Comment by Prof. Mumun Tahir
The question of what civilization or social form of government and form of organization follows the previous ones is always relevant and vitally important. It is known that nothing in the world is eternal; everything changes, transforms, passes from one qualitative state to another. But not always in the direction of humanistic civilization. Every civilization, according to the concepts of the ideological and philosophical school to which Oswald Spengler and Arnold Toynbee belong, is expansive and extroverted.
But the current vicious civilization strives to conquer new societies and spaces. Overextension, the pursuit of material and territorial acquisitions corrupt and exhaust the great civilizational formations. Anticipating this and wishing to prevent such trends, in 1951 the foundations of the greatest peace project were laid - the European Community. Four fathers assisted in the "birth" of the European Union.
The Prime Minister of Italy Alcide de Gasperi (1945 to 1953) together with the German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer (1949 to 1963), the French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman (1948 and 1952) and his compatriot Jean Monnet took the first step towards a united Europe with the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community.
In the following decades, the European Union not only managed to preserve peace and stability, but also significantly improved the socio-economic and cultural life of European nations. They lived in conditions of freedom and prosperity, i.e. It could be confidently asserted that the ideal of the founders of the European Union - a peaceful, united and prosperous Europe - has been realized.
Until now, Europe and the world have seemed more secure than ever. Currently, all sorts of trends are undermining this significant human achievement and creating the conditions for what has been achieved so far to be not only meaningless but also erased. As if everything that has been achieved over the decades for stability, security, trust and courtesy, respect and hope, is exposed to risk, threat, uncertainty, danger…
Were we prepared for this and are we prepared now?
After a “cultural and Christian country like Germany allowed itself to be taken over by Hitler, writes Margaret Thatcher in her book “Life and Politics“, human civilization should never be seen as an unchangeable given, it must necessarily be nurtured, and this means that good and worthy people must stand up for the things they believe in”. That there is always some unknown danger that we must be ready to guard against, was also warned by Angel Wagenstein: “If you take your children to the Museum of the Past on a Sunday, warn them to be careful! The exhibits from the political Paleolithic may seem clumsy, ridiculous and ridiculous for the century we live in, but they are safe, oh, far from it! Spielberg showed in his virtual story how monsters that disappeared billions of years ago can be reanimated and that, brought back to life, they again become the old bloodthirsty horrors. Know this, just as you know that you should not let your children into a tiger's cage!”.
In this context, the problem of security acquires new dimensions. Therefore, timely and always urgent measures must be taken to ensure the security - of the individual, society, the state and the world as a whole. Activities in this regard would be, as Thatcher figuratively expressed it, like the insurance of a house: a person does not stop paying the premiums just because there have been no burglaries on his street for some time. Therefore, it is always vital to understand in what conditions of civilization or social system we live and what will come after the current one.
Contrary to the claims that we are (or will be) in a situation of war of cultures and religions, as well as between civilizations (terrestrial or extraterrestrial - their proponents do not specify), and unlike S. Huntington (and his followers), who saw after the end of the Cold War in culture and religion, in history and geography the driving forces of new conflicts and according to whom the fundamental source of conflicts in the new conditions is not ideologies and ideological values, not economics and economic interests, but civilizations, understood as a type of culture, I continue to believe that the main contradiction of our modernity is between wealth and poverty, between civilization and barbarism. And this is already a fact.
In my opinion, there is no clash of civilizations. Because there is one civilization on our planet. And it is, in short - humanistic, ennobled, spiritualized, constructive, creative, mutual responsibility of members of society for the well-being, happiness, security of everyone and of society as a whole, with high architecture, with exquisite virtues and dignity; a complex of sublime values, communication, home, decency and propriety, models of behavior, refined manners and cultural etiquette, respect for differences between people, respect for dissent - political, religious, ethnic, linguistic... Peace and freedom. Human rights and civil liberties.
The other is barbarism that is trying to swallow us up. Will it swallow us up!?
“People, beware!“ You know!