Complicating Barbarism And Civilization

Recent critics have declaimed against John Stuart Mill's liberalism, arguing that his conception of civilization is inexorably bound to a hierarchal conception of social progress justifying Europeans' moral right to “civilize” barbarian peoples. Without exonerating him of his undoubtedly problematic views regarding non-European cultures, I'd like to argue that Mill in fact has a much subtler view of historical development and of civilization than such critics attribute to him. Central to these critics' charges is an “aggregative” view of Mill's conceptualization of historical development - suggesting that Mill understood societies to move through discrete stages of social development, characterized by specifically correlated stages of economic, political, cultural and moral development - which fails to be borne out under close examination. Mill was keenly attuned to the vast differences between peoples, to the contingencies of historical development and to the great pathologies endemic in “civilized” states. He was equally aware that particular social stages did not immediately correspond to specific economic or political conditions; this challenges critics' contention that Mill reduced the world to a binary dichotomy distinguishing “civilized” from “barbarian” peoples. Given the great attention that he devoted to the very particular social, economic, cultural and political conditions under which people developed the capacities required for effective representative government - conditions that he saw as difficult to achieve in even the most “civilized” of states - I argue that the critics' characterization of Mill as an unquestioning imperialist must be re-considered.

PARADOX AND CONTRADICTION "WAR IS THE HEALTH OF THE STATE" RANDOLPH BOURNE WAR AND THE THREAT OF WAR HAVE CARRIED US TO UNDREAMED OF HEIGHTS OF ACHIEVEMENT IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND MEDICINE. THEY HAVE ALSO LED TO THE WORST EXCESSES OF DEPRAVITY. THE LANDSCAPE OF HISTORY IS LITTERED WITH THE RUINS OF ONCE GREAT CIVILIZATIONS CONSIGNED TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY, EIR MONUMENTS TRAMPLED UNDERFOOT, THEIR SUBJECTS ENSLAVED, DISPERSED OR PUT TO THE SWORD. ONE CAN HARDLY THRUST A SHOVEL INTO THE EARTH WITHOUT STRIKING THE REMAINS OF SOME HAPLESS VICTIM OF WAR THIS PARADOX AND THIS CONTRADICTION LIE AT THE HEART OF THE HUMAN CONDITION. CAN WE AVOID THE FATE OF COUNTLESS CIVILIZATIONS BEFORE US OR ARE WE DOOMED TO REPEAT THE PAST? CAN WE BREAK THE HOLD OF JUNGLE LAW? CAN WE SOLVE THE RIDDLE OF POPULATION AND ECONOMICS? CAN WE MANAGE OUR DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT RECOURSE TO WAR? ARE PERIODIC OUTS O BLOODLETTING AND GENOCIDE PART OF A LARGER ECO EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS? CIVILIZATION AND BARBARISM explores questions in several disciplines in a number of chapters with provocative titles such as: Rube Goldberg, Barney Google and Charles Darwin; Malthus The Undead; Darwin's Mice And Steinbeck's Men; Positive Science And "Irrational" Man; Homo Sapiens Rex: Sexual Evolution And The Maturational Threshold; Biological Boom And Bust – When Credit Falls Like Rain On Credit Default Swaps; The First Commandment Is: "Thou Shalt Kill!" and Opiate Or Placebo. Dr. Feied earned his doctorate at Columbia University. He and has taught at the University of California at Berkeley, Michigan State University and California State University at San Jose as well as other colleges and universities. He currently resides in Berkeley where he divides his time between writing and racing his thirty–eight foot sloop on San Francisco Bay.

Explicitly engaging and criticizing Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations, Salter (The American U., Cairo, Egypt) places Huntington's thesis in context of long line of discourses justifying imperialism. Acknowledging a debt to post-structuralist theory, he argues that Huntington distinguishes between a civilized West and a barbarous Islam that is the natural enemy of civilization. In order to expose and delegitimize this attempt to "reinscribe imperial cartographies on the post-Cold War order," he traces the civilization/barbarian discourse through the 19th and 20th centuries, in order to illustrate the political function that the discourse serves in international relations theory. Distributed by Stylus. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

Notions of civilization and barbarism were intrinsic to Eugène Delacroix’s artistic practice: he wrote regularly about these concepts in his journal, and the tensions between the two were the subject of numerous paintings, including his most ambitious mural project, the ceiling of the Library of the Chamber of Deputies in the Palais Bourbon. Exiled in Modernity delves deeply into these themes, revealing why Delacroix’s disillusionment with modernity increasingly led him to seek spiritual release or epiphany in the sensual qualities of painting. While civilization implied a degree of control and the constraint of natural impulses for Delacroix, barbarism evoked something uncontrolled and impulsive. Seeing himself as part of a grand tradition extending back to ancient Greece, Delacroix was profoundly aware of the wealth and power that set nineteenth-century Europe apart from the rest of the world. Yet he was fascinated by civilization’s chaotic underbelly. In analyzing Delacroix’s art and prose, David O’Brien illuminates the artist’s effort to reconcile the erudite, tradition-bound aspects of painting with a desire to reach viewers in a more direct, unrestrained manner. Focusing chiefly on Delacroix’s musings about civilization in his famous journal, his major mural projects on the theme of civilization, and the place of civilization in his paintings of North Africa and of animals, O’Brien links Delacroix’s increasingly pessimistic view of modernity to his desire to use his art to provide access to a more fulfilling experience. With more than one hundred illustrations, this original, astute analysis of Delacroix and his work explains why he became an inspiration for modernist painters over the half-century following his death. Art historians and scholars of modernism especially will find great value in O’Brien’s work.

The relationship between Western democracies and Islam, rarely entirely comfortable, has in recent years become increasingly tense. A growing immigrant population and worries about cultural and political assimilation—exacerbated by terrorist attacks in the United States, Europe, and around the world—have provoked reams of commentary from all parts of the political spectrum, a frustrating majority of it hyperbolic or even hysterical. In The Fear of Barbarians, the celebrated intellectual Tzvetan Todorov offers a corrective: a reasoned and often highly personal analysis of the problem, rooted in Enlightenment values yet open to the claims of cultural difference. Drawing on history, anthropology, and politics, and bringing to bear examples ranging from the murder of Theo van Gogh to the French ban on headscarves, Todorov argues that the West must overcome its fear of Islam if it is to avoid betraying the values it claims to protect. True freedom, Todorov explains, requires us to strike a delicate balance between protecting and imposing cultural values, acknowledging the primacy of the law, and yet strenuously protecting minority views that do not interfere with its aims. Adding force to Todorov's arguments is his own experience as a native of communist Bulgaria: his admiration of French civic identity—and Western freedom—is vigorous but non-nativist, an inclusive vision whose very flexibility is its core strength. The record of a penetrating mind grappling with a complicated, multifaceted problem, The Fear of Barbarians is a powerful, important book—a call, not to arms, but to thought.

Examines how distinctive liberalisms respond to racial, cultural, gender-based and class-based forms of diversity and difference.

A new reading of a crucial chapter in the history of social and political thought – the transition from the late Enlightenment to early liberalism.

Challenging societal beliefs, this volume rethinks African and world history from an Afrocentric perspective.

Challenges the established corrections paradigm and argues for replacing mass incarceration with a viable and more humane alternative. The practice of mass incarceration has come under increasing criticism by criminologists and corrections experts who, nevertheless, find themselves at a loss when it comes to offering credible, practical, and humane alternatives. In Civilization and Barbarism, Graeme R. Newman argues this impasse has arisen from a refusal to confront the original essence of punishment, namely, that in some sense it must be painful. He begins with an exposition of the traditional philosophical justifications for punishment and then provides a history of criminal punishment. He shows how, over time, the West abandoned short-term corporal punishment in favor of longer-term incarceration, justifying a massive bureaucratic prison complex as scientific and civilized. Newman compels the reader to confront the biases embedded in this model and the impossibility of defending prisons as a civilized form of punishment. A groundbreaking work that challenges the received wisdom of “corrections,” Civilization and Barbarism asks readers to reconsider moderate corporal punishment as an alternative to prison and, for the most serious offenders, forms of incapacitation without prison. The book also features two helpful appendixes: a list of debating points, with common criticisms and their rebuttals, and a chronology of civilized punishments. “Newman’s book is a monumental piece of scholarship that presents a controversial set of propositions about how punishment in the future should be administered. Readers will likely learn many new things about the history of punishment and be challenged about their current views of just punishment for wrongdoing.” — Martha J. Smith, coeditor of Theory for Practice in Situational Crime Prevention