, can't they... just wait.

[yimija]

NOTE: long reply with not a lot of mention of Japan... but
I'm hoping in the end it will be pertinent..

Yes it's pertinent, and although we might have different point of views and perception (or way to speak about it) we are basically not completely wrong and not completely right.

It's an intricate situation and there will be as many different ways of seeing or explaining it as there are different people to talk about....

But I thoroughly enjoyed reading you, so I say thank you.
If I have a little more time, i'l come back to it, but now for the comming week, it seems a bit difficult. we'll see what others will have to say.

[chiquiliquis]

...It's an intricate situation and there will be as many different ways of seeing or explaining it as there are different people to talk about....


... Amen to that :-)


...But I thoroughly enjoyed reading you, so I say thank you...


And thank you for showing yourself to be both a careful reader and a careful thinker :cool: :victory:

If you do find the time to get back to this thread, I'll be looking forward to further hearing what you have to say.

[yimija]

... Amen to that :-)



And thank you for showing yourself to be both a careful reader and a careful thinker :cool: :victory:

If you do find the time to get back to this thread, I'll be looking forward to further hearing what you have to say.
A thinker, yes, careful... I don't knos.. Have too many times in trouble speakin too fast... and telling it like it is...

Yes, I'll be back, and I'm allready all over this forum... in all kind of directions and subjects... LOL
see you around

[Golgo_13]

What's the point of all this?


Japan is not a Western nation, but it's nation that has been "westernized" in the past 150 years.

[yimija]

What's the point of all this?


Japan is not a Western nation, but it's nation that has been "westernized" in the past 150 years.

yes I think everyone agree with you
but you don't say if you like it or not
(you'll probably answer that there is nothing you can do about it, no ?

[Golgo_13]

yes I think everyone agree with you
but you don't say if you like it or not
(you'll probably answer that there is nothing you can do about it, no ?

I like it that Japan has become a modern, industrially and technologically advanced nation.

I don't like it that this has put a strain on people's lives, e.g. stress, poor health habits, pollution, extinction of wild animals (there have been wolves and wildcats until the end of 19the century; there are very few bears left), etc.

But overall, positives far outweigh the negatives, and yes, there's nothing I can do about it, and I'm not bitching about it.

[yimija]

I like it that Japan has become a modern, industrially and technologically advanced nation.

I don't like it that this has put a strain on people's lives, e.g. stress, poor health habits, pollution, extinction of wild animals (there have been wolves and wildcats until the end of 19the century; there are very few bears left), etc.

But overall, positives far outweigh the negatives, and yes, there's nothing I can do about it, and I'm not bitching about it.

yes, good, I agree that we can be proud of the technological and industrial state of Japan.

yes, this success have negative sides, and you mention some of them, important ones.

I'm not sure that positive outweight negative, it depends in which situations and of course there is not much we can do, progress goes too fast for little one as we are can catch up with and try to stop...

[aaltunn]

What's the point of all this?


Japan is not a Western nation, but it's nation that has been "westernized" in the past 150 years.

hi...
expedition to the unknown c.asia vol.1-2 (sven hedin??) :scientists all over europe examines newly discovered material at uygur territories discussing being modern...they met several archaeologists from japan (ealy1900's).Euros sure about that japan is successful at that time because of using west tech.nics.there is a great hegemony about west that no alternative way exists.Japan has been westernized but without dropping out own morals totally.
they say that people never believed in marco polo because such stories about greater civilisations is impossible nor the equals...west is the chosen peoples lands forever... :worried:
so Tarzan is a white instead of being asian or anything else...

japan ,is among the west club housing east, has been westernized for 150 years.japan proves that alternative style of being modern exists. :wave:

(scientists try to discover how 'll they explain the words west/east/left/right those whom coming from far universe )

[yimija]

so Tarzan is a white instead of being asian or anything else...

no, Tarzan is white because the story was written by a white writer, and was played by Johnny Weissmuller.
If a Japanes had written the story, Tarzan would be the descendant of a proud japanese warrior and a lovely geisha.

[Golgo_13]

A Japanese male champion of the "Sasuke" competition would've made a great Tarzan -- swinging from vines.

http://www.tbs.co.jp/program/sasuke2004.html

[yimija]

A Japanese male champion of the "Sasuke" competition would've made a great Tarzan -- swinging from vines.
not sure, but it's a good animation... :D

[Golgo_13]

not sure, but it's a good animation... :D


"Sasuke" is not an animation. It's a real live competition.

[yimija]

"Sasuke" is not an animation. It's a real live competition.
Oh, I think I knew that from the start.
Animation as per some dictionnaries :
3) Movement, liveliness, generally collective. To put the animation in a group.
2) ardor, ardor bet in an action,; vivacity. To discuss with animation.

[Golgo_13]

Moushiwake nai. Gokai shimashita. "anime" ka to omoimashita.

But I really do think that a Sasuke winner would be a good Tarzan . . . or a Spiderman.

[potatoe]

the current situation of where i live, (Britain)
makes Japan a western country, but whats the big deal about being a western country, does mean a big deal?

[digicross]

Under the term used in the book, Japan is now part of Oceania, the same goes for Singapore.

China seems to be also more and more becoming part of Oceania, the same goes for Russia.

In the end, most of the world probably will come under Oceania rules. Interestingly, the final frontier seems to be in the South East Asian area.


Of course, in the book, Japan and China was part of Eastasia, while Europe and the former of Soviet Union was part of Eurasia, and Oceania basically has the largest portion of the three countries.

The equatorial area (with exception of the ones in or near the American continent) were rarely part of any of these countries.

http://www.crcs.k12.ny.us/hs/projects/litcrit/1984.htm

[Wang]

Japan is not a western country. It has taken over some western stuff, but the core and most part of Japan is East Asian.

[Gaki]

the current situation of where i live, (Britain)
makes Japan a western country, but whats the big deal about being a western country, does mean a big deal?

You what ? America is west of the UK. :okashii:
So maybe China and Korea are western as well, since they are in that direction as well. :D

[Jean-Francois]

So maybe China and Korea are western as well, since they are in that direction as well.

I know you're kidding. China and Korea are never western.

Japan... difficult to say. Hmmm, don't you notice the western media like New York Times and the Economists don't really include Japan in Asia? It is always Japan and Asia. Not Japan of Asia.

[Gaki]

I know you're kidding. China and Korea are never western.



Neither is Japan.

[Sinspawne]

Tough question :? It does depend on how you see it.
Geographically, the earth is round so just spin it a bit and east becomes west lol (jk) :hihi:

When it comes to industrialisation. can it be more industrialised?
I've heard that Japan is building so much that the price of concrete reinforcement have gone up all over europe : )
Its on the front line in computer technology as well, and i believe japan uses more of the technology in dayly life than most western countries.

In my view the answer would be yes.. maybe..

[Maciamo]

The more I look at Japan's deep-rooted culture, such as morals or social interractions, and the more I realise how very un-Western Japan is. But it is certainly one of those non-Western countries which has learned and adopted the most from the West in its lifestyle and politico-economic system.

[Jean-Francois]

Neither is Japan.


Honestly, it is none of my business whether Japan is a western country or not.
But before (not as common nowadays), Chinese people referred Japanese as 東 洋 人 , Westerners of the East. So, if “western” is a relative term, then Japan is a Western country (the most westernized? more westernized than those Chinese people who called Japan 東 洋 ) in East Asia. (^_^)

[Hidetoshi]

Hi, everyone

It's really an interesting topic. But in the post-war period (50s - 60s), many Japanese scholars had dicussed to argue that Japan is a Western or Eastern nation. Among them, perhaps Umesao Tadao is one the most famous scholars. He wrote a book named "An Ecological View of History (Japanese Civilization in the World Context)" in Japanese language (Chuo Koron Publishing) (and has just been translated into English currently, 2002, if I remember exactly). From his perspection, he saw the The Old World as an elliptic diagram and divided The Old World into 2 Zones. The first one has 2 part, the western-most and eastern-most of the ellipe, namely Western Europe and Japan, are similar in ecological conditions and developing progress, and the second one located in the center, namely the 4 world of China, India, Russia and Islamic-Mediterranean and its satellite countries in Umesao's view.
From this point of view, we may see lots of things interesting and this book was ranked among the top 10 books that influenced Japanese after WWII (the 4th).

[Golgo_13]

How about this:

Japan doesn't have to be anything but itself.

[King of Tokyo]

How about this:

Japan doesn't have to be anything but itself.

I'll kanpai to that :beer: lol

[Golgo_13]

I'll kanpai to that :beer: lol


Kanpai !!!! :beer:

[Ogumo]

Japan is a eastern nation with far too many western elements for it's own good.

[TwistedMac]

says you! :D :D

[Gackt_Camui]

Of course, it all depends on what we call "Western". There are several definitions.

First, the geographical opposition between Europe and Asia, but that alone has turned out to be a too simple definition, as Australia or New Zealand are more East than Asia, but definitely Western. So is it a cultural or ethnic distinction rather purely geographical ?

Secondly, Western used to refer to the Capitalist world during the cold war. The East-West opposition was especially valid for Europe, but on a global point of view, America the NATO countries laid West, while the communist world (not only the USSR, but also China and North Korea) laid East.

Finally (I think), most Europeans consider that a Western country is about the same as an industrialised/developped one.

The 2 latter points, Japan is definitely Western, and I think that's also where most Europeans would place Japan (from the opinions I have heard). Nonetheless, Japanese always stress the opposition between themselves and Westerners (or foreigners in general). They certainly not feel Western, but what if others consider them as such because they have a different definition ?

Before developping more deeply, I let you reflect on this and give your opinions.

its eastern whats the matter with you :okashii:

[blessed]

Just because they stopped carrying katanas everywhere doesn't mean they stopped being Japanese.

Just because you can find a few Macdonalds' there, doesn't mean they turned American.

European economic policies don't make the country European, it's just that economics was mainly developed in Europe and America.

And just because they embrace some beliefs of Americans doesn't make them
American; I don't suddenly turn Japanese if I start sleeping on the floor and taking off my shoes before entering my house?

Just cause they went through some changes since the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate doesn't mean they are no longer who they are: change is inevitable.

[Ewok85]

I'd call it an Eastern country with Western influences. Apart from geography how people think is what makes a country what it is.

[Golgo_13]

Are we still on this?

Japan is not a western country. It's a modern country.

[Surronded]

I think that is not. The culture and manners are really diferent, i see it from here (i'm not in japan). I can't tell more, but from what i heard (trustable sources) is quite diferent.

[OnegaiNL]

i don't seem to get it why they like western countries that much... our countries truly suck ... and the most what i hate is that stupid import into Japan... because thats destroying the Japanese culture :(

i dont mind if there's anime, manga and more stuff here... but i dont want Japan to change into some stupid western country like USA .

i like Japan how it is / was .... and why do Japanese people always show their t-shirts and stuff with the flag of usa on it... or other countries.. it makes me wanna say.... "ehh i come here for Japan, i don't come here to see stuff from my country"

am i talking the truth or not ?

[TwistedMac]

i don't seem to get it why they like western countries that much... our countries truly suck ... and the most what i hate is that stupid import into Japan... because thats destroying the Japanese culture :(

i dont mind if there's anime, manga and more stuff here... but i dont want Japan to change into some stupid western country like USA .

i like Japan how it is / was .... and why do Japanese people always show their t-shirts and stuff with the flag of usa on it... or other countries.. it makes me wanna say.... "ehh i come here for Japan, i don't come here to see stuff from my country"

am i talking the truth or not ?

not.

your first question (or rather statement):
"i don't seem to get it why they like western countries that much"
I shall explain with an old saying: the grass is always greener on the other side

how japan "was" depends on what era you're talking so i have no idea what it is you want there.. if you mean the samurai period... sure.. why not bring back a time when only the samurai could have names, everyone else were to only be known by their profession ("hi fisherman!" "well waddayaknow! hi cobbler, haven't seen you in a while, how's horsedungsalesman doing?") and samurai killed people for looking at them the wrong way (not an exaduration) and everyone was just plain false and murderous.. that's a GREAT time to live in.. especially if you're horsedungsalesman's apprentice or something.

copying the good stuff from another countries is a way to evolve as a people.. to reach new technologic advances.. what's the use in re-inventing the wheel?

the "it was better in the old days" mentality is dead wrong.. it WASN'T better in the old days.. everyone remembers the good parts of everything...

it's like when i was in the army... I hated every moment of guard duty.. I also don't have a single real memory from guard duty.. or any other boring or otherwise negative task.. I do however have alot of cool memories.. but if I add them all up they'd probably be something like a week.. I didn't do my services for a week.

the bad parts are always set aside.. so whatever picture you have of old japan is romantisized(?) to a very high degree... just go there and enjoy how it is now.

:balloon:

[OnegaiNL]

not.

your first question (or rather statement):
"i don't seem to get it why they like western countries that much"
I shall explain with an old saying: the grass is always greener on the other side

how japan "was" depends on what era you're talking so i have no idea what it is you want there.. if you mean the samurai period... sure.. why not bring back a time when only the samurai could have names, everyone else were to only be known by their profession ("hi fisherman!" "well waddayaknow! hi cobbler, haven't seen you in a while, how's horsedungsalesman doing?") and samurai killed people for looking at them the wrong way (not an exaduration) and everyone was just plain false and murderous.. that's a GREAT time to live in.. especially if you're horsedungsalesman's apprentice or something.

copying the good stuff from another countries is a way to evolve as a people.. to reach new technologic advances.. what's the use in re-inventing the wheel?

the "it was better in the old days" mentality is dead wrong.. it WASN'T better in the old days.. everyone remembers the good parts of everything...

it's like when i was in the army... I hated every moment of guard duty.. I also don't have a single real memory from guard duty.. or any other boring or otherwise negative task.. I do however have alot of cool memories.. but if I add them all up they'd probably be something like a week.. I didn't do my services for a week.

the bad parts are always set aside.. so whatever picture you have of old japan is romantisized(?) to a very high degree... just go there and enjoy how it is now.

:balloon:


well first to say... you use "you can't re-invent the wheel" WAY TOO MUCH IN YOUR POSTS :okashii:

and im talking about the time after WW2 ... and im kind of interested in samurai can't help it but i'd rather live in a country that has it's own and unique culture

you will probably reply and say

"they have their own unique culture"

but in fact that culture is fading in the years... i don't want Japan to change into some european country like a big capital with no nature at all ...

i don't want Japan to change from beautiful .. to some stinky sewer :?

but that's probably only me who thinks this way and looks at it this way... but people don't seem to get it.

i don't come to a country just for technology
because i have enough in my own country

i just want to see alot of the nature and old houses and stuff ...
and about the old saying "the grass is always greener on the other side"
it means copycat everyone ... so you rather see Japan look like USA ... instead of having it's own look ...
it also mean's... if you like a celebrity like Britney Spears or whatever ... everyone should look like that?

and by the way... Japan grew trough import and export ... and not by changing their whole culture into some kind of USA fans culture :okashii:

[Glenn]

Well, Japan is not like the US, or any European country, either. If you don't believe me then just look around a bit on this forum, esp. Maciamo's posts.

Also, this was said in the Why Japanese copy everything (http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10829) thread, but copying and assimilating something into your own culture is not the same thing as becoming a clone of another culture. The Japanese are no more American for importing American things than the Americans are Japanese for importing Japanese things.

[OnegaiNL]

Well, Japan is not like the US, or any European country, either. If you don't believe me then just look around a bit on this forum, esp. Maciamo's posts.

Also, this was said in the Why Japanese copy everything (http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10829) thread, but copying and assimilating something into your own culture is not the same thing as becoming a clone of another culture. The Japanese are no more American for importing American things than the Americans are Japanese for importing Japanese things.

people don't see and don't read
since i said that Japan is slowly changing into an european country
as it's already so mega cool to have english slogans in your commercials so called to be modern.

do you see any real big changes in US ? not really except for that manga and anime gained popularity (but that's mostly because of fansubs)

Japan whatsoever changed alot ... alot of things from the US can be seen in Japan... import and export is important... but i don't see why Japan is evolving too much...alot of traditions (older one's) are cut off
and no im not talking about the samurai one's ... i'm talking about the normal lifestyle one's in those days. Those were cut off in the last 50 years or so .

Will there be more huge changes? Because if Japan is going to look more like USA ... i could go on vacation to USA instead of Japan... b/c it's cheaper.

still i'll go to Japan no matter what...

another note
technology doesn't always bring good.

[TwistedMac]

well first to say... you use "you can't re-invent the wheel" WAY TOO MUCH IN YOUR POSTS :okashii:

once? first time I use it.. not to mention almost first time I post a serious post.

and about the old saying "the grass is always greener on the other side"
it means copycat everyone ... so you rather see Japan look like USA ... instead of having it's own look ...
it also mean's... if you like a celebrity like Britney Spears or whatever ... everyone should look like that?

and by the way... Japan grew trough import and export ... and not by changing their whole culture into some kind of USA fans culture :okashii:

you're not very good at sayings huh?... it means you'll always think everyone else has it better than you do.. that you'd always rather have what they're having...

[kirei_na_me]

OnegaiNL, if you want to talk about this subject, you can go to a really good and popular thread by Maciamo:

http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1303

Let's try to stay on topic, even though this topic is lame to begin with.

[Glenn]

And done. Alright, now:

people don't see and don't read
since i said that Japan is slowly changing into an european country
as it's already so mega cool to have english slogans in your commercials so called to be modern.

Since it's not a European country and it's slowly changing, why couldn't you go there and not have a problem with it being European?

do you see any real big changes in US ? not really except for that manga and anime gained popularity (but that's mostly because of fansubs)

Well, there is the influx of kanji tatoos and just kanji everywhere in general, video games, anime, and martial arts.

Japan whatsoever changed alot ... alot of things from the US can be seen in Japan... import and export is important... but i don't see why Japan is evolving too much...alot of traditions (older one's) are cut off
and no im not talking about the samurai one's ... i'm talking about the normal lifestyle one's in those days. Those were cut off in the last 50 years or so .

What traditions have Japan lost from the past 50 years that you so desperately want back?

Will there be more huge changes? Because if Japan is going to look more like USA ... i could go on vacation to USA instead of Japan... b/c it's cheaper.

See above on this one.

another note
technology doesn't always bring good.

What does that have to do with anything?

[blessed]

aha, I have it: why should they be western... if that means having a big mac once in a while, or watching disney or drinking Earl grey or listening to.... Radiohead (go Radiohead!!!!! :D)...
I see a lot of people eating sushi, watching anime, driving japanese cars, buying sony products, playing Playstation, Gamecube...and I'm currently on a site called "Japanese Reference"...
...in other words, I, and probably the westerners reading this, are getting "easternised", "they" are getting "westernised", and we'll all happily meet in the middle, or switch sides, hwhatever...

another new though: making the east democratic isnt westernising them... just like getting laws out of Babylon (located, ironically, in ancient Iraq) wasn't... "Mesopotamianising" everyone; its just the spread of information.

[cicatriz esp]

Confucianism is too heavily ingrained in the people's mindset for Japan to be considered Western. A lot of that philosophy does not mesh with judeo-christian philosophy or outlook. As much as the Japanese would like it to.

[Maciamo]

why should they be western... if that means having a big mac once in a while, or watching disney or drinking Earl grey or listening to.... Radiohead (go Radiohead!!!!! :D)...
I see a lot of people eating sushi, watching anime, driving japanese cars, buying sony products, playing Playstation, Gamecube...and I'm currently on a site called "Japanese Reference"...
...in other words, I, and probably the westerners reading this, are getting "easternised", "they" are getting "westernised", and we'll all happily meet in the middle, or switch sides, hwhatever...

Good point about borrowing each others products or inventions, but I don't think products themselves make somebody Western or Eastern. There are so many products that can be found worldwide nowadays. Then, what if this or that country hadn't invented or commercialized worldwide this or that popular product (McDonald, BMW, Evian, Parmesan cheese, Playstation...) ? Would it make these countries like Western or Eastern ? Certainly not. There are no Starbucks in most European countries, and they are everywhere in Japan. So what ? That's only the product of one country, not the whole West. Similarily, mangas are Japanese, but not "Eastern". Video games were not even invented in Japan, and most PC games are made in the West.

That bring us back to the question : "What does it mean to be Western ?"

- being Caucasian ? hmm, maybe, but then what about well-adaptedimmigrants or black Americans ? Are they just people who have adopted Western ways ? I guess so (that does not include lots of immigrants and a sizeable portions of the Afro-American population, who have a noticeable different, and un-Western culture of their own).

- being from a Judeo-christian background ? I don't like that idea for 2 reasons. 1) Western culture has its root in Greco-Roman civilization, which predates Christianity, and 2) most younger European are definitely not Christians (even less Jewish) nowadays.

- using a Western legal, political and economic system ? maybe, but then lots of countries are Westernizing fast, and Japan is definitely Western then.

- being part of the Western Civilization and way of thinking, including the whole influence of Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, and European civilizations ? Yes ! That is probably the answer. This is also why a whole country cannot be considered "Western", as it depends too much on individuals themselves. Take a country like Peru or Venezuela. I am sure some (Caucasian, upper-class) people will be very Western in their way of thinking. But is it true of Quechuan or other Ameridian people ? Is it true of meztisos and so on ? Mostly not. That is why very often "Westernness" is brought back to being "Caucasian" because almost all Caucasians are Western in thinking, and only a minority of the world's non-Caucasian population are Western in thinking (including adopted children, etc.).

As for the Japanese, I am sure some of them think like Westerners, but most are still too influenced by Japanese traditional values and Confucianism to be called Westerners. But I do know a few people (who happen to speak English well, be very interested in Western countries, and in favour of change in Japan toward more Westernization and against Confucianist values) that I consider more Western than Japanese.

[corocoro]

Hi, I'm Japanese and this is my first post here.

Is Japan a Western country?...

NO! not at all!! No matter how you guys see us or our country, we are sooooooooo asian! Why should we be western anyway? and I don't know why you guys think that we want to be westerner which is not true. What would you think if we say you are easterner(or Japanese?) because you eat our food, watching anime and buying Japanese products etc... I'm sure that most of you would say "NOOOOOOOOO WAAAAAAY!"and start to laugh.

I think it's the same thing. We may love wearing "t-shirts and stuff with the flag of usa on it... or other countries" but it's not like we want to be like the US either westerner, Japan is Japan. It's only my opinion, but Japanese are so very curious and we accept and swallow evrything that is appeal to us. don't even think much about where it come from. We just love things that we think cool or better!

Western countries are happen to be more advanced than eastern countries so Japan was much infulenced by western. but if it was a eastern dominated world, things might have been different. Who knows?:)

I don't mind what you parsonally would think about our country, but please don't say we want to be westerner or something that is untrue. That makes me kind of sad...;)

[-Yu-]

Well, it's true, some of Japanese want to be like westerners or want to make this country westerned.
Therefore many things have been done in order to lead this country into capitalism by them.

That's a subject of another thread though.

I think, yes, as some mentioned, Japan isn't really like westerned but americanized, here in Japan, generally when people talk about western, what country comes in their minds first is America, that is to say Japan is influenced by America most, even in uncouncious level.

[Maciamo]

Hi Corocoro,


NO! not at all!! No matter how you guys see us or our country, we are sooooooooo asian! Why should we be western anyway? and I don't know why you guys think that we want to be westerner which is not true.

We don't want you to be Westerners. The point of this thread is to understand what it really means to be "Western". For example, do you think that Japanese-Americans (2nd, 3rd or 4th generation) are Wersterners ? If they were born there, speak English as their first language, think and behave like Americans, it doesn't matter whether their blood or name is Japanese, they are American, and thus Westerners.

What would you think if we say you are easterner(or Japanese?) because you eat our food, watching anime and buying Japanese products etc... I'm sure that most of you would say "NOOOOOOOOO WAAAAAAY!"and start to laugh.

That is where you maybe be wrong. As Blessed said above, some (Western) people like so much Japanese products and culture that they actually want to become Japanese or do things like the Japanese. If someone can actually learn so much about Japan and behave so much like a Japanese, speak Japanese, live in Japan, get Japanese nationality, etc., can't they be considered to be Japanese and therefore Eatsern ?

But where is the limit for someone to shift from Western to Eastern ? As I wrote 2 posts above, I don't think that only using or liking products from one country changes one's Westernness or Easternness. Otherwise Japan would be a Western country, because about 90% of all products in Japan are Western in origin (even Japanese cars or TV's, as they are originally Western inventions).

If we consider the State and not the people, Japan is very Western, as it has a Western-style constitution, legal system, parliament, ministries, courts, and most laws were copied on the West (driving rules, real estate regulations, commercial laws, etc.).

So, I guess the only thing that remains to determine whether Japanese people are Eastern or Western is the way they think and behave. Considering the huge differences of culture between Western (sep. European) countries, I think the only real important thing they have in common is the Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian heritage. And this is what Japan doesn't have. Well, partly, as it has learned and copied a lot from the West that come from it. There are also so many words from English or other European languages in Japanese, than the language itself is "slowly" Westernizing itself. What about Japanese people who have lived abroad, speak English and think more like Westerners than traditional Japanese ? Couldn't we say that this minority is actually Western ?

Thank you for you consideration.


I think, yes, as some mentioned, Japan isn't really like westerned but americanized, here in Japan, generally when people talk about western, what country comes in their minds first is America, that is to say Japan is influenced by America most, even in uncouncious level.

That is funny and a bit sad at the same time. The US is only one of many Western countries. If Japanese people focus only on America, they will never understand what it means to be Western, as they cannot see the huge cultural differences between Western countries. By the way, there are about 500 million Europeans, but only 280 million Americans. Only the EU now has 20 official languages + many dialects or non official languages.

I often hear Japanese think that all Westerners are Americans or "like the Americans". I am shocked everytime I hear it. Stereotypes like "Westerners are individualistic", or "they speak too directly or frankly", or "they are more self-confident than the Japanese", are all false.

Greeks, Spaniards or Portuguese are certainly as collectivist (if not more) than Japanese. English people (esp. middle or upper-class) are famous for being polite, hypocritical and using a lot of understatement, making them very alike to the Japanese. Then many English or Nordic (Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish) people are quieter and often seem less self-confident than even the Japanese. As for such things as being well-prepared, meticulous, hard-working, etc. Japanese and German people are also very similar.

[Reiku]

LOL

Interesting thread...

...personally I gave up on questions like this when I was 2 and realized that the earth was round. :D

[stupidumboy]

here is my very simple and ignorant answer but I think usually the definition of western means geographycally European continent related ,looking like white europeans.(including anglo,latin,german,nordic etc etc)

many aspects can be discussed in religious,cultural,phiolosphical etc etc etc point of views but I think usually we just remind geographical and outward looking things to judge whether it is western or not.

is japan western country? my answer is no.

[Maciamo]

here is my very simple and ignorant answer but I think usually the definition of western means geographycally European continent related ,looking like white europeans.(including anglo,latin,german,nordic etc etc)

This is a bit simple indeed. Australia is a Western country (nobody would deny it) eventhough it is geographically as East as Japan. Because Western culture and people have spread on all over the world, the original geographic meaning of "Western" has lost its significance. Because lots of Western countries have become ethnically mixed (like the US, UK or Australia), being Western does not just mean being Caucasian. Because geography and ethic origins do not matter to be Western, it's more in the way people think and behave, but without forgetting that there are huge differences between Italian, Finnish, Irish, French, American or Australian people, but they are all Western nevertheless. Is there enough similarity between the Japanese and people from these Western countries to consider Japan one of them ? I could find many similarities between the Japanese and the Germans, Italians or Britons - although much less with the French or Americans.

[stupidumboy]

This is a bit simple indeed. Australia is a Western country (nobody would deny it) eventhough it is geographically as East as Japan. Because Western culture and people have spread on all over the world, the original geographic meaning of "Western" has lost its significance. Because lots of Western countries have become ethnically mixed (like the US, UK or Australia), being Western does not just mean being Caucasian. Because geography and ethic origins do not matter to be Western, it's more in the way people think and behave, but without forgetting that there are huge differences between Italian, Finnish, Irish, French, American or Australian people, but they are all Western nevertheless. Is there enough similarity between the Japanese and people from these Western countries to consider Japan one of them ? I could find many similarities between the Japanese and the Germans, Italians or Britons - although much less with the French or Americans.

@Maciamo,

Of course Australia does belong to Oceania geographicaly,but they tend to look for their ancestors origin from Britain and they still tend to put more concernings on their British identity.(therefore its related to european somehow) Its much like that Canadians are proud of their identity being as the member of british commen wealth.
I am not saying that they are racists but they are just very proud of their identity ties with Europe. thats all.


Of course,there are other minority ethnities living in Austalia or Canada and the majority white people try their best to give the equal chances for them.
But the Asian minority also tend to try to look for their identity from Asian countries from where their ancestors moved if they were on the situation to clarify themselves somehow by all means.

Many social science scholars often tend to put these notions first hand when they make some generalization or new findings-like samuel huntington or francis fukuyama.

Yes as you told,the answer might be related to that of the way people think and behave,but still people tend to put it behind than geographical origin and ethnical looking.I think due to influence of medias and western standadized education globally,people's ways of thinking and behaviors has less things to do with defining the western or eastern things today.But it should come with individual difference.

[ippolito]

I think that Japan it is between West and East.
It is my opinion that jp people have lost a part of they identity
forgetting their old culture and living in futuristic hitech life.
Too much u.s. way of life...expecially in big towns like Tokyo.
Well is their life it is their country so they decide wich is their favorite model.
What can I say that they do not enjoy too much their life if coomon people
as live for work and not like we say we work to live.
Normally an italian worker could have from 22 to 26 days of vacation
that means with Sundays and Saturadys more than one month.

As far I know in Japan the workers could have a week or 2 weeks off.
So with this style of life they will be happy at 65 years when retired.
It my opinion that a young coople should have a space of their life suficient to travel in Japan or in the world....
I am not anymore young and before I have been travelling a lot now cannot anymore like before....but when younger I visit many places in this world
I met a lot of people and culture...and I think travel meet other culture
different way of life and see marwelous attractions is one of the best thing a man can do.
I find funnny (in a good way) the jp groups that visit Italy in 5 days
they run so much I understand that they must do all with a week ....
You cannot image how many historical reachness we have here and need more that a week only to visit Rome...image Florence Venice etc....
hello all
Ippolito

[cicatriz esp]

I think that Japan it is between West and East.
It is my opinion that jp people have lost a part of they identity
forgetting their old culture and living in futuristic hitech life.
Too much u.s. way of life...

Interesting. Forgive me if i am wrong, but in your opinion, the US way of life is fast and high tech. I would say that this applies to the big cities, but not real