That's a very generous analysis of the West and its relation to the non-white world.
About that Western sharing thing...
..The global North takes 3x more in value from the global South in 1 year than it gives back in 8 years. More than $5 trillion dollars in wealth is transferred to the West on an annual basis -- and those are 2008 figures.
What the West decides to "share" with people from the global South is but a very, very small fraction of what they take. What you perceive to be grace and generosity from the West, is a merely a change of tactics in imperial manoeuvres.
Now, I'm not absolving us of blame; we're guilty as sin for being such abject failures and for producing societies that seem unable (or unwilling) to create social, political and economic systems that would elevate our populations.
We are philosophically and socially behind by centuries; we are undoubtedly more immoral than the West because we are rapacious in domestic settings, while the West is only rapacious in an international context.
Nations that tried tried to develop economically and politically (independently from the West) were subject to regime change and assassinations.
Where do you suppose Burkina Faso would be right now if Thomas Sankara wasn't assassinated with the help of the French? His Nation experienced tremendous economic and social gains prior to his assassination; his reforms were immediately shelved and reversed by his Western compliant successor.
The DRC would likely be a lot wealthier right now if Patrice Lumumba wasn't murdered by the United States for trying to use his Nation's vast wealth to his people's benefit.
Corrupt, myopic and murderous despots in Africa are kosher as long they're compliant.
It's difficult to predict where certain Nations would be right now in terms of morality and decency if their developments weren't so terribly disrupted during the colonial period.
It's been estimated that Britain took around $40 trillion dollars from India when it was a possession of the British empire.