It seems almost a universal fact that every civilization and every culture considers itself superior to others. Even the great Aristotle said that barbarians (i.e., non-Greeks) were by nature meant to be slaves to the Greeks (of all things!).

This phenomenon is explained by the fact that we judge according to the parameters of the civilization to which we belong, and thus we inevitably feel superior to those who have different parameters. They, in turn, will feel superior for the same reason. For example, the veil worn by women seems like a barbarity, a madness, to us, but for other civilizations, we are the barbarians and the fools.

It is an illusion, I would say, almost inevitable. Like all civilizations, we modern Europeans also tend to think that our principles are the true ones, or at least the superior ones. In this way, however, we end up not understanding cultures and civilizations different from our own. We could even say we refuse to understand them, but in reality, there are other cultures and mentalities that we are unable, and unwilling, to understand.

This attitude of superiority is perhaps most noticeable in our own left, as it tends to exalt the new values of the West (which they call progressive) and is therefore more inclined to believe that these values are universal and self-evident. In fact, with wokeism, we have an intolerance, which is a misunderstanding, of our own past that is even stronger than that for other civilizations. I want to clarify that I do not intend to show opposition to progressives in general, but merely to make an observation.

But the right also feels superior, perhaps by insisting on other values. For example, during the Bush era, the neo-cons thought that if Arabs would just try the Western liberal-democratic system, they would embrace it with enthusiasm. This was not the case, and a tragedy ensued.

Let's say that the veil, wokeism, and Bin Laden's jihad, while not being expressions of an entire civilization, are nonetheless reasonable ideas within the cultures in which they appear. We can say in summary then that a civilization judges itself based on its own values (ethnocentrism of cultures, as historians call it).

This is not just about a few errors—always present—in understanding another culture, but precisely about failing to recognize the cultural context and the principles from which every single action takes on its meaning and significance. In short, for us, a Bin Laden is a madman, and we do not realize that in his context he is a perfectly coherent person, perhaps too coherent, while we are the ones who appear to be the madmen to him.

It also happens that, in a religious context, superiority is made to ascend to the divine: a classic case is that of Judaism, which considered itself the people chosen by God.

The ethnocentrism of civilizations should not, however, be understood as ethical relativism, like that of the ancient sophists. For them, in fact, everything is true and everything is false; one can prove everything and the opposite of everything, so much so that the sophists were famous for their double discourses in which they would argue one thesis and immediately after another. For ethical and cognitive relativism, therefore, in reality there is neither true nor false, neither good nor evil, but only the ability to make what we desire to be considered as good and true appear so.

In the variety of cultures, however, within each of them, good and evil, true and false are still clearly distinct: the difference lies in the fact that they are identified differently, not that they are ignored. Returning to the example of the veil: for Islamic civilization, wearing the veil is a good thing, an expression of femininity, a rule that preserves the order of society and the family. For a Westerner, on the other hand, it is a sign of sexual discrimination, a humiliation of women, the sign of a backward and unjust society. Each person is therefore very sure of their own opinion and considers the other's to be wrong, but neither of them believes that there is no difference between wearing the veil and not wearing it.