Among others but primarily, liberalism is the recognition and allowance of man: his existence, autonomy, agency; and the institution of man. The realisation of men of their being dawned upon the West after prolonged annihilation campaigns on the part of one or another grouping.
The realisation of being led them to see and fashion their collective life objectively. In the process, however, they retained as was quite natural, their ethnic, racial, and civilizational moorings, and among the traits so held and which drove their agency was othering and dominating the other.
The good liberal ideas dictated them to accept the others when they too rose to claim their humanity against the domination of the West. But, what I seek to underscore here, they while recognising the others and their ways, whether by goodwill or having no other choice, make a dogma of liberalism too. Their latent approval of their ethnicity and civilization leads them to see equal merit in others' ethnic ways and civilizational values. Not to say that there is no equal merit but what the West had attained: objectivism, they too compromised that in the recognition of others. More tragically, when they were at the peak of their hegemony, just after their successful elimination of the monstrosity of Bolshevism, they stayed away from making objectivism the global order. And now, they are again back to the 'an eye for an eye' age. This is not to blame the West alone but being resourceful, and that at the cost of others, they owed more to the world.
Niraj Kumar Jha
कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:
एक टिप्पणी भेजें