Othering is universal across cultures, not particular to Orientalism

Evidence

In his remarkable study of ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, and China, Mu-chou Poo (Enemies of Civilization: Attitudes Toward Foreigners in Ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, and China [Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005]) offers a textured narrative of the stereotypical views that these civilizations held vis-à-vis the foreigner, views that seem to be based in cultural difference, rather than in race or even ethnicity: “Even though Mesopotamia was a multiethnic society, there was still a sense of the unity of ‘Mesopotamian/we’ people, as opposed to ‘foreign’ or ‘enemy/they’ people.… When the Egyptian texts mentioned a foreign people or country outside Egypt, they often employed stereotypical and hostile expressions to characterize the foreigners.… In the theological line of representations, the foreigners were of necessity evil force from without” (147). “In fact, even the Greco-Roman rulers, or their representatives in Egypt, found no need to discontinue the traditional hostile or condescending attitude” (149). … In fact, a sense of cultural superiority existed in all the three civilizations studied here” (152). — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 625 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Orientalism occupies an epistemic position that can allow it to accomplish this task, precisely due to its specific location in the current systems of knowledge. First, it is, along with anthropology, the most obvious academic discipline whose declared purpose is nothing other than the study of the Other, the “Oriental” Other who can now instruct in the art of forming the new self. Second, it is uniquely equipped with proficient philological tools and direct access to texts and archives of that Other. In this respect, Orientalism dwarfs anthropology, which on the whole continues to suffer from a serious deficit in philological talent, although anthropology has developed a cutting-edge theoretic still lacking in several quarters of the Orientalist discipline. Third, and related to the foregoing consideration, Orientalism is the single academic discipline in the Western hemisphere that has access to the “esoteric” and highly complex philosophical, moral, “legal,” and mystical expressions of the Orient. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 477 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Orientalism uniquely holds philological access to the non-Western Other; Not all prejudices are alike; each is culturally situated — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice: Society,…, 49; Non-Western receptions of foreign cultures reproduce the same reductive dynamics Said attributes to Orientalism. — Sadik Jalal al-‘Azm, Orientalism and Orientalism in Reverse, 46 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Cultural superiority toward foreigners predated and transcended Western Orientalism #corroborates (0.92) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 625
• Orientalism uniquely holds philological access to the non-Western Other #complicates (0.78)
• Orientalism holds unmatched philological access to the Other’s texts #complicates (0.78) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 477
• Not all prejudices are alike; each is culturally situated #complicates (0.75) — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice, 49