Canada is like the quintessential “western” country. But it possible for Canada to instead be seen as a non-western country? What does “western” mean anyway? How can I have Canada be as “western” as Russia or India?
Have Canada be considered a non-western country
- Thread starter Siberian Tiger
- Start date
By Canada you means the modern landmass? and India ain't western at all. Russia yes, but India ain't...maybe is colonized by a non white European, non nazarean? Muslims? fully native Canada? Japanese/chinese/korean? Nusatarans?
You seem to have misread my last sentience. What I was asking was how to make Canada just as “western” as India (in other words: not at all). As for the first question, I just mean Upper Canada and Lower Canada.
Yeah but Russia is western, just not the political one, or a vassal of the Anglosphere. But that's the point, either we've a fully native Canadian landmass or colonize by a non european
Western is a very vague term. It can mean anything from White to Christian to Capitalist to American to British to Roman to Greek to High-Income to Democratic to liberal depending on the context. I prefer not to use the term western because of how vague it can be.
There really is no way for the modern nation-state of Canada to be considered non-western since its a British colony filled with European immigrants. If you just mean the landmass, then either prevent the colonization of Canada somehow, have the British support a large Native American state in modern-day Canada, or have another group of people like the Chinese or the Japanese or Arabs or Africans colonize modern-day Canada. Whatever POD you pick will probably also butterfly away the USA.
There really is no way for the modern nation-state of Canada to be considered non-western since its a British colony filled with European immigrants. If you just mean the landmass, then either prevent the colonization of Canada somehow, have the British support a large Native American state in modern-day Canada, or have another group of people like the Chinese or the Japanese or Arabs or Africans colonize modern-day Canada. Whatever POD you pick will probably also butterfly away the USA.
The easiest way I can see is to change the common perception of what it takes to be a "western" state. For example, presume a stronger and longer-lasting conflict between Catholics and Protestants, with religion the dividing line for most people's conception of what is and isn't civilized and Catholics and Protestants firmly viewed as separate faiths. (For bonus points, have western protestants view say Buddhists and Orthodox Christians as basically misguided protestants, while Islam and Hinduism are clearly Catholic traditions of other religious revelations.) This set of perceptions could develop / be cemented very late- say if an early Italian unification leads to a wide-scale European religious war in the late 1700s / early 1800s.
Canada's early colonization by the French makes it a very difficult nation to make entirely Protestant dominated. So there you go- American and British thinkers view a Catholic majority state as a barely civilized outpost of an 'Eastern' (Rome is farther East than London, anyway) enemy.
The less likely option is messier. Suppose that the American Revolution goes much worse for the British, and that during the course of the Revolution the Quebec elite also rise up, as a separate but co-belligerent ally of the Continental Army. Perhaps Carleton never became governor of Quebec, the Quebec Act never got passed, and the occupation of New France has been much more brutal in TTL. Then, the Americans guarantee the independence of this alt-Canada, but it doesn't join the American federation in any respect. (Or it does, and leaves before the US constitution is ratified). The new Canada will still be considered Western at this point, but suppose that it effectively entirely fails as a state. Vicious infighting for control of a powerless government, lots of random little settlements settling down with the local native bands to create Metis cultures, and so forth. (Perhaps we even see a Paraguay-style government-directed idealization of mixed-race cultures, although this seems a little improbable even for me.) Over time people associate the name Canada with the largely non-white northern wastes of North America; with the most economically valuable territory having been absorbed into the US. The rump alt-Canada might not be viewed as any more Western than Russia, even if it eventually got its act together to some degree- which it presumably would have to, as the US isn't going to tolerate total anarchy on its northern border forever.
Canada's early colonization by the French makes it a very difficult nation to make entirely Protestant dominated. So there you go- American and British thinkers view a Catholic majority state as a barely civilized outpost of an 'Eastern' (Rome is farther East than London, anyway) enemy.
The less likely option is messier. Suppose that the American Revolution goes much worse for the British, and that during the course of the Revolution the Quebec elite also rise up, as a separate but co-belligerent ally of the Continental Army. Perhaps Carleton never became governor of Quebec, the Quebec Act never got passed, and the occupation of New France has been much more brutal in TTL. Then, the Americans guarantee the independence of this alt-Canada, but it doesn't join the American federation in any respect. (Or it does, and leaves before the US constitution is ratified). The new Canada will still be considered Western at this point, but suppose that it effectively entirely fails as a state. Vicious infighting for control of a powerless government, lots of random little settlements settling down with the local native bands to create Metis cultures, and so forth. (Perhaps we even see a Paraguay-style government-directed idealization of mixed-race cultures, although this seems a little improbable even for me.) Over time people associate the name Canada with the largely non-white northern wastes of North America; with the most economically valuable territory having been absorbed into the US. The rump alt-Canada might not be viewed as any more Western than Russia, even if it eventually got its act together to some degree- which it presumably would have to, as the US isn't going to tolerate total anarchy on its northern border forever.
Have the English return Canada in the 1763 Peace of Paris rather than Haiti. Reinforce the Native American Population with refugees from the Northwest Territories, and let Upper And Lower Canada become an unofficial officially French 'Indian Territory'. Have enough intermarriage between French and Indians to create a dominant 'Metis' ruling class. Deliberately not conquer it, as the Indian Refugees in Canada are not in the Northwest Territories, which frees up those lands to white settlement and keeps British North America happy and not the United States.
Quite hard to contemplate on it, even in both Pacific coast and rest of the OTL Western provinces most specifically if it involved an über-wank involving Chukotko-Kamchatkan people.
Last edited:
Russia is objectively "Western" IMO, but isn't considered so in vernacular simply because it's poorer, non-democratic, and politically opposed to most other "Western countries". So have Canada be 1. Much poorer, which is hard to do or 2. Have Canada be opposed to other Western countries. Both of these things are very difficult as Canada was an amalgamation of leftover British North American colonies in North America, and is necessarily dependent on either the US or UK for protection and trade, which automatically makes them very Western.
Yup.
Russian isn't Western. It isn't a Western European nor historically Catholic state.
Russia is neither historically Western European nor historically Catholic and didn't as much engage in some of the historical events that define the mythos of other Western countries like the reanassance, protestantism and the revolutions just following after the French one. So unless Western is a by-word for European, it isn't Western.
That's a very narrow definition of Western that IMO doesn't really make sense. Is Greece not Western? Romania? Ukraine?
Much of Russia's culture, religion, writing system, and claim to political legitimacy is descended from the Roman Empire. I don't know what you would call that other than Western.
People are asking what “Western” is, what I’m wondering is what “Canada” is for purposes of this challenge? A state filling most or all of the borders of OTL Canada, and/or one that has some kind of significant shared history with OTL Canada?
What I’m thinking is some kind of mid-18th century crisis disrupts Western European colonization efforts, Russia is able to exercise control over more territory, although lightly and mostly through trading posts. A Métis population speaking Russian as their lingua franca grows and is plugged into the central plains culture complex, spreading the language and orthodoxy. For whatever reason you like, Russian control falls away - internal revolution (USA option), failure of control (Mexico option), or peaceful handoff (Canada option). Some of the Native peoples who would have been killed in place or removed to reservations instead go north; like OTL it is also a destination for runaway slaves. This *Canada is more focused on the Pacific and has closer ties with Japan, China and the Philippines, and receives fair numbers of immigrants from those areas. By 2020 *Canada is a Russian-creole-speaking Pacific-focused nation of primarily Native and Asian descent, with Orthodoxy and a collection of indigenous religions as the main faiths. With less direct foreign control, it has developed a unique cultural and political environment that owes little to Europe.
I think you can swing something like that plausibly enough. Entirely ejecting Europe from the east coast of Canada is harder. You can always say this alt-Canada gains the strength to push them out through war, and then the population is either expelled or successfully absorbed.
What I’m thinking is some kind of mid-18th century crisis disrupts Western European colonization efforts, Russia is able to exercise control over more territory, although lightly and mostly through trading posts. A Métis population speaking Russian as their lingua franca grows and is plugged into the central plains culture complex, spreading the language and orthodoxy. For whatever reason you like, Russian control falls away - internal revolution (USA option), failure of control (Mexico option), or peaceful handoff (Canada option). Some of the Native peoples who would have been killed in place or removed to reservations instead go north; like OTL it is also a destination for runaway slaves. This *Canada is more focused on the Pacific and has closer ties with Japan, China and the Philippines, and receives fair numbers of immigrants from those areas. By 2020 *Canada is a Russian-creole-speaking Pacific-focused nation of primarily Native and Asian descent, with Orthodoxy and a collection of indigenous religions as the main faiths. With less direct foreign control, it has developed a unique cultural and political environment that owes little to Europe.
I think you can swing something like that plausibly enough. Entirely ejecting Europe from the east coast of Canada is harder. You can always say this alt-Canada gains the strength to push them out through war, and then the population is either expelled or successfully absorbed.
Last edited:
Is is often included for the saw of being part of the mythos of the Western European an historically Catholic states but I'll say, yes, Romania and Ukraine aren't Western.
Greece again shouldn't be but is sometimes included for the sake of it's continuity in the mythos of the West but technically Egypt and Babylonia are part of the far past of the Mythos of the West but aren't included so Greece shouldn't be.
So only formerly Catholic nations are Western? That doesn't make sense. Are Greek Catholics simply not Western because they were formerly Orthodox?
And you are saying freaking GREECE shouldn't be included as part of the Western mythos? Huh?
Anyway, back to OP, again it his hard to make Canada non-Western since it's rather fundamentally a Western nation and a rather new one.
It's simple, you can do it in OTL, today.
You just have to find an average European (preferably living in the countryside to increase your chances) and ask the question. The chances are that he will answer in the negative.
Simply because "the West" as currently used (and more particularly in the Anglo-Saxon world) does not represent anything really concrete.
By Formerly Catholic I mean the vast majority being Catholic and like bring Catholic in the Medieval and/or Early modern era.
I would distinct the West from Europe and say Greece isn't Western.
I don’t know, Canada was pretty authoritarian and it was used for natural resources (like a lot of developing countries today) in the early parts of it’s history.
The term may be vague but I still hear it being used quite often (e.g. western media).