Dualism is used to justify and naturalize the structured patterns of domination and exploitation by the West. Vote affirmative on the permutation to reject the dualism that the negative imposes through their deployment of the Orient.

The term Orientalism, like Latinism and Hellenism, refers to the discipline which can now be equated with Middle Eastern studies. The Orient, in the 19th century European usage of the word, meant the Arab world or generally the Middle East; it did not include India, China or the Far East. The Orient, literally the sunrise, pointed above all to the region that lay immediately to the east of Europe.1 Therefore Orientalism, like other branches of area studies, aims to understand and analyse Middle Eastern affairs in an academic milieu. In Edward Said's view, however, the discipline of Orientalism is but a crystallisation of a hostile ideology in Western scholarship.2 In his masterpiece, Orientalism, Said deeply and comprehensively researched the historical construction of this ideology.3 Published for the first time in 1978, Orientalism traces the various phases of relationship between the West and Islam, from the Napoleonic invasion of Egypt, through the colonial period and the rise of modern Orientalist scholarship in Britain and France during the 19th century. It continues up to the end of European imperial hegemony in the Orient after World War II and on to the emergence of US dominance. As Said illustrates, the vast corpus of Orientalism was to legitimise and promote Western superiority and dominance by inventing the ideology of the West-and-Islam dualism. In this article dualism is used to denote a way of thinking that promotes duality between 'the self and 'the other' in order to justify and naturalise some structured patterns of domination and exploitation. By portraying 'them' as lesser in humanity or lower in the great chain of being, dualism is employed to legitimise some implications of hierarchical power and to show who gets what, when and how. The critical part of dualistic thought is not that there is merely a difference which can be found between each pair of people, but a dramatic difference, a 'difference by nature', ie an essential otherness which makes a specific group of people less human and hence subject to domination by another complete human being. In the social and political realms the main intention behind promoting dualistic thought is usually to justify the way 'we' treat 'them', even if we, as human beings, do not want to be treated in a similar way. The core of a dualistic argument, thus, is that 'they' are essentially different, totally dismissing their commonalities with us as members of the human race