Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It depends in what sense.
If it comes to *culture* - yes, it might be more reminiscent of Latin America, just for a fact that it's predominantly Catholic culture (that's Spain's background.)
When it comes to economy/laws - no, it's different from Latin America. Spain is part of European Union, so of course the corruption is under control there, and the wealth/technology are on a par with other developed European nations.
Truth to be told, even though Spain was one of the powerful European countries back in the Middle ages, when it received its colonies, later on with time Spain became rather weak and ineffective among other European nations. "Latin countries" ( except for France) were lagging behind. It were OTHER European nations that played the leading role in Industrialization, as much as in progression of the governments - namely England first of all. That's why colonies founded by Great Britain received the full benefit of it - as far as laws and industrialization went. Latin countries (Spain, Portugal, Italy) were lagging behind, that's why the colonies that Spain obtained earlier in time, were less advanced as well.
That's why when people refer to the "West" ( Vs "EAST") in European terms, they consider former British colonies as part of the "West," but Latin America doesn't fit into the same category.
I'll agree except for a few important points. Spain and England had very different goals when it came to colonization. Spain colonized almost strictly to plunder wealth for the crown. They didn't encourage Spaniards to move to their colonies. They sent almost exclusively troops to their colonies, not families looking to start new lives. Once the wealth was gone, Spain didn't care what happened in their colonies for the most part. Those colonies were of little use to Spain when the wealth was gone.
England also wanted to benefit of course from it's colonies and did so but they had a different approach and a long term goal of colonizing and keeping military bases in their colonies along with moving families there with women and children. The long term goals of the Spanish and English were very different.
You can't include Italy into the mix in this at all. Italy didn't exist as a country until the 1860s. It was comprised of many small independent countries and city states until then. It wasn't until the advent of Mussolini in the early 1900s that Italy had any interest as a nation of obtaining colonies in Africa or anywhere else. Columbus was not Italian. He was from the nation of Genoa and worked for the Spanish Crown.
I'll agree except for a few important points. Spain and England had very different goals when it came to colonization. Spain colonized almost strictly to plunder wealth for the crown. They didn't encourage Spaniards to move to their colonies. They sent almost exclusively troops to their colonies, not families looking to start new lives. Once the wealth was gone, Spain didn't care what happened in their colonies for the most part. Those colonies were of little use to Spain when the wealth was gone.
England also wanted to benefit of course from it's colonies and did so but they had a different approach and a long term goal of colonizing and keeping military bases in their colonies along with moving families there with women and children. The long term goals of the Spanish and English were very different.
Well there we go. That explains right there why the US/Canada/Australia are regarded as "part of the West," since the British were planning these colonies to be their future bastions, with their own people in charge and governmental system/laws/economy being run their way.
Spain apparently didn't have what it takes to plan things in the same manner, in the long run.
Quote:
You can't include Italy into the mix in this at all. Italy didn't exist as a country until the 1860s. It was comprised of many small independent countries and city states until then. It wasn't until the advent of Mussolini in the early 1900s that Italy had any interest as a nation of obtaining colonies in Africa or anywhere else. Columbus was not Italian. He was from the nation of Genoa and worked for the Spanish Crown.
I don't remember Italian history in particular, but I added Italy for the sake of the argument, that European countries are not the same in terms of development and their impact on the world economy/laws.
So it's incorrect to assume that once a country is created with the help of ANY European power, it automatically shares the same standing/qualities with the rest of them.
Well there we go. That explains right there why the US/Canada/Australia are regarded as "part of the West," since the British were planning these colonies to be their future bastions, with their own people in charge and governmental system/laws/economy being run their way.
Spain apparently didn't have what it takes to plan things in the same manner, in the long run.
I don't remember Italian history in particular, but I added Italy for the sake of the argument, that European countries are not the same in terms of development and their impact on the world economy/laws.
So it's incorrect to assume that once a country is created with the help of ANY European power, it automatically shares the same standing/qualities with the rest of them.
In a larger sense..you have a point..as most Western cultures like to trace their civilization from Rome.
I suspect that West vs East may have a cultural context from the Crusades as well.
The South American Countries that comprise what is known as 'Latin American' --were essentially America's economic playground for a long time..a lot of the Communism you see in that area traces its origin in opposition to companies such as United Fruit..many of the coups and manipulations CIA was guilty of was in the interest of those companies.
I find it interesting that so many either don't know or don't care about the US role in destabilizing the area as a matter of foreign policy.
The hate many feel to the US...was well earned, by us. All for cheap bananas, coffee and clothing.
There is also the issue that it was..and is...seen a matter of our interest that no nation grow too powerful...so close to us. One of the reasons we kicked Mexico in the crotch so many times.
Some truth in this...there can only be one big dog...on our block. Might as well be us, eh?
Last edited by EvilEyeFleegle; 01-20-2018 at 09:27 PM..
In a larger sense..you have a point..as most Western cultures like to trace their civilization from Rome.
I suspect that West vs East may have a cultural context from the Crusades as well.
The whole point of calling "Latin America" Latin America is to trace that culture to Rome. It's to remind everyone that they are descendants of the Spanish who are linked to ancient Rome thru culture and similar language. After all Spain and the Iberian peninsular were an important part of the Roman Empire and what is now England as well didn't escape being conquered by Rome. The Romans named that island Britannia, not the English. Look up how many words in English have Latin origin.
"About 80 percent of the entries in any English dictionary are borrowed, mainly from Latin. Over 60 percent of all English words have Greek or Latin roots. In the vocabulary of the sciences and technology, the figure rises to over 90 percent. About 10 percent of the Latin vocabulary has found its way directly into English without an intermediary (usually French)."
The whole point of calling "Latin America" Latin America is to trace that culture to Rome. It's to remind everyone that they are descendants of the Spanish who are linked to ancient Rome thru culture and similar language. After all Spain and the Iberian peninsular were an important part of the Roman Empire and what is now England as well didn't escape being conquered by Rome. The Romans named that island Britannia, not the English. Look up how many words in English have Latin origin.
"About 80 percent of the entries in any English dictionary are borrowed, mainly from Latin. Over 60 percent of all English words have Greek or Latin roots. In the vocabulary of the sciences and technology, the figure rises to over 90 percent. About 10 percent of the Latin vocabulary has found its way directly into English without an intermediary (usually French)."
Given the fact that most of the people's that Rome conquered were Pre-literate--it's not a surprise that Latin played a huge influence in forming the modern English language. Along with the Norse and the remnants of Old Saxon.
Culturally, however--with a nod to the extreme versatility of English---English is not Latin, culturally---Spanish has that role.
I'll agree except for a few important points. Spain and England had very different goals when it came to colonization. Spain colonized almost strictly to plunder wealth for the crown. They didn't encourage Spaniards to move to their colonies. They sent almost exclusively troops to their colonies, not families looking to start new lives. Once the wealth was gone, Spain didn't care what happened in their colonies for the most part. Those colonies were of little use to Spain when the wealth was gone.
England also wanted to benefit of course from it's colonies and did so but they had a different approach and a long term goal of colonizing and keeping military bases in their colonies along with moving families there with women and children. The long term goals of the Spanish and English were very different.
You can't include Italy into the mix in this at all. Italy didn't exist as a country until the 1860s. It was comprised of many small independent countries and city states until then. It wasn't until the advent of Mussolini in the early 1900s that Italy had any interest as a nation of obtaining colonies in Africa or anywhere else. Columbus was not Italian. He was from the nation of Genoa and worked for the Spanish Crown.
Actually Spain did actively encourage colonization of its colonies. Same with Portugal to Brazil. Large numbers did migrate there with the families. After all the wealthy in Latin America during Colonial times were controlled by the Whites there. Spain did continue to get wealth from that region.Even when much of the Gold and Silver ran out, they went into cash crops such as sugar and coffee. THow do you explain large numbers of Blacks living in the Spanish speaking West Indies, and they are not rich in minerals? Actually the British West Indies were not much different from the Spanish WEst Indies, in its dependence of cash crops and Black slaves. So much of them did not go there just for mining, but due to cash crops.That the same as Brazil. This did make Spain and Portugal very rich however the corruption and Spain getting into expensive wars in Europe, did have a large den't in the Spanish economy. With Brazil, in the 18th century since Portugal had a small population
Actually Argentina was one of the worlds wealthiest countries 100 years ago.If it kept it up it would be considered Western. But it had serious problems with corruption since then and it declined.
Last edited by other99; 01-20-2018 at 11:12 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That explains right there why the US/Canada/Australia are regarded as "part of the West," since the British were planning these colonies to be their future bastions, with their own people in charge and governmental system/laws/economy being run their way. 
And then there's this....
