I think the problem is that the term "culture" is generally misdefined by most people, and the term "civilization" is incredibly problematic in the post-colonial world.

Contemporary anthropologists tend to shy away from even using "culture" these days because of it's mis-use by laypeople (or other social sciences, for that matter). These days anthropologists tend to think of it simply as referring to a vaguely distinctive system of meanings and practices, with emphasis on the practice portion (Pierre Bourdieu ftw!).

"Civilization" historically refers to what we Westerners consider social systems that resemble our own: centralized, hierarchical states with explicit labor specialization. The term is often used punitively against non-Western societies (portrayed as "uncivilized"), hence why anthropologists try to avoid it like plutonium.

Responding to your comment, on these terms culture is absolutely necessary for civilization to exist, as culture is necessary to even be human. It's culture that allows us to conceive of a need for public works, and form labor groups to construct them. It's culture that provides language, which in turn provides written scripts. It's culture that creates a set of shared meanings and practices that provides a sense of collective identity in order for social groups to cohere in the first place. None of these things, in fact, necessarily even need a strong, centralized government (i.e., "civilization") to occur.

Now, whether or not a culture produces what we would consider "civilization" is entirely subjective and bound up with what we see as particular markers of complexity. Heck, there are a lot of archaeologists that scoffed until very recently at the notion that the Classic Period Maya constituted a state-level "civilization" simply because Maya cities were much more dispersed over the landscape in comparison to Aztec urban centers (which were much more similar in form to Western cities, if much larger).

I reject the idea that "civilization" is a bad word. I regard regard large-scale, organized, and literate societies as being obviously better than barbarism. Scientific progress exists and it improves the human condition.

These views would make me unemployable in academia.

"Civilization" is not a _bad_ word so much as it's a badly _mis-used_ one (same as "culture"). My point was perhaps unclear; the issue is how it's been implemented politically that's the problem. I happen to think one _can_ use it in a scholarly context as a broad brushstroke reference, but only with care and discretion and an understanding of its historical use.

Labelling a community as "barbaric," however, has been a handy excuse for taking land and killing people for millenia. White settlers came to view Native Americans as barbaric, and that was reason enough for attempted genocide. A case could be made that trying to systemically eliminate an entire population might perhaps count as barbaric. "Barbarism," like "civilization," is in the eye of the beholder.

Being natives within a large-scale, organized, literate society, it's only natural to assume this is the best of all possible worlds, but one could make a counter-argument that this society leaves its members weak, alienated, and anomic. There's also the matter of poverty, large-scale warfare, oppression, and pollution that contemporary societies contribute. I must say, my digital watch is pretty neat, though.

As a scientist myself, I certainly place a great deal of value in science as a process of inquiry and understanding. However, science is just a tool, and like a hammer it can be used to cause harm as well as create. It all depends on the person wielding it.

Being from Eastern Europe myself, I also don't suffer from the American/West-European self-hatred and self-flaggelation that seems so rampant in Leftist circles. Heck, I remember what it was like to walk in Rome/Paris in the mid 90's compared to how it is now, and, God help me and my future employment prospects if this wasn't anonymous, I think it was better in many regards then, for reasons I dare not speak of.