Yes, large parts of "west" are not "pro-west". Moreover, even most liberal liberals will use utilitarian philosophy in case of war or war-like situation. Usually, it takes about 3 years of war to convert a liberal country back to utilitarian. It's why USA and Britain bombed Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, which is a war crime, — because they are engaged in war for more than 3 years.
Liberal philosophy is luxury. NATO allowed to liberal countries to rise. Without NATO, a war with a strong neighborhood will quickly kick out any liberal minds from heads of people of a west country.
Liberal philosophy can be represented in mathematical logic by simple algorithm in a simple game. Game rules: player can make bad(+1,-1), e.g. war, neutral (0,0) or good (+1,+1), e.g. cooperation, moves. Optimal strategy: do a single good move to player neighborhood(s) and then copy their behavior, AKA "pay it forward". It's proven that this algorithm is optimal for growth when all players have equal size and power. For game with unequal players or when group dynamic is allowed (e.g alliances), it's good (not an optimal, because group dynamic is Turing complete, so it's impossible to prove that an algorithm is optimal) only for biggest and most powerful players, otherwise liberal algorithm will make the player to be the most valuable target very quickly. So, to win as liberal, player must be big and powerful, like USA, or be member of large defense alliance, like NATO. If you are liberal and you are nor USA nor in NATO, you are target (e.g. Kuwait - Iraq, Taiwan - China) and your life will be short, unless you will convert your country to utilitarian dictatorship or will create a mix of two, like in Israel, which is unstable.
Liberal philosophy is luxury. NATO allowed to liberal countries to rise. Without NATO, a war with a strong neighborhood will quickly kick out any liberal minds from heads of people of a west country.
Liberal philosophy can be represented in mathematical logic by simple algorithm in a simple game. Game rules: player can make bad(+1,-1), e.g. war, neutral (0,0) or good (+1,+1), e.g. cooperation, moves. Optimal strategy: do a single good move to player neighborhood(s) and then copy their behavior, AKA "pay it forward". It's proven that this algorithm is optimal for growth when all players have equal size and power. For game with unequal players or when group dynamic is allowed (e.g alliances), it's good (not an optimal, because group dynamic is Turing complete, so it's impossible to prove that an algorithm is optimal) only for biggest and most powerful players, otherwise liberal algorithm will make the player to be the most valuable target very quickly. So, to win as liberal, player must be big and powerful, like USA, or be member of large defense alliance, like NATO. If you are liberal and you are nor USA nor in NATO, you are target (e.g. Kuwait - Iraq, Taiwan - China) and your life will be short, unless you will convert your country to utilitarian dictatorship or will create a mix of two, like in Israel, which is unstable.