An interesting focus on what seems the reversal of Said's [b:Orientalism|355190|Orientalism|Edward W. Said|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1704228087l/355190._SY75_.jpg|2310058]. But this book is written rather sloppy and struggles with the conceptual knot that is inherent with Western identity (the struggle between Enlightenment and Romantics). On top of that they seem to equalize Occidentalism with anti-modernism, another conceptual knot. In that respect [b:Age of Anger: A History of the Present|30989285|Age of Anger A History of the Present|Pankaj Mishra|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1470699087l/30989285._SY75_.jpg|51615336] by Pankai Mishra is much more to the point. Can't recommend this book, I'm afraid. See my review in my general account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2795334562.

This booklet somewhat confused me. I read this immediately after [b:Orientalism|355190|Orientalism|Edward W. Said|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1409777781s/355190.jpg|2310058], the acclaimed and reviled book by Edward Said, that uncovered how Western culture had created a derogatory image of the East that was the source and justification for colonialism and imperialism. With a title like "Occidentalism" you expect a study of the reverse movement, and Buruma and Margalit confirm that in their introduction. And indeed: they zoom in on various historical examples of resistance against the West, that have in common an image of that West as inhuman, barbaric and soulless. Regardless of whether this image is correct, it is indeed a finding that, for example, Russian slavophiles in the 19th century, Japanese militarist nationalists in the 1930s-1940s and the current Muslim fundamentalists cherish(ed) that image and use(d) it as justification for their fight.

Paradoxically, Buruma and Margalit state that in many cases these 'Occidentalists' not only fully adopted and adopt Western technology, but were and are also ideologically inspired by Western thinkers: the Japanese by fascism and Nazism, the Muslim fundamentalists very often by Marxist-Leninist frameworks. They are certainly not the first to see that paradox. The anti-Western resistance may often be presented as a return to the own, original culture, it is clearly "contaminated" by the same West.

What really struck me and also astonished me was that Buruma and Margalit constantly indicate German Romanticism from the 18th and 19th centuries as the source of this Occidentalism. And in the same line they call Hitler and Nazism the worst exponents of it. Excuse me? That’s a bit strange. Because both Romanticism as Nazism are typical Western products, aren’t they? We are hitting a conceptual knot, here. Because it is clear that Buruma and Margalit equalize Occidentalism, hatred of the West, with anti-modernism, resistance to modernity as it first took shape in the West. Obviously there is a kinship between the two and hence the confusion; but it would be better to make a certain distinction. That would at least make clear that not only German Romanticism is the source of Occidentalism, but that there were quite a few thinkers and writers with reactionary traits in France and Great Britain also (in this respect, Buruma and Margalit seem rather anti-Germanic, a form of "Germanotalism"?). In the end both currents, modernism (Enlightenment) and anti-modernism (Romantics), are intertwined aspects of Western identity and their dynamics form the engine of the cultural evolution in the West.

This booklet is struggling with this conceptual knot, that is clear, and it is therefore not surprising that a term such as "Occidentalism" has never caught on. But of course, it does expose the particularly complex and paradoxical side of the interdependence between hatred against the West and opposition to modernity, and the adoption of modernist/Western conceptual frameworks and technology. In this interesting, yet too carelessly written book, you are not going to get a conclusive answer on this, and that’s a pity.

Книга за десять лет немного устаревшая, короткая и сравнительно поверхностная. С другой стороны, тематический охват велик, практически все основные стороны анти-западного дискурса описаны ясно и связно. Особенно полезное чтение для здешних "западников", для осознания возраста и масштабов проблемы и избавления от наивных иллюзий.

There are some interesting tidbits of the history of ideas here, but they are woven into an oddly unbalanced and decontextualized story. I'm kind of mad at the authors for taking this title for a book that doesn't live up to its promise. Occidentalism ought to be a book that looks at Occidentalism as the obverse of Orientalism, showing the parallels in these stereotyped ways of seeing the other while also surveying the material and intellectual contexts in which these ways of thinking arose.

The worst part of this book is that, as this review in The Guardian notes, Buruma and Margalit give the impression that the ways of thinking they describe are almost wholly imported from Europe, thereby implicitly denying the capacity of Eastern intellectuals to think for themselves.

The best part of the book is the chapter on anti-cosmopolitanism as an intellectual trend stretching across time and geography. I also appreciate the recognition that the ways of thinking that the authors call "Occidentalism" (a misnomer, as far as I'm concerned) are currently present not only among radical Islamists in the East but also among fundamentalist Christians in the West, although I'd have liked that to be made more explicit.

Extremely dumbed down criticism of everything that's critical of the West, redifined by the authors as liberal capitalism, lumping together Pol Pot, the Taliban, Marx, Tolstoy, German romantic philosophers and, of course, Nazis. Totally unworthy of one's time.

"The Occident, as defined by its enemies, is seen as a threat not because it offers an alternative system of values, let alone a different route to Utopia. It is a threat because its promises of material comfort, individual freedom, and the dignity of unexceptional lives deflate all utopian pretensions. The antiheroic, antiutopian nature of Western liberalism is the greatest enemy of religious radicals, priest-kings, and collective seekers after purity and heroic salvation."

This book's purpose is not to demonize the enemies of the west or assist in the "war on terrorism", but to understand what drives Occidentalism, and to show that the suicide bombers of today have their roots in history that includes the west itself. Understanding doesn't provide excuses, but just additional knowledge in dealing with those who demonize the west.
The book looks at occidentalism from a variety of viewpoints. One is the idea of war against the west, one is the idea of the city as an occidental evil that with an urban reality destroys the local culture. Another looks at the idea of the hero versus the merchant, where the pursuit of economic wellbeing works against the true way things should be. Yet another looks at the philosophy of the mental model of the west as seen by its enemies and how they interpret the west's intent. We then get to religion and the various ways the west is seen as idolatrous, including the way that women are treated. The last is the seeds that bring revolution, looking at various examples and showing how some current situations mirror these historical ones, and theorizing what that means for the world going forward.
Well-researched and insightful, this analysis goes back more than two centuries to trace the roots of anti-Western ideas and sentiments, and places modern terrorists within this historical continuum.