What does Habermas, who lends support to Israel's brutality, represent?

The idea of "provincializing Europe" is based on the observation that Europe's local history is losing its characteristic of being a universal design. Attentive readers will notice the influence of two important authors in this sentence: Dipesh Chakrabarty and Walter Mignolo. I anticipate that their ideas in this direction will be increasingly discussed over time. In fact, we need to consider the Habermas incident within this framework. Habermas was not alone. Many famous philosophers devoted to European universalism openly supported Israel's brutality. Their universal designs were resonating worldwide. However, after Gaza, the provincial qualities of these philosophers and similar ones became much more apparent. I would like to clarify that I use the concept of provincialism in a broad sense that reflects romantic tendencies.

After periods where doubts about the universality of European thought were not easily expressed, it was surprising that England, Germany, the Netherlands, and France raced to participate in Israel's brutality. They did not even feel the need to salvage the image. Probably, the majority did not expect the reality that the illusion of Western universalism would be exposed in such a short time.

After reality manifested itself in this way, instead of asking again "which West," we need to ask the question "What is the West and Europe, and who constitutes them." We encountered more local realities such as Latins, Anglo-Saxons, Germans. This new factual situation will yield striking results outside the West. The fact that Israel is an extension of one or more of them will necessitate the reconsideration of many issues centered around "Europe."

For those of us who have been dealing with the Western issue for about two hundred years, understanding events in the Anglo-Saxon world will be difficult. Indeed, the real division related to this new reality is already taking place outside the West. There is no indication that Anglo-Saxons, Germans, Normans, and others experience division among themselves due to this new reality. They will likely reconcile with neoromantic ideas by pursuing the longing for the provinces and rural excitement anew. This will even provide them with a means of purification. However, dealing with the heavy consequences of leaning on the West for two hundred years will not be easy for us. It is necessary not to dismiss the accusation of "Palestinians also sold their land" as an ordinary sentence.

Hamid Dabaşi's article titled "Thanks to Gaza, European philosophy has been exposed as ethically bankrupt" in "Middle East Eye" highlights similar ideas. Dabaşi's sentences are crucial: "I believe Habermas's attitude is in line with the German state policy that is complicit in the Zionist massacre of Palestinians." Dabaşi includes the term "Tribal Europe Spectators" in one of the subtitles. The author points out the surprising support of leading European philosophers like Jurgen Habermas and a few colleagues for the Zionist massacre of Palestinians. Dabaşi's comments on Habermas evoke notions of provincialism and local history. Here's one of his sentences: "If there is not even a trace of people like Palestinians in Habermas's moral imagination, we have no reason to think that his entire philosophical project is in any way related to the rest of humanity beyond the tribal European spectators." The phrase "philosophical imaginations that stubbornly remain tribal" in the article is also a striking expression of today's reality.

In the article on "Middle East Eye," it is stated that Habermas's tribal statements and rough attitude towards Palestine demonstrate the moral bankruptcy of Europe and that this points to a turning point in the colonial relationship between European philosophy and the rest of the world. Dabaşi also adds that the whole world owes Palestinians for bringing about such a reality.

Especially Anglo-Saxons seem determined to spread the brutality displayed in Palestine to different regions of the Islamic world. We can describe this situation as "new colonialism" or neocolonialism. The role of this new context will be significant in divisions and contradictions.