From: jimruttshow8596

This article explores the concept of oikophobia, or self-contempt towards one’s own culture, as a recurring pattern in the decline of civilizations. Drawing from Benedict Beckhæld’s book “Western Self-Contempt: Oikophobia in the Decline of Civilizations,” it examines historical examples and underlying societal dynamics that contribute to this phenomenon [00:00:39].

Defining Oikophobia

Oikophobia is a term coined by Sir Roger Scruton about 20-25 years ago, derived from the Greek “oikos” (home) and “phobia” (fear) [01:18:00] [01:18:00]. It refers to a fear or contempt of one’s own cultural home [01:37:00]. This concept manifests as a tendency among Westerners to view the West as the worst civilization, responsible for global problems, or for Americans to perceive their country as uniquely guilty of crimes [01:43:00]. It often involves looking down on traditional values and deeming other parts of the world as superior [02:00:00].

Benedict Beckhæld offers an example of oikophobia from a dinner in Rome where an academic companion insisted that “oppression and imperialism were the core contributions of the West to the world” [02:46:00].

The Academic Phenomenon

Oikophobia is disproportionately found within academia [03:16:00]. Academics, being at the forefront of “what’s new” and “revolutionary,” tend to look down on traditional values [04:24:00]. This phenomenon spreads beyond academia as society becomes more egalitarian and access to information is diffused, exposing more people to outside influences and making it easier to slip into the belief that other cultures are superior [05:04:00].

The Xenophobia-Oikophobia Continuum

Societies often move along a continuum from xenophobia to oikophobia as they progress [07:17:00].

  • Xenophobia: An early, more parochial societal posture where older traditions hold greater force, leading to a natural assumption that one’s own way is best due to less exposure to other civilizations [07:25:00].
  • Oikophobia: As a society becomes more successful, grows, and interacts with other civilizations, it moves towards finding interest in other ways of doing things, eventually leading to self-contempt [08:01:00].

This continuum is comparable to Aristotelian virtue, where a “golden mean” of self-critique lies between the extremes of xenophobia and oikophobia [09:35:00]. A mild degree of self-critique is good, as is a moderate amount of wholesome self-preservation [10:52:00]. The problem arises when either goes to an extreme [11:11:11].

Game Theory and Extremes

In academia, constant competition among peers drives intellectual outlandishness and radicalism [12:13:00]. The emergence of a new theory creates a “niche” for scholars to challenge or “destroy” it [13:56:00]. While the desire to “make one’s mark” could push in either direction, current academic trends show a “herding” or “sheep-like behavior” towards radical oikophobia (e.g., gender studies) [14:41:00].

Historical Case Study: Ancient Greece

The cycle of self-criticism to oikophobia is evident in Ancient Greece, particularly in the 5th century BC [19:39:00].

  • Persian Wars (Early 5th Century BC): Greek civilization faced extinction, leading to strong unity and xenophobia, as protecting one’s own civilization became paramount [19:56:00].
  • Athenian Empire: Following victory, Athens achieved immense success and established dominance, creating a sense of security and leisure [21:00:00].
  • Rise of Self-Questioning: This newfound security allowed intellectuals to analyze their own culture [21:48:00]. With no major external antagonist, competition shifted to internal peers, fostering a sense of self-righteousness among the intellectual elite [22:57:00].
  • Rejection of Tradition: By the late 5th and early 4th centuries BC, figures like Euripides, Hippias of Elis, and Diogenes (founder of the Cynic school) began questioning traditional Greek religion and values, rejecting the idea of Greek cultural superiority [23:22:00] [25:32:00]. This was largely an elite phenomenon, unlike modern widespread oikophobia [26:11:00].
  • Decadence: The emergence of decadent figures, like Alcibiades, correlated with oikophobia. Wealth and leisure allowed for hedonism, reducing the “need” for traditional gods or traditions [28:15:00].
  • Aristotle’s Balance: Aristotle, though chronologically late in this development, embodied the “second phase” of civilizational development [30:32:00]. He could analyze and question ancient traditions while still appreciating the value and beauty of his own civilization, remaining loyal to it without falling into atheism [29:41:00].

Historical Case Study: Rome

Rome presents a unique case, exhibiting the least amount of oikophobia among the discussed civilizations [32:21:00].

  • Adaptive Xenophobia: Romans maintained a strong sense of self-superiority for centuries but possessed a “genius” for adopting useful ideas from other civilizations (e.g., Etruscans) without sacrificing loyalty to their own [33:09:00].
  • Influence of Greece: Despite conquering Greece, the Roman elite became fascinated by Greek culture, especially philosophy and rhetoric [34:15:00]. This exposure led to questioning Roman traditions objectively [35:02:00].
  • Philosophical Divergence (Stoicism vs. Epicureanism): Stoicism, with its emphasis on duty and virtue, resonated more with the Roman temperament and imperial ambitions (e.g., Marcus Aurelius) [38:51:00]. Epicureanism, advocating withdrawal from public life for tranquility, was less suited to a managing empire [39:47:00]. This philosophical alignment helped to check extreme oikophobia [39:05:00].
  • Rise of Eastern Religions: As the empire expanded, integrating diverse cultures like Syria, Egypt, and Greece, access to their knowledge and religious norms increased [36:14:00]. Roman religion, rooted in an agrarian, simpler time, became “quaint,” leading the elite to flirt with foreign cults such as Isis and Judaism [36:46:00].
  • Christianity’s Role: Christianity, being alien and initially pacifistic, was incompatible with the Roman Empire’s needs for military action and a strong state [42:25:00]. While later Christian thinkers like Augustine adapted the religion to justify warfare, by then it was “too late for the Roman Empire” [42:52:00]. The influx of eastern peoples who were not loyal to Rome, combined with other factors like an over-vast realm and biological issues, contributed to the Roman Empire’s collapse [43:46:00].

The Middle Ages: An Exception

The Middle Ages are characterized by a lack of oikophobia [46:04:00]. This is primarily due to economic and social conditions:

  • Lack of Security and Wealth: There was no strong sense of safety, security, or widespread wealth, which are catalysts for oikophobia [46:06:00]. People lacked the leisure and access to knowledge required to extensively question their own civilization [46:21:00].
  • Illiteracy: Most people were illiterate, limiting access to knowledge to monasteries [46:34:00].
  • Fragmented Authority: The absence of strong central authorities meant no strong cities or civilizations could protect citizens, reducing the opportunity for self-critique [46:44:00].
  • Christianity as Tradition: Christianity, once subversive in the Roman Empire, became the “traditional” and established religion, absorbing and even justifying violence [47:28:00]. Intellectuals were “under the gun” in monasteries, limiting dissent [48:25:00].

General Dynamics of Cultural Decline

Freedom and Skepticism

Increased freedom in a society, including freedom of speech and access to knowledge, correlates with a higher likelihood of oikophobia [51:14:00]. Truly oppressed societies often lack the ability to even conceptualize their oppression, while today’s widespread claims of oppression indicate the opposite [51:50:00]. Athens, as the first democracy, was the first place where free intellectual exchange could flourish, leading to its emergence of oikophobia [53:24:00].

Religion and Civilizational Strength

There is a “nexus of civilizational weakening, religious weakening, and oikophobic rise[58:26:00]. Religion, particularly Christianity and Judaism in the West, serves to appreciate one’s heritage and acts as a “boon for our society” by generally keeping people non-oikophobic [01:00:13]. Every civilization, without exception, has been religious in its founding [01:00:50]. The human need for something higher than oneself is typically fulfilled by the supernatural element of religion, and discarding this element for the masses could be “playing with fire” [01:10:04].

The Double-Edged Sword of the Enlightenment

The Enlightenment, while emphasizing science and reason and questioning received tradition (positive aspects), also coupled these with a progressive philosophy and politics [01:06:00]. This belief that science and reason inherently endorse progressivism is a flaw [01:06:40]. Progressivism, especially its utopian branch (traced to Rousseau), believes in humanity progressing toward a higher state, which requires erasing national exceptionalism for universal advancement [01:13:09].

Two Kinds of Oikophobia

Oikophobia manifests in two seemingly opposite forms that ultimately converge in their goal of tearing down one’s own civilization [01:11:51]:

  1. Relativist Oikophobia:

    • Appeared first in history, seen in ancient Greece [01:12:12].
    • Argues that no culture can be objectively better than another; all cultures are equally valuable [01:12:25].
    • Serves to degrade one’s own culture relative to others by elevating foreign cultures [01:12:37].
  2. Positivist Oikophobia:

    • Emerged primarily in the 18th century in Europe, largely a result of the Enlightenment [01:12:56].
    • Believes that reason and science can lead to universal moral truths and that humanity is progressing towards a single, superior “social condition” or utopia [01:13:28].
    • This outlook necessitates the erasure of one’s own cultural specialness for the sake of universal progress [01:14:18].

Despite their philosophical incompatibility (relativism asserts no objective truth, positivism asserts universal truth), many oikophobes today simultaneously hold both views, convinced of a specific utopian future while claiming all truths are relative [01:15:02].

The Power of Boredom (Civilizational Anomie)

A significant factor in civilizational decline is boredom, or more precisely, civilizational ennui [01:29:57]. As societies achieve excessive safety, wealth, and security, and traditional religion declines, a lack of higher purpose or “meaning” emerges [01:30:38].

Humans inherently need an antagonist or a higher thing to aspire to [01:31:09]. This “higher thing” can be:

  • A common external enemy (e.g., war) [01:31:16].
  • A shared religion or spiritual pursuit [01:31:20].

These are typically communal activities that foster unity [01:31:36]. When these traditional sources of purpose are absent, people become existentially “bored” (a sense of meaninglessness) [01:31:51]. This void can then be filled by destructive communal activities, such as tearing down symbols of their own civilization, rioting, or attacking authority figures, as a means to find meaning [01:32:40]. Such boredom, fueled by wealth, luxury, decadence, and the decline of religion, ultimately feeds into oikophobia [01:33:14].