Oddly enough, I actually agree with both of you (meta-monkey and Stephan Schulz).
From my perspective, if you look at all the currently living humans, meta-monkey is correct that some of them (many of them) will never, and can never be, brought to believe and uphold modern Western values of freedom, brotherhood, and universalism.
However, the way that a Western civilization seeking to change the behavior and values of another culture can accomplish this, is through two things: (1) selective breeding; and (2) waiting for those who will never share our values to die (preferred over violence in almost all cases); or, if they are dangerous, actively kill them.
Selective breeding refers to the idea that a human being born and raised into a culture that is at least not actively hostile to the Western values and way of life, is far less likely to become radically (militarily and/or ideologically) opposed to the West. So, being able to control the education of the young for the masses of a population of non-Western people is a very important point of leverage if our goal is to instill in them our values.
It also refers to the idea that those who *do* become ideologically opposed will tend to act on their opposition in some way during their life, and that their activity can be labeled in such a way that our government can justify striking them before they have a chance to harm us. The problem is that certain forms of retaliation or preemptive violence against these people will tend to radicalize a lot more people than are being killed by us; this is the effect that has made our problems in the Middle East worse over time, instead of better. Even if you are raised to value Western ideals, seeing someone you love or know intimately get killed by a drone missile strike is going to dramatically increase your chances of wanting to become militant or ideologically supportive of anti-West organizations.
We needed (past tense) to handle the Middle East problem more like we handled the Japan and Germany problem in the 20th century. Now the problem is so large that I'm not sure we can actually contain the ideologies that have cropped up against us, no matter how we choose to act. If we kill people, we just piss even more people off. If we don't kill people, they will sit there and fester; spread their ideals; gain power, influence, and resources; and strike back at us when they're prepared and able. Either way, we lose. Even if you kill every last one of them in that whole geographical area, that act alone will serve to radicalize people who sympathize with them from within the Western civilization's citizenry, leading to riots, uprisings, and heightened levels of terrorism that will itself be far worse than what we're enduring presently. Clearly, that isn't a viable option, even if you were able to morally justify it in your conscience.
While in a utopic world, universalism would be "by design" (due to all cultures on Earth agreeing to some basic principles on the value of human life, like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; I'm not saying you have to be an overt capitalist), the reality is that it will now take many generations of careful efforts by Western civilization to properly control the cultures we've radicalized against us, and breed out the ideologies that are incompatible with ours and portray our civilization as the root of all evil.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure if we have enough time to effect any plan at all, before these groups become powerful enough to actually have the capability to destroy us. They are already turning our own governments against us by enabling politicians with authoritarian tendencies to enact laws that trend toward authoritarian goals and move away from traditional Western values of democracy and human rights. These politicians are perfectly content to rule by fear; when we weren't afraid of anyone, they had no platform to stand on. Now they do, thanks to our ideological enemies making everyone live their daily lives in fear of being nuked or hit by a hijacked airplane or any other imaginable "movie plot" disaster.
If these ideologically backwards humans succeed in toppling the collective Western civilization -- North America, western and central Europe, Australia, Japan, etc. -- it will plunge humanity into a second dark age, setting back scientific progress, moral progress, and human rights progress by several centuries. Higher-minded ideals will eventually rise up like weeds opposing these ultra-conservative ideologues, who in time will become the establishment; and over time the moral high-ground will win out... but it will take a very long time. And billions of people will die to hunger, war and disease in the interim. Horrible, horrible ways to die.
As long as groups of people feel oppressed by, wronged by, and hateful of the Western civilization -- rather than feeling like they are a part of it -- progress of humanity towards a future where we can truly let the values of human universalism transcend our values and way of life to the next level, will be prevented. We have to take that step together, as an entire race, atomically. It's all-one or none, as Dr. Bronner says.
I don't think you're wrong in your assessment of the present, meta-monkey. You're totally right. But I have to believe that time will change that. On the other hand, pretending as if the current peoples of the Earth are actually in a state of mind to fully embrace universalism, is indeed naive, but that doesn't mean we should lose sight of the goal.