|
Alliance
of Ethics
and
Enlightenment
Some
Reflections concerning the Link between Xenophobia and the
Rule of Power, as well as the option of fostering Critical
and Responsible Humanitarianism through an Alliance of
Ethics and Enlightenment
Wolfgang
Fischer and Rudolf Kuhr
(
pdf.format
)
A
Culture of Peace overcomes Psychological
Homelessness
I
Xenophobia and its Effects upon Society
II
The Alliance of Moral Values with a View to Overcoming
the Effects of an as yet inadequate Awareness of
Responsibility.
A
Culture of Peace overcomes Psychological
Homelessness
People
who suffered from love deprivation in their childhood, from
a lack of acceptance by their immediate social environment,
whose lives seemed never given tangible meaning or a goal
worth pursuing - people who were thus left psychologically
homeless tend to compensate for this lack by seizing for
guiding orientation upon anything that proclaims their own
nation or race as something special. In order to imbue this
ideal with extra meaning, to the extent of even using it as
a justification for action, anyone foreign, or different,
not coming from one's own nation or race or thinking
differently, is then branded as the enemy, and will
eventually be violently attacked as posing a recognisable
threat to the group identified with.
Repressed
personal insecurity is thus compensated and one's own ego or
self apparently elevated through the devaluing of foreign or
arbitrarily separated identities - a typically neurotic and
potentially psychotic attitude. A motivation thus generated
e. g. in the racist neo-Nazi scene, is nourished by the
individually underdeveloped, insecure and unloved egos, with
correspondingly dangerous consequences for a social
environment that is different. Only where the motivation of
political activists (of either the right or the left) is
directed towards individual development for the sake of
improving social conditions may it show even wholistic,
humanist attributes.
Historically
there have been frequent instances of the right and left
motivations overlapping in a variety of totalitarian
systems. In this respect Stalin did not correspond to a
progressive socialist theory. And likewise the former
leadership of the GDR (the East German state), with its
tendency to paint the West as the devil whilst at the same
time committing human rights violations in their own
country, could be considered as being totalitarian rather
than progressive in the sense of the socialist left. Whether
their theoretical understanding proclaims them as on the
right or of the "progressive" left: both kinds of activists
will show their true colours by their activities in social
practice. And it is this practice, too, on which any
unambiguous statement may be based concerning the quality of
the respective reigning culture.
On
a global scale, the behaviour of the industrialised nations
(Minority World) towards the vast majority of the world's
population bears the marks of a totalitarian attitude which
has little regard for people or life as such.The clumsiness
or even tolerance if not ignorance shown by German
politicians with regard to neo-Nazi tendencies, as well as
the half-hearted attitude of the judiciary towards the
crimes committed by this group are both rooted in the fact
that this totalitarianism (and thereby the system itself) is
here not endangered. At the same time, however, the
dissident movement remains consistently under attack.
On
the other hand, the likewise totalitarian tendencies of
other governments with regard to the striving for
self-respondibility within their countries are revealed by
their attacking any separatist national movements, to the
point of even using military force. What this means for the
freedom movement within other nations is this: wherever they
seem to threaten the tendency towards a totalitarian
rigidification of the world order, they are opposed
militarily, whereas in regions where the nation state order
is being maintained if not supported by anti-human
activities, such groups, may they hold human life ever so
cheap, are even rewarded (- globally: support of all nations
against the interests of indigenous populations, and in
general: legalised destruction of their means of survival).
The
eyes of global justice remain blind; they will gain their
sight only when the general psychological homelessness is
overcome by a wholistic humanist orientation, an orientation
by the necessities of Life, that will provide meaning and
purpose on a global scale. Then the development and maturing
of a truly peaceful mentality which also respects
environment will be able to be reflected in a culture of
therapeutic quality which can heal the damage incurred
throughout history as a consequence of immature motivations.
I.
Xenophobia and its Effects upon Society
'Xenophobia'
is a negative prejudicial thought system postulating an
intrinsically higher worth of one's own ethnic group in
comparison to other such groups. It is determined by racist
and ethnocentric (nationalistic) thinking.
The
racist component considers the de-valued 'alien' race as
inferior 'by nature' (i.e. on account of biological-genetic
determination). The ethno-centric, nationalistic component
of xenophobia regards the question of superior or inferior
value as culturally determined.
The
concept of 'Race' involved here is being used in political
and ideological combat. It may utilise biological features
of certain populations, but may just as well disregard them;
in either case social inequality will be presented as a
biologically determined natural order. Accordingly, any
attempt to change this order is rejected as 'contrary to
nature', whereas that which is constant, i.e. the
immutability of existing power constellations, is
glorified.
Thus
in the final analysis the concept is invariably directed
against the idea of equality and any efforts to achieve it.
(Inasmuch as racism pronounces the differences to be
biologically determined and hence insurmountable, it may be
regarded as "worse" than nationalism or ethnocentrism.) This
is not to discuss the question whether or not "race" is
meaningful as a biological concept. However, any use of the
concept to explain anything in the social sphere is plain
nonsense.
Numerous
research projects have presented empirical evidence
indicating that many prejudices towards foreign immigrants
in Germany have a racist tendency. These prejudices
postulate a genetic inferiority of the foreign groups (i.e.
an inferiority determined by ethnic origin) so as to justify
their social and judicial discrimination. In this respect
the current xenophobia has largely adopted the contents and
forms of traditional racism.
In
the context of society at large, racism or xenophobia have
the effect of stabilising the current power constellations
under the conditions of socio-economic instability. This
statement is not to support a "governmental conspiracy"
theory disregarding the xenophobia (or antisemitism, for
that matter) of the "man in the street". It is true that the
purposive utilisation of racist ideology has been a "proven"
instrument for securing (or gaining) power in times of
social instability, or of mobilising its resources, to which
end the technique of separation ("divide and rule") has been
applied throughout history. However, pointing this out is
not to state that this means is being used by consensus
within ruling groups let alone by all ruling groups.
Ideology as an instrument for disguising facts may also take
the form of "systematic toleration" of tendencies emanating
from the "man in the street" (such as blindness towards
neo-nazism).
Furthermore,
a sociological examination of the phenomenon of power
indicates that due to the exigencies of foreign policy or
international economics, racism (or xenophobia) in itself
constitutes an element of destabilisation the limitation of
which must be in the interest of those in power.
II.
The Alliance of Moral Values with a View to Overcoming the
Effects of an as yet inadequate Awareness of
Responsibility.
A
feeling of being threatened by the appearance of strangers
in one's familiar environment may, at least in persons who
are insecure in themselves, be explained in terms of
biology; and this feeling will produce an emotional urge to
drive the stranger away. However, those whose actions are in
this way biologically determined may well be regarded as
being in proximity to the animal kingdom. Would they really
rather be identified with animals than with humans who carry
the responsibility for their actions?
Any
attempt to devise a strategy of countering phenomena of
under-developed human nature such as xenophobia must begin
with the question as to our own personal
identity.
Who
am I? Where do I belong? Where do I come from? Where am I
going? With whom, or with what do I identify?
Am
I identifying in a holistic spirit with the one humanity
sharing life in this world, in a sense embedded in Nature, -
or else, feeling insufficient in myself as part of the
whole, with elitist values, concepts and desires that
exclude others? Am I thus, childlike and biologically
determined, seeking to stabilise my identity through
differentiation instead in an adult, spiritual manner
through connectedness with the one family of man and with
nature?
At
this point we ought to realise that the effect of a mind-set
dogmatically solidified in the interest of the status quo is
akin to that of a conspiracy against social progress and the
development of responsible humanity. Acknowledging this will
facilitate the task of changing this mind-set in such a way
that its thinking will result in changed aims and action and
thus contribute to the creation of a tolerant and just
society.
A
closer look at our civilisation will show it to be
functioning as it does only because those in power - whether
engaged in a conspiracy or not - are in the final result
agreed to leave the current power constellations intact as
far as possible. Only this enables them to safeguard
adequate servicing of Capital, to acquire resources at a
minimum cost, to support the expansion of the middle class
only to the point of securing adequate labour, to
reinterpret election results as far as possible (so as to
prevent them being seen as an expression of mistrust towards
a political system which can no longer hide its corruptness)
- and so on, the list is endless...
Those
acting in this way find this totally okay. For them, any
change to this situation would constitute a real threat. And
thus they are in total agreement that "one good turn
deserves another". Intergovernmental treaties, laws and
teams secure the status quo 'Rich over Poor' and 'Man over
Woman', and a mind-set dominated by patriarchal thinking for
millenia will reject any kind of alternative as
"Utopian".
Those
individuals who nonetheless insist on expressing a deviating
opinion are, wherever they could bring about effective
change, made out to be criminals.
Does
it not seem right to regard all this as constituting the
perfect model of a conspiracy by those who rule? Whoever
follows closely the argument here presented must concede
that what is needed is a kind of counter-conspiracy - or
better: an alliance of ethics, of enlightenment, a league
for the purpose of fostering responsible
humanitarianism.
Only
through an unambiguous espousal of humanitarianism may we
hope to get the better of social phenomena like neo-nazism
and the hostility towards foreigners. This presupposes
finding our own identity as responsibly acting individuals,
and will ultimately lead to a solidly united society which
is accepting its responsibilities also beyond national
boundaries. Accordingly, this kind of society will no longer
merely regard asylum seekers as either of practical use (in
today's terms, "the useful ones") or a threat, but it will
empathise with their fate which may also be
investigated.
In
the case of many foreign asylum seekers this fate has been
marked by harrowing social conditions in their home country.
For the wealthy nations the situation of these countries
continues to be an advantage, as their natural resources are
being plundered. Accordingly, many of their inhabitants are
considered of 'value' only as extremely cheap labour and as
such are forced to eke out a miserable existence unworthy of
human beings. In their struggle against these conditions
many of them are branded as criminals and then land at our
borders seeking our sympathy for their situation.
According
to the German constitution the dignity of humans is
inviolable. The state has a duty to respect and protect it
with all powers at its disposal. Seeing that, beginning with
the first paragraph of the first article of the
constitution, the state, under the sway of diverse
interests, shows itself unwilling to enforce the
constitutional right of inviolability of human dignity, it
seems not surprising that in the sphere of foreign and
asylum politics so much continues to go wrong. Not enough
with this, politicians are publicly differentiating between
"useful" and "other" foreigners or asylum seekers, thus
preparing a fertile soil for the relapse of human maturity
into a lack of responsibility befitting a stone-age
mentality.
Bans
and prohibitions alone will accomplish nothing in the long
run, just as children cannot develop into responsible adults
simply through being punished. No one is born as a racist,
nor will anyone ever be cured through ostracism or
punishment.
What
is needed is the engagement of all concerned groups in a
comprehensive public debate about themes such as nationalism
and violence and their causes. And, whatever the
consequences for a changed self-image of power and politics:
it will be absolutely essential to discuss and openly
proclaim the fundamentals of responsible
humanitarianism.
here
is more on the subject: http://emanzipationhumanum.de/english/titels.html#1
Emanzipation
Humanum,
version 9.2000, translation form german to english by
Rainer
Taëni.
Criticism, suggestions as to form and content, dialogue,
translation into other languages are all
desired
http://emanzipationhumanum.de/english/politics01.html
|