“Civilization” and the Self-Critical Tradition

Abstract

Of all the terms in modern social science, none is more reviled by academics today than “civilization.” Post-colonial theorists such as Aime Cesaire and Edward Said have influenced generations of scholars who see the term as little more than a veil for scientific racism and colonial aggression. The sociologists Norbert Elias and Pierre Bourdieu have also portrayed European conceptions of civilization as justifications for social hierarchy and exclusion. This article highlights the convergent denunciation of “civilization” by these theorists. The article provides a fresh perspective on the history of the word “civilization” by highlighting the role of the term in generating an atmosphere of self-critical reflection. The word “civilization” post-dates, and bears a strong trace of, Rousseau’s indictment of modern society in The Discourse on Inequality. The first author to use the word “civilization,” the Marquis de Mirabeau, spoke in a Rouseauian fashion of “false civilization” and “the barbarity of our civilizations.” In nineteenth- and twentieth-century usages, “civilization” was a central term in the framing of questions about the contradictory nature of progress. The term even figures prominently in debates about the basis of colonial authority—debates sponsored by some colonial administrators themselves. Some of the top colonial administrators in the early twentieth were pioneers in advancing cultural anthropology. These administrators forged the viewpoint that natives had valuable “civilizations” of their own. The radical theorists discussed in this article have portrayed “civilization” as a sign of colonial arrogance inherited from a hyper-rational and chauvinistic Enlightenment. In contrast, this article traces how a keyterm was born in the liberal atmosphere of the Enlightenment and generated an expanding space of self-doubt afterward. When we appreciate that a large slice of modern Western civilization is a critical inquiry about the meaning of itself, and when we recognize that the language of civilization helped create a public sphere of doubt even within the colonial enterprise, we can conclude that the radical theorists discussed in this essay are less than reliable guides to the contours of European cultural history.