From: jimruttshow8596
What is Oikophobia?
Oikophobia, a neologism coined by the late Sir Roger Scruton about 20 to 25 years ago, is derived from the Greek “oikos” (home) and “phobia” (fear of) [01:18:00]. It refers to “Western self-contempt” or “fear of one’s own cultural home” [01:36:00]. This tendency is characterized by Westerners believing the West is the worst civilization, responsible for global problems, or Americans thinking their country is the worst and guilty of crimes [01:43:00]. It involves looking down on one’s own civilization or its traditional values, often deeming other parts of the world superior [02:00:00]. This phenomenon, while not entirely new, has recurred throughout history [02:07:00].
An example of oikophobia is an academic insisting that oppression and imperialism are the West’s core contributions to the world [02:46:00]. While such thoughts are disproportionately found in academia, the sentiment has spread beyond, becoming more diffused due to increased egalitarianism and democratization [04:01:00] [05:04:00]. Exposure to outside influences and information, while not inherently bad, makes it likelier for individuals to believe other ways are superior to their own culture [05:35:00].
The Xenophobia-Oikophobia Continuum
Societies typically move along a continuum from xenophobia to oikophobia as they progress [07:17:00].
- Xenophobia: The natural posture of a parochial society, where older traditions hold greater force, is to be more xenophobic [07:27:00]. This entails a certain self-reliance and the assumption that one’s own way is best, due to limited mingling with other civilizations [07:38:00]. It reflects a general preference for oneself, which can easily border on hostility towards other civilizations [07:51:00].
- Oikophobia: As a society becomes more successful, grows, and interacts with other civilizations (often through overcoming enemies), there is more mingling with other ways of doing things [07:58:00]. This success leads to finding interest in other ways, even if a civilization has been utterly defeated [08:26:00]. This shift towards questioning one’s own traditions marks the move towards oikophobia [09:18:00].
This continuum can be compared to the Aristotelian concept of the “golden mean,” where virtue lies between two extremes [09:31:00] [10:06:00]. If xenophobia and oikophobia are the extremes, a mild degree of self-critique (which can become oikophobia) and a mild degree of wholesome self-preservation (which can become xenophobia) represent the desirable balance [10:38:00]. If either tendency goes to an extreme, it becomes problematic [11:11:00].
Societies, however, tend to move to one extreme or the other [05:54:00]. In academia, constant competition can lead to ever more outlandish extremes as individuals seek to stand out by coming up with new ideas [12:13:00] [12:49:00]. This can lead to phenomena like the widespread adoption of “hot topics” (e.g., gender studies) where everyone researches the same area [14:04:00].
The Problem with Progressivism
Progressivism is seen as a “double-edged sword” [0:00:58]. While valuing scientific advancement, reason, and rejecting blind adherence to tradition, it erroneously couples these positive aspects with a belief that science and reason militate in favor of progressivism [0:05:37] [01:06:38]. This coupling allows the dismissal of non-progressive philosophical opponents as “anti-scientific” or “irrational” [01:06:50].
Increased freedom and comfort can lead to decadence, as “everything in life is a trade-off” [01:17:45] [01:18:13]. The core problem with progressivism is the belief in utopia, which is a fallacy [01:31:00] [01:18:29]. While solving specific problems (like curing disease or ending child labor) is good, the idea of “bringing society forward” to a “higher state” by solving individual problems leads to traps [01:18:35]. This emphasis on continuous progression can lead to absurd and outlandish results [01:28:11].
Historical Manifestations of Oikophobia
Ancient Greece
The cycle from xenophobia to self-critique and oikophobia is evident in Ancient Greece, particularly in 5th century BC Athens [01:51:00].
- Xenophobia (Persian Wars): During the Persian Wars (early 5th century BC), Greek civilization faced extinction [01:56:00]. This crisis led to banding together, making protection of one’s own civilization paramount [02:22:00]. There was little thought that their own civilization might be worse, as they were actively fighting the Persians [02:37:00].
- Shift to Self-Critique & Oikophobia: After Greek victory and the establishment of the Athenian empire, a newfound sense of security and power emerged [02:02:00] [02:25:00]. This allowed for more leisure and self-observation, leading intellectuals to analyze their own culture and develop a sense of self-righteousness, seeing themselves as superior to their countrymen [02:48:00]. Competition shifted from external enemies (Persians) to internal rivals (other Greeks and Athenians) [02:24:00].
- Questioning Traditions: By the late 5th and early 4th centuries BC, figures began questioning traditional Greek ways and religion [02:27:00]. Playwrights like Euripides questioned traditional Greek religion and the goodness of the gods [02:38:00]. This questioning, while enabling appreciation of art, signals a move towards oikophobia because it indicates a shift away from needing the gods for protection, which occurs during times of security [02:35:00].
- Cultural Influence and Elite Phenomenon: Cultural influence from other parts of the Eastern Mediterranean (Persia, Ancient Egypt) through trade and Athenian power further fueled this [02:51:00]. Plato, for instance, referred to Greek culture as a “baby culture” compared to Ancient Egyptian [02:50:00]. Intellectuals like Hippias of Elis and Diogenes (founder of Cynicism) rejected their heritage and adopted cultural norms of other civilizations [03:30:00]. Due to a less egalitarian society, oikophobia in ancient Athens remained primarily an elite phenomenon [03:04:00].
- Aristotle’s Position: Aristotle represents the “second phase” of the civilizational spectrum [03:34:00]. He was able to analyze and question his own civilization’s traditions and customs, yet still appreciate the value and beauty of Greek civilization without rejecting it [02:52:00]. He believed in a higher power but questioned the literal stories of the gods, while still seeing beauty in the myths [02:59:00].
Ancient Rome
Rome exhibited the least oikophobia among the discussed civilizations [03:24:00]. Romans maintained a strong sense of duty and a patriarchal model, which served as a bulwark against oikophobia [03:35:00]. They had a genius for adopting useful ideas from other civilizations while remaining loyal to their own [03:12:00].
However, tendencies toward oikophobia were still visible:
- Greek Influence: After conquering Greece, the Roman elite became fascinated by Greek culture, particularly philosophy and rhetoric [03:52:00]. This exposure to Greek philosophical questions forced Romans to look at their own traditions objectively and skeptically, posing a threat to Roman civilization [03:27:00].
- Rise of Leisure and Decadence: As Rome grew powerful, a leisure class emerged that questioned traditions [03:40:00]. Decadence, though not identical to oikophobia, often goes hand-in-hand with it, as wealth and leisure reduce the perceived need for traditional gods and values [02:15:00].
- Eastern Religions: Roman home religion, suited for an agrarian time, no longer fit the lifestyle of the wealthy [03:46:00]. This made it easier to embrace foreign cults and religions from conquered peoples, like Egyptian Isis or Judaism, and later Christianity [03:16:00]. These alien influences, combined with the vastness of the empire, factionalism, and demographic changes (e.g., senators who spoke Greek instead of Latin), contributed to the weakening and eventual collapse of the Roman Empire [03:48:00] [04:26:00].
- Stoicism vs. Epicureanism: The Roman temperament favored Stoicism, with its emphasis on duty and virtue, over Epicureanism, which advocated withdrawal from public life [03:51:00] [03:50:00]. This preference helped maintain Roman values to some extent [04:03:00].
The Middle Ages
The Middle Ages are characterized by a lack of oikophobia [04:04:00]. This period saw:
- Economic Conditions: A lack of safety, security, and wealth, which are catalysts for oikophobia [04:06:00]. People lacked the leisure and access to knowledge needed to question their civilization [04:25:00].
- Limited Knowledge Access: Most people were illiterate, and knowledge was largely confined to monasteries [04:36:00].
- Christianity as Traditional: Christianity, which was subversive and pacifistic in the Roman Empire, morphed into the traditional and established religion in the Middle Ages [04:33:00]. Subversiveness then came from other eastern religions or external influences [04:17:00].
Religion and Societal Cohesion
History consistently shows a nexus between civilizational weakening, religious weakening, and the rise of oikophobia [00:59:00]. Religion serves a crucial societal purpose, acting as a “boon” to society by helping people appreciate their heritage and keeping them non-oikophobic [01:00:13]. Every civilization, without exception, is religious in its founding [01:00:50].
Human beings generally have a spiritual need for something higher than themselves [01:00:20] [01:00:20]. If one rejects their traditional religion, they may turn to other spiritual paths, such as Buddhism, which can be attractive due to its difference from home culture [01:00:41]. This relates to the “narcissism of small differences”—the need to be slightly different from those at home [01:00:47]. While individuals can manage without supernatural elements, for the general populace, discarding the supernatural component of religion could be “playing with fire” [01:09:57].
Two Types of Oikophobia
Oikophobia can manifest in two seemingly opposite ways that ultimately converge in their goal of tearing down one’s own civilization [01:11:58]:
- Relativist Oikophobia: This form, seen as early as ancient Greece, asserts cultural relativism [01:12:12]. It claims that no culture can be objectively better than another; all cultures are equally valuable [01:12:26]. This outlook serves to degrade one’s own culture relative to others by elevating them [01:12:37].
- Positivist Oikophobia: Emerging largely from the Enlightenment in the 18th century, this form emphasizes the belief that reason and science can lead to eternal moral truths and that humanity is progressing towards a “higher state” [01:12:51] [01:13:31]. This notion of universal progress means that one’s own specialness or exceptionalism must be erased to allow all humanity to come together in this higher state [01:14:13]. It claims there is a superior social condition towards which all ought to aspire, which is the opposite of relativism [01:14:31].
These two strands are often united in modern-day oikophobes, who may simultaneously express cultural relativism (e.g., “truth is relative”) while being convinced of a single, ideal social condition or utopia towards which humanity should aspire [01:15:00].
The Problem of Boredom
A significant factor contributing to oikophobia is “civilizational ennui” or boredom [01:29:55]. If a society lacks external conflict (war), strong unifying religion, and exists in a state of safety, wealth, and security, the next generation may turn against the very state that provided such comfort [01:30:30] [01:30:50].
Humans inherently need something higher to aspire to [01:31:09]. This could be a common enemy in war, a shared religion, or other communal activities [01:31:17]. Without such higher communal causes, individuals focus on their immediate selves, leading to profound boredom [01:31:40]. This void of meaning can drive people to find purpose in destructive communal activities, such as tearing down statues or rioting [01:32:40]. This boredom, stemming from wealth, luxury, decadence, and the decline of religion, feeds into oikophobia [01:33:14].