The Epstein Case

Western civilisation has positioned itself not merely as a historical experience but as the ultimate measure of humanity. It has presented its own cultural journey as a universal norm, its own history as an inevitable direction and its own crises as unavoidable stages of humanity. This presentation is not an innocent self-confidence; it is the declaration of a norm-setting subject. Here the West is not merely a civilisation; it is the arbiter. It is not merely an actor; it is the yardstick.
This attitude is ethnocentrism institutionalised on a civilisational scale. Ethnocentrism is a group’s acceptance of its own values as the natural and ultimate reference, and its judging of others in relation to this centre. That is exactly what the West does: it removes its own historical experience from the particular and presents it as the destiny of humanity. It markets its own crises as universal evolution, its own concepts as necessary progress and its own norms as humanity’s final destination.
The real problem with this approach is not that the West ascribes value to itself. The problem is that it imposes these values as the only valid measure. Here the claim to universality produces not an inclusive principle but an exclusionary hierarchy. The West places itself at the centre, while other civilisations are labelled according to their distance from this centre: “backward”, “deficient”, “authoritarian”, “underdeveloped”, “problematic”. In this way the classic in-group/out-group distinction of the concept of ethnocentrism is reproduced on a global scale. The West becomes the norm; the others, deviations from the norm. The West becomes progress; the others lag behind or are delayed. The West becomes the truth; the others, drafts awaiting revision. This shows that the claim to universality is not a neutral ethical ground but a centrism fed by power. Moving from the position of the one questioned to that of the one who judges is the most refined form of ethnocentric consciousness. While imposing its own values as the destiny of humanity, this consciousness pushes alternative visions of civilisation outside the bounds of legitimacy. The West’s claim to universality thus produces a hegemonic consciousness that absolutises its centre rather than an inclusive commitment to principle. This consciousness is not only a claim to cultural superiority; it is a practice of establishing normative hierarchy. And it is precisely this practice that constitutes the least questioned yet most decisive ideological foundation of the modern world.