> > Now that I've gotten going on this stuff, I might as well follow through on the thought. Has anyone else ever wondered about the arbitrary labelling of "The West" and "The East"? I mean, they're basically on opposite sides of the world, so why does the Pacific Ocean get the pleasure of being "The Impassable Barrier" at which we split the plant apart when making our flat maps?
>
> The division between the lands we know as "The West" and the lands we know as "The East" is cultural. Now that we have a foot solidly in the information age, we're starting to become a bit more familiar with each other's culture, but even so, plunk a random American in the middle of Japan, even one that watches anime, and that person will be completely lost about how to go about the conventions of every day life. Western businessmen that need to make business trips to Japan or China are given seminars to educate them in protocol and etiquette. But if you knew nothing about France or Portugal or Brazil or Norway, and were suddenly plunged into one of those countries, well, the culture shock would likely put you into some amusing situations, some embarrassing situations, but probably nothing of real consequence. You certainly wouldn't inadvertently start a world war.
>
> Even post-USSR Russia is alien to us. Look at what recently happened in the news -- we had a guy over there who was convicted of spying and could have spend an unconscionable number of years in prison had he not been pardoned and sent home for humanitarian reasons (he had a rare form of cancer). My understanding is that he was just going about his business and did something that we wouldn't think a thing about but which, by Russia's mindset, was a great offense.
>
> So that's why we have this vague notion of two halves of the world. Why they were called "The West" and "The East" is, I think, twofold: one, the international date line, running through the Pacific, clearly defines what is "West" and what is "East." Two, the means by which the discovery of Earth's lands came to be known to everyone by an east-to-west direction of exploration, and so the New Lands were always thought of as "west of here." (With all due respect to the American Indians, who came to America from Asia before the Europeans did; the difference is that they didn't go back and tell everybody about the New World.)
>
> I asked Brunnen-G (from New Zealand, for those of you who don't know) about this once. I asked her if she thought of herself as living in "The West" or "The East," given that New Zealand is as eastern as it gets, yet NZ culture is so very British. (I've heard it said that the city of Christchurch, on South Island, seems more British than a lot of actual British cities.) She said that, yes, she considers herself part of "The West," even though exotic places like Japan and Thailand are just a bit to her northwest. I would assume Australia would think of themselves in a similar manner.

Yes, in Australia we think of our selves as being in "the west". But you can also speak of an Eastern country being "Westernised", which means they are being heavily influenced by Western culture.

Hey, in Western Australia, we tend to refer to ourselves as living "in the West", so that that again harkens back to the country-centric(I don't think that's a word, but bear with me) view of the land we live in.

ding"just had to add my view"dong