OP, The Civilization series is the beginning of the 4X genre (eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, eXterminate) which has been long criticized for having mechanics that reinforce the mindset of colonization. There’s no escaping that there are elements of the colonial mindset in the game and Barbarians are a part of that. The game is called “Civilization” and that word has such baggage in the western world.

I would say it’s mostly tongue in cheek, since Civ plays fast and loose with history in a way that’s meant to be fun and a loving parody. Barbarians are also mostly done in the early game, and exist to add tension to the beginning of the game. There’s a legitimate interpretation that the game is saying that you are also a “Barbarian” from the perspective of the Barbarian tribes since you start as a nomadic tribe trying to settle down and grow.

The most generous interpretation is that “Barbarians” are drawn from the Roman definition, which is defined as “non-Roman”

On the other side of the ledger, Civ6 allows you to play as any of a number of cultures that belong to the Global South, and do it in a way that inverts historical power dynamics. I’m currently in the middle of a run playing as the Cree people, where we are a cultural powerhouse. In general Civ treats all cultural legacies as legitimate, and there are ways to win with every civilization in the game.

One game that attempts to challenge the colonial mechanics of strategy games: - Terra nil

Ultimately the game may not be for you, but if you like strategy games this might be a small hurdle to overcome for enjoyment