In many aspects of life, there will be a before and after the pandemic. It seems that 2020 will not only be remembered by the Coronavirus, but also for tackling social issues that remain to be solved. For example, statistics are starting to throw light on the profile of those most affected by the illness, sometimes revealing clear social inequalities.
The protests and changes that are taking place around the world triggered by events that occurred in the US (but that are certainly not unique to that country), demonstrate that perpetuating certain actions, attitudes or beliefs towards other fellow human beings can have devastating effects.
As we commence our staged steps to recovery from the current crisis, we have the opportunity to do things differently, to do things better. The following excerpt of a speech delivered by Mawlana Hazar Imam, gives us a clear understanding of what pluralism entails, its challenges and how to tackle them:
“For a very long time, as you know, the term most often used in describing the search for human understanding was the word “tolerance.” In fact, it was one of the words that was used in 1955 text to describe one of the objectives of this Jodidi Lecture.
In recent years our vocabulary in discussing this subject has evolved. One word that we have come to use more often in this regard is the word “pluralism.” And the other is the word “cosmopolitan.”
You may know that our AKDN Network, a decade ago, cooperated with the Government of Canada to create a new Global Centre for Pluralism based in Ottawa, designed to study more closely the conditions under which pluralist societies can thrive.
A pluralist, cosmopolitan society is a society which not only accepts difference, but actively seeks to understand it and to learn from it. In this perspective, diversity is not a burden to be endured, but an opportunity to be welcomed.
A cosmopolitan society regards the distinctive threads of our particular identities as elements that bring beauty to the larger social fabric. A cosmopolitan ethic accepts our ultimate moral responsibility to the whole of humanity, rather than absolutizing a presumably exceptional part.
Perhaps it is a natural condition of an insecure human race to seek security in a sense of superiority. But in a world where cultures increasingly interpenetrate one another, a more confident and a more generous outlook is needed.
What this means, perhaps above all else, is a readiness to participate in a true dialogue with diversity, not only in our personal relationships, but in institutional and international relationships also. But that takes work, and it takes patience. Above all, it implies a readiness to listen.
What is needed, as the former Governor General of Canada Adrienne Clarkson has said, and I quote, is a readiness “to listen to your neighbour, even when you may not particularly like him.” Is that message clear? You listen to people you don’t like!
A thoughtful cosmopolitan ethic is something quite different from some attitudes that have become associated with the concept of globalization in recent years. Too often, that term has been linked to an abstract universalism, perhaps well-meaning but often naïve. In emphasising all that the human race had in common, it was easy to depreciate the identities that differentiated us. We sometimes talked so much about how we are all alike that we neglected the wonderful ways in which we can be different.
One result of this superficial view of homogenized, global harmony, was an unhappy counter-reaction. Some took it to mean the spread of a popular, Americanized global culture—that was unfair and an assessment that was erroneous. Others feared that their individual, ethnic or religious identities might be washed away by a super-competitive economic order, or by some supranational political regime. And the frequent reaction was a fierce defence of older identities. If cooperation meant homogenization, then a lot of people found themselves saying “No.”
But an either-or-choice between the global and the tribal – between the concept of universal belonging and the value of particular identities – was in fact a false choice. The road to a more cooperative world does not require us to erase our differences, but to understand them.
A responsible, thoughtful process of globalization, in my view, is one that is truly cosmopolitan, respecting both what we have in common and what makes us different.
It is perhaps in our nature to see life as a series of choices between sharply defined dualities, but in fact life is more often a matter of avoiding false dichotomies, which can lead to dangerous extremes.
The truth of the matter is that we can address the dysfunctions of fragmentation without obscuring the values of diversity.
A cosmopolitan ethic will also be sensitive to the problem of economic insecurity in our world. It is an enormous contributing factor to the problems I have been discussing. Endemic poverty still corrodes any meaningful sense of opportunity for many millions. And even in less impoverished societies, a rising tide of economic anxiety can make it difficult for fearful people to respect, let alone embrace, that which is new or different.”
Excerpt of Samuel L. and Elizabeth Jodidi Lecture at Harvard University, 12 November 2015
https://www.akdn.org/speech/his-highness-aga-khan/samuel-l-and-elizabeth...
We are living in times marked by the polarisation of ideas. It is important to equip ourselves and the future generations with a solid understanding of diversity and pluralism, so that we can be shielded from narrow minded ideas of exclusion of those who are different to us. The website of the Global Centre for Pluralism is an excellent source of information for the understanding of the concept of pluralism and its applications across different fields of practice.
