be able to appropriate, to bringback under his sway, all those things that are kept at a distance bydifference, and find in them what might be called his abode. Making historical analysis the discourse ofthe continuous and making human consciousness the original subject of allhistorical development and all actions are the two sides of the same system ofthought. In this system, time isconceived in terms of totalization and revolutions are never more than momentsof consciousness. As one can note,Foucault was not an adept of evolutionist thought that beholds that historyitself is a process of progress towards something more whole. He is saying that this discourse and thediscourse on the human subjectivity, as interiority, and as foundational ofhistory itself, is a particular system of thought, which has its links toChristianity and to Metaphysics. Thisdiscourse is pervasive in Western, modern societies, and allows for (in)actionsto be justified on the basis of the good management of human consciousness. The Terrorist, then,appears as someone that is in need of psychological intervention, and this isposited as a solution, a resolution, of social-historical conflicts. The human subject, as foundational ofhistory, as the ground of what gets constructed as reality, can be intervened upon in order for normalization tooccur. Under this same premise,communities all around the world were intervened upon on the basis of theassumption that they were inherently lacking something more human, whichthe European supposedly possessed. Themass extermination of cultures all around the world under colonizations in theAmericas, Africa, Asia, Pacific Islands: all these places have suffered andstill suffer the effects of colonial prejudice and submission. Conceptualized as lacking by the European,who self-identified as civilized while calling other cultures barbarian,these cultures were made into slaves of the colonial enterprise which in moderndiscourse makes other cultures and communities underdeveloped[46],primitive, traditional, or just less than a true human. With regards to the notion of civilization,Antonin Artaud (1958) has this to say:...acultivated civilized man is regarded as a person instructed in systems, aperson who thinks in forms, signs, representations a monster whose faculty ofderiving thoughts from acts, instead of identifying acts with thoughts, isdeveloped to an absurdity. Thisinterpretation can show how even the term civilized itself is not free of apathologization. Indeed, on asocial-historical level, we could argument that the notion of a civilizedpeople has served to wage terror and war throughout the world in the name ofcivilization. We had an example ofthis when George Bush described the September 11 attacks as an act ofbarbarism, and called for a war of civilization against it. Embedded in this affirmation is a strongracism and ethnocentrism[47]. The terrible act of a few gets linked to theessence of a people, regarded as less than what America stands for. The arrogance of this view was embodied bythe Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, when he affirmed that this was astruggle between Western civilization, the superior one, and Islamiccivilization, the inferior[48].Besides the arrogance, the portrayal of Islam as a monolithic entity isviolence in itself (as is the portrayal of the West). Islamic countries and other countries thatcontain Islamic peoples in it practically every one in the world express