Is being modern = to being westernize?

Since I was in this module about managing culture diversity in workplace, my professor recommended this book. The writer is a Culterist. One of the chapter makes me realize that being modern doesn't equate to being westernize.

Although the West attempts to pre-dominate the world thru war, it all came to a halt, due to strains in the military expenses. The quest and purpose to dominate comes down to ashes . One of many countries were the Soviet unions, United States and Germany. Political Causes no longer is attractive. People needs something bigger than Communism and Capitalism.

I was surprised that the book brought in religion and term it as "a motor of development" . You see after the war, people's emotional and spiritual needs are not met. Plus, the literacy level is low. During this era, countries turn to the west as a source of modernization. Western cultures were imported as a way to live and work. This, however, didn't turn out to be 'D-way' of being modernize. As literacy level of a country rise, urbanization rapids. People turns to religion for ideology, emotion and social needs.

Mess movement of religious revival happen across the globe. Most of this movement helps the secular society and thus the values and culture is shape. For example, you can have a Seoul business man that wears a suit, speak good English, and do business with the western country. But His value and cultures still maintains toward the religion, environment and beliefs he grows up in.

Therefore, being modern doesn't equate as being westernize. What determines that would be the cultures and valves one being raise up in.