Western European countries had the good fortune to be occupied by countries more democratic than themselves. For instance, most countries of southern and western Europe were occupied by Rome, the most democratic country of its time.
Later on, England enjoyed great rights established through the Magna Carta, which was derived from Anglo-Saxon rights going back to the time of Alfred the Great. France may have ultimately benefited from (more democratic) English and Flemish occupation during the 100 years War. Certainly, it became much more democratic in the late 18th century as a result of its "alliance" with the United States, which brought down the French monarchy (because of the cost of the war with England), and replaced it with something akin to the American Revolution.
Germany and Italy benefited from "Napoleonic" (post-French Revolution) occupation, which streamlined their territories (e.g. Confederation of the Rhine), and gave most of those territories a taste of (local) "self-rule.
Russia, on the other hand, had the misfortune to be occupied by LESS democratic countries. Kievan Rus was arguably as democratic as medieval Europe, until the arrival of the Mongols.
Sweden was a more democratic country that could have been a positive influence on Russia, but was defeated at Poltava.
Russia briefly experienced all of the "bad" (and none of the good) of a Napoleonic occupation, and the brief occupation of part of the country by Hitler was just plain bad, which represented the worst (not best) of "Western culture and principles."