The level of development of a country does not define its relationship with barbarism. Many first-world countries today have been involved in numerous acts of barbarism throughout history. Ecrin Bulut emphasizes that this situation reveals the true face of barbarism.
Discussions on barbarism confront the profound divides in human history. As Claude Lévi-Strauss states, the real barbarian is firstly the one who believes in barbarism. In this context, the classification of people as civilized or barbaric by others becomes a sign of discrimination that has persisted throughout human history.
If Adam and Eve had a foresight about this divide at the origins of humanity, the question arises whether humanity would wish to continue its lineage. The greatest mistake of humans is to accept the weakness of evaluating cultural differences in a superficial manner. The concept of barbarism has historically become a tool for power and othering.
The only being that believes itself superior to others is humans. In this respect, a forest with pine trees can only exist through the combination of different elements. Cultural differences emerge as a result of societies fighting for survival, challenging the validity of the notions of cultural superiority or inferiority.
The origin of the concept of barbarism dates back to Ancient Greece. This term was used to denote communities that contradicted Greek culture and did not speak Greek. Over time, this concept merged with ethnocentrism and symbolic violence, gaining the connotation of “uncivilized” in modern times.
Many ancient societies labeled peoples outside their cultural boundaries as barbaric. The period of colonialism is filled with instances of Europeans branding the peoples of Africa, America, and Asia as “barbaric.” During this process, this term was often used to delegitimize non-European civilizations in the eyes of humanity.
Today, the barbarisms committed by “developed” countries are a reality of human history. For instance, Israel’s oppression in Palestine and China’s practices against the Uyghur Turks are examples of such barbarism. Statistics may show high quality of life, yet this does not prevent the disregard for those communities’ rights.
The largest industrial states of the 20th and 21st centuries have also been at the center of great wars and mass destruction. This situation demonstrates that cultural measurements must carry significance beyond mere numbers. Anthropologist Franz Boas argues that cultures should be assessed based on their various responses to geographical and historical conditions.
It is a fact that the ethnocentric mindset seeks to dominate people with its own cultural norms in every context, which should not be overlooked. This situation also brings about environments where harmony cannot be achieved. In short, the term barbarism retains its meaning while transforming, remaining relevant in modern life.
All these discussions necessitate questioning the hierarchy of humanity. Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of symbolic violence holds significant importance in understanding this issue better. Questioning the concepts of civilization and barbarism is vital for illuminating not only the past but also the future.
Source: www.yeniduzen.com
