>>> NOW, THE IDEA, AND THE STORIED ORIGINS OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION HAVE SHAPED MOST OF HISTORY AND POLITICS AS WE KNOW IT, BUT OUR NEXT GUEST SAYS THE TRADITIONAL FROM PLATO TO NATO UNDERSTANDING IS MISLEADING.

ANCIENT HIS TOUR YAN NAOISE MAC SWEENEY EXPLAINS IT ALL IN HER NEW BOOK, "THE WEST."

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> IT'S LOVELY TO BE HERE.

THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION.

>> YOU ARE A CLASSICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST, A HISTORIAN OF ANCIENT ERAS.

YOUR BOOK MAKES TWO POWERFUL, AND I THINK FOR SOME PEOPLE, PROVOCATIVE ARGUMENTS.

THE FIRST IS THAT OUR GENERAL STORY ABOUT THE HISTORY OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION IS FACTUALLY WRONG, SO, WHY DON'T WE JUST START WITH THAT, AND WHAT IS THIS FALSE NARRATIVE THAT WE'VE ALL BEEN TAUGHT?

>> WELL, THE STORY THAT I THINK MOST PEOPLE WILL RECOGNIZE TELLS THE TALE OF THE ORIGINS, THE MODERN WEST, OF HAVING ITS ORIGINS, ITS ROOTS IN ANCIENT GREECE AND ROME AND THAT WESTERN CIVILIZATION IS TRANSFERRED INTO CENTRAL AND NORTHERN AND WESTERN EUROPE AND FROM THERE, IT GETS TRANSFERRED, ACROSS THE ATLANTIC, ESPECIALLY, TO NORTH AMERICA.

SO, THIS IS THE STORY OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, AND IT'S ALL AROUND US.

WE SEE IT EVERYWHERE WE TURN.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I REALLY WANTED TO DEBUNK IN THE BOOK IS THAT THIS IS A STORY THAT DOESN'T MATCH THE FACTS THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY.

YOU KNOW, IT MAY HAVE MATCHED THE FACTS THAT WE HAD AT THE TIME THE STORY WAS FIRST WRITTEN, BUT WE HAVE MORE FACTS NOW.

WE KNOW MORE ABOUT THE PAST, AND THAT'S SIMPLY NOT THE WAY CULTURE TRAVELS OR CIVILIZATION TRAVELS.

THE REAL STORY IS MUCH, MUCH MORE COMPLEX.

>> SO, WHY DOES IT PERSIST?

WHY DOES IT PERSIST AS THE WAY WE ARE TAUGHT THIS STORY?

>> OH, WELL, OKAY, THAT QUESTION IS KIND OF TWO ANSWERS.

THE FIRST ONE IS, IS THAT THE DIFFERENT BITS OF IT ARE KNOWN, BUT WE HAVEN'T PUT IT ALL TOGETHER.

WE KNOW THAT ANCIENT GREEK CULTURE AND PHILOSOPHY AND LEARNING WASN'T JUST INHERITED IN WESTERN EUROPE, WE KNOW THAT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT IN THE MEDIEVAL ARABIC WORLD, WE KNOW THAT ANCIENT GREEK WAS STILL USED AS A LANGUAGE RIGHT UNTIL THE 14th CENTURY IN SUDAN.

SO, WE KNOW IT'S A MUCH RICHER SET OF CULTURAL TRANSMISSIONS.

IT'S JUST JOINING IT UP INTO ONE BIG OVERARCHING THEIR TICH, WHICH WE HAVEN'T QUITE DONE.

AND WHEN WE ASK, WHY HAVEN'T WE DONE THAT, WHY HAVEN'T WE REWRITTEN THIS BIG NARRATIVE?

AND I THINK BECAUSE IT'S BEEN POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT FOR US NOT TO.

THIS FULFILLS A CERTAIN SOVIET, AND IT HAS BEEN VERY CONVENIENT OVER THE CENTURIES TO HANG ONTO IT, BECAUSE IT BOLSTERS WESTERN IDEAS OF WESTERN SUPREMACY, WESTERN IDENTITY, AND WESTERN EXCEPTIONALISM.

>> AND THAT IS LIKE THE SECOND POINT THAT YOU MAKE VERY EXPLICITLY IN THE BOOK, WHICH IS THAT, THIS NARRATIVE, THIS FALSE NARRATIVE, HAS STAYING POWER, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN USEFUL TO THOSE WHO WANT TO DOMINATE.

>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

AND I THINK -- THIS IS NOT A SHOCK HORROR MOMENT.

ALL HISTORICAL NARRATIVES DO THIS, RIGHT?

THAT'S WHY WE TELL HISTORIES THE WAY WE DO, BECAUSE THEY MAKE SENSE TO US.

AND THEY HELP US TO EXPLAIN WHO WE ARE TODAY.

NOW, THE ONLY TROUBLE IS IS THAT THIS NARRATIVE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, IT DOESN'T REALLY EXPLAIN WHO WE ARE TODAY IN THE MODERN WEST IN THE 21st CENTURY.

I THINK IT WORKED WELL FOR THE 18th AND 19th CENTURY WHEN IT WAS A STRONG NARRATIVE.

IT BEGAN TO WORK LESS WELL AS THE 20th CENTURY WENT ON ITS WAY, BUT NOW WE'RE IN THE 21st CENTURY.

THE MODERN WEST IS NOT THE SAME AS THE WEST OF 1900.

AND WE NEED.

>> THIS IS THE APPROACH YOU TOOK, TO GROUND YOUR STORIES IN THE LIVES OF 14 HISTORICAL FIGURES, AND OBVIOUSLY CAN'T ASK YOU TO DESCRIBE ALL 14 OF THEM, BUT I WANTED TO ASK YOU, IF WE COULD PICK A COUPLE, AND THEN, IF YOU COULD SORT OF DESCRIBE YOUR THESIS THROUGH THEIR LIVES.

SO, IF YOU COULD JUST START WITH THE ANCIENT GREEK HISTORIAN, HOW DOES HE COMPLICATE OUR -- OUR NOTIONS ABOUT THESE SORT OF -- THE INHERENT KIND OF WHITENESS OF WESTERN CULTURE AND THIS KIND OF CLEAR THROUGH LINE.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I START WITH HIM IN THE BOOK, BECAUSE WE OFTEN LOOK BACK TO HIM, CALL HIM THE FATHER OF HISTORY, AND WE OFTEN ASSUME THAT HE IS THE FIRST ORIGINATOR OF THIS CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS, THE WEST VERSUS THE REST KIND OF NARRATIVE, VERY FAMOUSLY, HE WROTE HIS BIG MAGNUM 0 PUS WAS CALLED THE PERSIAN WARS AND TOLD THE STORY OF HOW AN ALLIANCE OF GREEK CITY STATES FOUGHT AGAINST THE PERSIAN EMPIRE.

SO, THIS BOOK IS OFTEN BEING READ AS A CLASH OF CIVILIZATION STORY, BUT IF YOU DELVE INTO THE BOOK, BUT HIS OWN LIFE, YOU CAN SEE HOW IT'S JUST NOT THAT SIMPLE.

HE HIMSELF, HE'S BORN IN MODERN DAY TURKEY.

HE'S A GREEK, HE'S GOT A GREEK NAME, BUT HE SEEMS TO BE AT LEAST HALF INDIGENOUS ANATOLIAN.

HIS FATHER HAS AN INDIGENOUS NAME.

OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ALSO SEEM TO BE INDIGENOUS.

HE'S A MIXED CULTURE KID.

HE ENDS UP HAVING TO LEAVE HIS HOME FOR POLITICAL REASONS, HE'S ESSENTIALLY A REFUGEE AND HE WINDS UP IN ATHENS, WHICH IS THE KIND OF GOLDEN TOWN OF THE MOMENT.

AND HE'S TRYING TO MAKE A LIVING AS A YOUNG WRITER AND HE'S DOING REALLY WELL IN ATHENS, BUT VERY STRANGELY, AT SOME POINT, HE DECIDES TO LEAVE ATHENS AND LIVE OUT THE REST OF HIS DAYS IN A SMALL TOWN IN SOUTHERN ITALY.

AND, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE ASKED OVER THE YEARS, WHY WOULD HE DO THAT, WHEN HE'S BEEN -- THE MOMENT WHERE HE'S A GREAT SUCCESSFUL WRITER, WHY IS HE LEAVING?

AND I THINK THE ANSWER LIES IN WHAT'S HAPPENING IN ATHENS.

BECAUSE IT IS DRAWING IN WEALTH AND RICHES AND TREASURE FROM AN EMPIRE, AN EMPIRE OF OTHER GREEKS AND WHAT THE POLITICAL RHETORIC OF ATHENS AT THIS MOMENT IS ONE OF INCREASING EXCLUSIONISM, IT IS ONE OF RACIAL PURITY, AND IT'S -- THEY ARE DEFINITELY TRYING TO MAKE IT AN UNCOMFORTABLE MOMENT FOR MIGRANTS TO BE IN.

AND WE CAN ONLY IMAGINE HE MUST HAVE FELT THAT.

AND WHEN WE KNOW THIS ABOUT HIS LIFE, AND THEN WE GO BACK TO READ HIS BOOK, THE HISTORY IS WHAT WE FIND IS THAT NOT A TRIUMPHANT STORY OF THE GREEKS DEFEATING THE COWARDLY EASTERN ASIANS, BUT ACTUALLY, WE SEE A MUCH MORE COMPLICATED STORY, WHERE DIFFERENT GROUPS OF PEOPLE ARE INTERRELATED IN DIFFERENT WAYS, WHERE IT IS ALMOST RIDICULOUS TO DRAW STARK LINES BETWEEN PEOPLE, BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY INTERCONNECTIONS.

AND ACTUALLY WHAT HE SEEMS TO BE DOING THROUGHOUT THE HISTORIES IS RUBBISHING THE IDEA OF A CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS, HE'S MOCKING IT.

HE'S SHOWING THAT IT DOESN'T WORK.

SO, I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE MISREAD HIM OVER THE CENTURIES BECAUSE OF THIS.

>> WHAT ABOUT PHYLLIS WHEATLEY?

I WAS SO INTRIGUED TO SEE HER INCLUDED IN YOUR WORK.

FAMOUS TO SOME PEOPLE, ENSLAVED AFRICAN AMERICAN POET, WHY DOES SHE -- HOW DOES SHE ENCAPSULATE YOUR THEORY?

>> WELL, I FIRST CAME ACROSS PHYLLIS WHEATLEY AS AN EARLY CLASSICAL SCHOLAR, I MEAN, SHE'S KNOWN NOT JUST FOR HER POETRY, BUT FOR THE VERY INNOVATIVE WAY THAT SHE USES CLASSICAL LANGUAGES, LATIN AND GREEK LITERATURE.

BUT TO LEARN ABOUT HER LIFE PUT ALL OF THIS INTO A VERY STARK CONTEXT.

SHE OBVIOUSLY WAS BORN IN WEST AFRICA AROUND 1755, AND SHE ENDED UP BEING ENSLAVED AND TRANSPORTED TO BOSTON, AND THERE, SHE IS -- SHE SHOWS A GREAT ATTITUDE FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING AND SO, SHE LEARNS LATIN AND GREEK VERY QUICKLY.

BY THE AGE OF 12, SHE'S PUBLISHING POEMS.

SHE'S A SENSATION.

NOBODY CAN BELIEVE THIS YOUNG ENSLAVED GIRL CAN PRODUCE LITERARY WORKS OF THIS HIGH CALIBER.

AND TO READ HER POETRY REALLY SHOWS YOU THE DEPTH OF HER ENGAGEMENT WITH THE IDEA OF THE CLASSICAL PAST AND THE WESTERN TRADITION, AND SHE'S VERY CLEVER ABOUT IT.

SHE -- SHE DRAWS UPON IT IN VERY SOPHISTICATED WAYS, BUT SHE ALSO POSITIONS HERSELF IN A PROBLEMATIC WAY TO THAT INHERITED CLASSICAL TRADITION.

SHE IS PART OF IT, SHE'S MASTERED IT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, SHE FEELS EXCLUDED BY IT, AND SHE DRAWS COMPARISONS BETWEEN HERSELF AND AFRICAN LATIN POET, TERRANCE.

SO, SHE'S A REALLY INTERESTING FIG YUFR.

AND THEN YOU FIND LATER IN HER LIFE, SHE WROTE VERY PAINFULLY ABOUT HER OWN EXPERIENCE AS BEING IN HER WORDSSNATCHED, AND WRITES ABOUT HOW THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT IN BOSTON AT THE TIME, SHE'S CAUGHT UP IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, HOW SHE QUESTIONS HOW THIS CAN EVER FIND DIVINE FFAVOR, WHY THEY CONTINUE TO PRACTICE ENSLAVEMENT.

SHE FINDS HER POLITICAL VOICE, AS WELL AS HAVING A LITERAL VOICE.

BUT THEN, IT'S VERY SAD, SHE HAS A VERY TRAGIC END, DIES, AND YOU DO WONDER HOW MUCH OF THAT IS LINKED TO HER SPEAKING OUT POLITICALLY.

>> AND THERE'S ONE OTHER PERSON I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT, A POET, A PHILOSOPHER, AND A FAMOUS COURT SAN OF THE ITALIAN RENAISSANCE.

WHY DID YOU INCLUDE HER STORY IN THE BOOK?

>> SHE IS ANOTHER FANTASTIC LITERARY WOMAN, WHICH I WAS VERY EXCITED TO BEGIN READING ABOUT.

AND BECAUSE, AGAIN, SHE UNDERMINES WHAT WE THINK OF AS HAPPENING IN THE RENAISSANCE, WHAT WE THINK OF THE RENAISSANCE, BEING A REVIVAL, LITERALLY A REBIRTH OF CLASSICAL AND WESTERN CIVILIZATION, A REDISCOVERY OF THE ANCIENT WORLD.

BUT ACTUALLY, TULI'S POETRY AND HER LETTERS ARE NOT -- ARE NOT LIKE THAT.

THEY HAVE AN AWARENESS OF A MUCH WIDER WORLD, SO, SHE DOES WRITE WITH CLASSICAL ILLUSIONS.

SHE WRITES VERY WITTILY AND VERY SOPHISTICATEDLY.

BUT SHE ALSO WRITES THIS WONDERFUL EPIC POEM, WHICH IS LIKE AN ADVENTURE STORY ABOUT ACTUALLY AN ENSLAVED YOUNG MAN WHO ENDS UP BECOMING FREE AND TRAVELING THE WORLD TO TRY AND FIND HIS PARENTS, CALLED "THE RETCHED ONE."

HE TRAVELS THROUGH ASIA AND AFRICA, AND TO THE WILDS OF EUROPE AND FINDS HIS PARENTS BACK HOME IN ITALY, OF COURSE.

BUT ALL OF THESE THREE CONTINENTS ARE DESCRIBED IN EQUALITY STRANGE AND WEIRD AND WILD WAYS.

AND WHAT TULI SHOWS US IS A WORLD WHICH IS NOT DIVIDED INTO EUROPE AND THE WEST IN CLASSICAL CULTURE ON THE ONE HAND, AND THE MONSTROUS EASTERN AND AFRICA ON THE OTHER HAND.

WE HAVE ELEMENTS OF CHRISTIANITY IN ALL THREE CONTINENTS.

WE HAVE ELEMENTS OF CLASSICAL GREEK AND ROMAN CULTURE IN ALL THREE CONTINENTS, AND WE HAVE ELEMENTS OF BARBARITY IN ALL THREE CONTINENTS, AS WELL.

WE HAVE TO REASSESS WHAT WE THINK OF THE WORLD VIEW, MUCH MORE GLOBAL THAN WHAT WE THOUGHT BEFORE.

>> THE ARGUMENT HAS BEEN MADE FOR SOME TIME THAT GENIUS KNOWS NO CONTINENT, YOU KNOW?

THAT GENIUS KNOWS NO CONTINENT, CREATIVITY KNOWS NO CONTINENT.

WHAT IS DIFFERENT IS, YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITY AND ACCESS, THE ABILITY TO EXPRESS IT.

AND I'M JUST SORT OF CURIOUS, LIKE, WHY DO WE -- WHY SHOULD THIS EVEN BE A RADICAL IDEA AT THIS POINT IN OUR LIVES?

>> IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S RADICAL NOW, BECAUSE, I THINK -- I FEEL, AT LEAST, THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN ESPECIALLY NORTH AMERICA AND IN EUROPE HAS BECOME VERY, VERY POLARIZED, AND WE SEEM TO BE RETRENCHING OURSELVES AT DIFFERENT ENDS OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM, AND UNABLE TO ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE ACROSS THE MIDDLE.

AND SO, TERMS LIKE THE WEST AND WESTERN CIVILIZATION HAVE EITHER BECOME TERMS FOR STICKING UP ON A STATUE PEDESTAL AND LIONIZING AND SAYING THEY ARE UNTOUCHABLE, FOR ONE SIDE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM, AND ON THE OTHER SIDE, THEY'VE ALMOST BECOME DIRTY WORDS.

THEY ARE SOMETHING SHAMEFUL, OR SOMETHING THAT WE -- TO BE DENIGRATED.

AND BOTH OF THOSE THINGS ARE CLEARLY STRAWMEN.

THESE ARE TWO STRAW MEN.

SO, IF WE CANNOT MOVE PAST THAT, IF WE CAN'T GET A MORE SOPHISTICATED, LESS TWO-DIMENSIONAL STRAW MAN VIEW OF WHAT WESTERN SOCIETY AND WHAT THE WEST CURRENTLY IS, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> BUT WHY DO YOU THINK THERE'S SUCH AN AGGRESSIVE MOVE NOW TO UPHOLD THIS SPECIFIC VIEW OF, YOU KNOW, WESTERN SAVIZATION?

NOT JUST IN THE UNITED STATES, BUT WE SEE THIS IN OTHER, YOU KNOW, WESTERN GOVERNMENTS, THIS DESIRE TO KIND OF NARROW THE FOCUS OF HISTORY, RATHER THAN BROADEN THAT.

WHY DO YOU THINK THAT IS?

>> I THINK IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE AT A CRITICAL JUNCTURE IN KIND OF THE BALANCE OF POWER GLOBALLY, WHERE THE WEST IS NO LONGER OCCUPYING THIS UNRIVALED POSSESSION OF DOMINANCE, WHICH IT HAS HAD FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF CENTURIES.

WE'VE HAD THE RECENT CHALLENGES OF, WELL, RUSSIA, ESPECIALLY WITH THE WAR IN UKRAINE, RUSSIAN AGGRESSION, BUT PERHAPS EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY IS THE RISE OF CHINA, BOTH ECONOMICALLY AND ALSO POLITICALLY, AS WELL.

NOW, WHEREVER YOU STAND ON THAT, WHETHER YOU THINK THIS IS A GOOD THING OR A BAD THING, IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD, IT IS SOMETHING WHICH IS -- MEANS THE WORLD ORDER IS CHANGING, THAT THINS ARE CHANGING AROUND THE WEST, NOT JUST WITHIN CHINA, BUT ALSO CHINA'S INTERACTIONS WITH THE REST OF THE WORLD.

AND THE WEST THEREFORE HAS TO RETHINK ITS POSITION, AND WHAT IT FUNDAMENTALLY IS.

IN DOING THAT, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO STEP BACK AND RETRENCH AND MAYBE PUT THEIR HANDS OVER THEIR EARS AND SAY, IT'S NOT HAPPENING, THE WEST IS WHAT IT ALWAYS WAS, IT CAN'T CHANGE, IT'S NEVER GOING TO CHANGE, AND THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO, YOU KNOW, WHO SEE THE FAULTS OF THE WEST AND WANT TO ALMOST RIP IT TO SHREDS, BUT THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE WHO ARE SEEKING TO TRY AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE WEST IS NOW, AND IT'S NOT WHAT IT WAS 100 YEARS AGO, IT'S NOT WHAT IT WAS 150 YEARS AGO.

IT'S NOT WHAT IT WAS EVEN 20 YEARS AGO, SO, THE KINDS OF IDENTITY WE NEED IN THE WEST NOW ARE NOT THE KINDS OF IDENTITY WE NEED AT THE TIME THAT THIS IDEA OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION WAS BEING PROMOTED.

WE NEED SOMETHING ELSE.

AND WE NEED IT NOW.

>> YOU SAY VERY CLEARLY THAT YOUR BOOK IS NOT AN ATTACK ON THE WEST.

SAY MORE ABOUT THAT, AND WHY YOU MADE A POINT OF SAYING THAT?

>> I MADE A POINT OF SAYING THIS, BECAUSE THERE IS -- THERE IS A SCHOOL, OR A POLITICAL CORNER, WHICH DOES WANT TO CRITIQUE THE WEST AND WESTERN CIVILIZATION, SAYING THAT THERE'S NOTHING GOOD ABOUT IT, AND IT'S ALL TO BE DENIGRATED AND ACKNOWLEDGING SOME OF THE HORRORS OF THE PAST IN WESTERN HISTORY.

NOW, I THINK WE MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THOSE HORRORS, WE MUST COME FACE-TO-FACE WITH THEM, BUT THAT -- DOES NOT MEAN TO SAY THAT THE WEST IN THE CURRENT WORLD IS SOMETHING THAT YOU SHOULD GIVE UP ON.

NOW, I AM OF THE WEST, I LIVE IN THE WEST, I DO HAVE A CHINESE MOTHER AND I HAVE FAMILY ROOTS IN CHINA, BUT I AM OF THE WEST.

AND THERE ARE THINGS THAT I CHERISH AND VALUE, WHICH I THINK ARE CORE TO MODERN 21st CENTURY WESTERN IDENTITY.

AND IN POLITICAL DEBATES NOWADAYS, AROUND ME, THERE ARE -- IT'S OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE THAT SEE THOSE THINGS AS CORE TO WESTERN IDENTITY, AND DEMOCRACY, THE RULE OF LAW, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF WORSHIP, WE COULD DEBATE WHICH ONES WE WANT TO INCLUDE AND EXCLUDE.

BUT THE CORE VALUES OF THE WEST, AS I SEE IT, AND AS MANY PEOPLE AROUND ME SEEM TO SEE IT, ARE NO LONGER RACIAL OR ETHNIC IN THE SAME WAYS THEY WERE 100 OR 70 OR EVEN 50 YEARS AGO.

AND SO, THIS NEW -- THIS CURRENT WEST, WHICH WE'RE NOW LIVING IN TODAY, IS THE WEST THAT I THINK WE NEED TO SEEK TO UNDERSTAND AND WHICH WE NEED TO FIND A NEW ORIGIN FOR.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SPEAKING WITH US TODAY.

>> THANK YOU.