From: jimruttshow8596
Benedict Beckhell’s book Western Self-Contempt: Oikophobia in the Decline of Civilizations explores the phenomenon of oikophobia, a term coined by Sir Roger Scruton approximately 20 to 25 years ago [01:23:55]. Derived from the Greek “oikos” (home) and “phobia” (fear), oikophobia refers to “fear of one’s own cultural home” or “Western self-contempt” [01:36:06]. This concept describes the tendency of Westerners to believe that the West is the worst civilization, responsible for global issues, and to look down upon its traditional values while viewing other cultures as superior [01:43:40]. This phenomenon, while not entirely new, recurs throughout history [02:08:42].
The Oikophobia-Xenophobia Continuum
Beckhell distinguishes a continuum between oikophobia and xenophobia, where a society typically progresses along this spectrum [07:07:07]. Early societies, being more parochial, tend towards xenophobia, assuming their own ways are best due to limited exposure to other civilizations [07:27:00]. As a society becomes more successful, grows, and interacts with other civilizations, it moves away from xenophobia [07:58:01]. This progression can lead to an interest in other cultures, even those that have been defeated, as seen with the Roman fascination with Greek culture after conquering Greece [08:26:00].
This continuum can be compared to Aristotle’s concept of the “golden mean,” where virtue lies between two extremes [09:34:00]. In this context, extreme xenophobia and extreme oikophobia are vices [10:37:00]. A mild degree of self-critique (a component of oikophobia) and a moderate amount of wholesome self-preservation (a component of xenophobia) represent the virtuous middle [10:52:00]. If either tendency becomes extreme, it devolves into oikophobia or xenophobia [11:11:00].
Freedom as a Catalyst for Oikophobia
Beckhell posits that increased freedom in a society contributes to the rise of oikophobia [51:14:00]. This is because greater freedom of speech and access to knowledge allow for more self-questioning and the “blaring out” of opinions [51:16:00]. Truly oppressed people often do not even realize their oppression or have the means to voice dissent, whereas the prevalence of discussions about oppression in modern society indicates a lack of genuine oppression [51:50:00].
The Role of Intellectuals and Academics
Academics, journalists, and those with large media followings tend to exhibit higher levels of oikophobia because they possess the loudest megaphones and the greatest freedom to express their views [52:39:00]. In academia, competition among peers can drive a need to “stand out” by developing ever more outlandish ideas, including radical critiques of one’s own culture [12:10:00]. This creates “niches” for assistant professors to “destroy” established theories [13:56:00]. However, this phenomenon is not limited to academia; the democratization of access to information means that the general population can also be influenced by these tendencies [05:07:07].
Athens, as the first democracy in the West, is identified as the first example of oikophobia [53:24:00]. Its newfound power and security after the Persian Wars led to increased leisure and opportunities for intellectuals to analyze their own culture, leading to questioning of traditional Greek religion and values [21:25:00].
The Nexus of Religious Weakening and Oikophobia
Beckhell states that “the evidence of history thus points to a nexus of civilizational weakening, religious weakening, and oikophobic rise” [58:26:00]. Every civilization, without exception, has been religious in its founding [01:00:50]. Religion provides a vital communal function, keeping societies “non-oikophobic” and fostering appreciation for heritage [01:00:30]. While not personally religious, Beckhell acknowledges religion’s societal benefits [00:58:55].
The Middle Ages, characterized by a lack of strong central authorities, widespread illiteracy, and limited access to knowledge, saw little oikophobia [00:46:04]. In this period, Christianity, once subversive in the Roman Empire, became the established and traditional force [00:48:02].
When traditional religion is rejected, people often seek spiritual needs in other forms, such as Eastern religions like Buddhism, which become attractive precisely because they are “something different” from one’s own culture [00:41:00]. This desire for distinction aligns with Freud’s “narcissism of small differences” [00:41:48].
Two Faces of Oikophobia: Cultural Relativism vs. Positivism
Beckhell identifies two distinct yet converging forms of oikophobia: cultural relativism and positivism [01:11:04].
- Relativist Oikophobia: This form, seen as early as ancient Greece, asserts that no culture is superior to another, and all cultures are equally valuable [01:14:41]. It serves to degrade one’s own culture relative to others by elevating foreign cultures [01:12:20].
- Positivist Oikophobia: Arising largely from the Enlightenment in the 18th century, this form is linked to progressivism [01:12:56]. It believes that reason and science can lead humanity toward a higher, universal state of progress and “eternal moral truths” [01:13:31]. This view often necessitates erasing a nation’s unique exceptionalism to facilitate universal progress [01:14:13].
While philosophically incompatible, these two strands often unite in modern oikophobia because they share the common goal of “tearing down one’s own civilization” [01:12:04]. Individuals may simultaneously hold relativistic beliefs about truth while being convinced of a single, superior social condition towards which humanity should aspire, a utopian vision [01:15:02].
Progressivism and Utopia
Beckhell distinguishes between beneficial progress in science or medicine and what he terms “philosophical progressivism” or “political progressivism” [01:16:46]. Increased personal liberty, for instance, is a double-edged sword: while an individual may enjoy freedom, its increase can lead to societal decadence [01:17:43]. The core issue with progressivism, for Beckhell, is the belief in utopia, which he argues does not exist [01:18:24]. While solving specific problems (like child labor) is good, framing these solutions as part of a continuous progression towards a “higher state” can lead to “absurd and outlandish results” [01:19:01].
He notes that the entire political spectrum has shifted leftward; even today’s conservatives are not as conservative as those from previous generations [00:57:41]. This political evolution suggests that the positivist push for progress has influenced societal values across the board.
The Power of Boredom and the Search for Meaning
A significant contributor to civilizational decline and oikophobia is “boredom” or “civilizational ennui” [01:30:05]. When a society is too safe, wealthy, and secure, and traditional sources of meaning like religion decline, future generations may turn against the very state that provided such comfort [01:30:38].
Humans have an inherent need for something higher to aspire to [01:31:09]. This “higher thing” can be a common enemy, a shared religion, or other communal activities that foster unity [01:31:13]. When this higher meaning is absent, people may find it in destructive communal activities like tearing down statues or rioting [01:40:00]. This search for meaning in the face of boredom, combined with declining religion, luxury, and security, feeds into the rise of oikophobia [01:33:30].
Ultimately, Beckhell, a philosopher who identifies as an atheist, argues that even without supernatural beliefs, individuals can find meaning in work or philosophy [01:33:34]. However, for the broader masses, discarding the supernatural element entirely in the pursuit of a progressive ideal might be “playing with fire” [01:10:24]. This highlights a central tension between increasing societal freedom and the potential for it to lead to self-contempt and societal fragmentation.