??Getting rid of negative ideologies!

By | février 9, 2016

Throughout history, mankind oscillated between a negative vision of the world and a negative view of history in which the human project amounts to organizing a response to a threat, real or imagined, and positive visions based on utopias that then must be translated into real projects. Negative ideologies always end using threats as an excuse to undermine freedoms. Sometimes positive visions become negative when opponents put them at risk.

In the recent past, as a negative ideology, we may mention National Socialism that is built on the imaginary threat of the Jews; as a positive ideology misdirected towards the negative, communism in a single country, that has become totalitarian, in response to class enemies, more or less imaginary. And as positive ideologies, that one can accept or reject, liberalism and social-democracy.

Today, two dangers are building two new negative ideologies and are giving birth to projects sowing the seeds of totalitarianism. The threat of fundamentalism, blending with that of an uncontrolled flood of refugees is leading to an ideology denying both, and intending to set up institutional and physical barriers. We see it everywhere, for example in the speeches of Donald Trump in the United States and in those of extremist parties in Europe. The climate threat also suggests a closed ideology, with a ban on production and use, or the total avoidance of all risks. We also see it everywhere, in the most radical speeches of environmentalists, in the United States, Europe or Japan. The dynamics are just as totalitarian, as is shown by the behavior of those who violently oppose certain infrastructure projects, in defiance of democratic procedures that have made them possible.

In the absence of positive ideologies, both negative ideologies rub off on the dominant political parties: the far-right’s proposals on immigration are found in the right-wing programs, and also in those of social democracy when they are in power; and the most vocal proposals of environmentalists, such as the precautionary principle, are also echoed in the platforms of the left wing, and then in those of the so-called « government right. »

All in all, contrary to what is claimed all too easily, the monolithic way of thinking is not one that would bring together liberals and social democrats. It is a juxtaposition, in all projects of all parties, of the ideas of the most radical environmentalists and the most vocal xenophobes. In France, thus the dominant ideology is ‘écolo-frontiste’ and everywhere, if we are not careful, a kind of brown-green dictatorship will emerge.

Nothing would be worse, in the United States and Europe, particularly in France, than to let government parties simply become Trojans of the worst totalitarian dogmas. Democracy would not survive. This is not a theoretical discourse: from what we see happening in the United States, the pre-requisite conditions of a coup d’Etat have never been closer. After all, this country is the last of the democracies arising from the Age of Enlightenment which has not yet suffered a coup d’Etat.

The answer, for the governing parties, is not in an extremist outbidding: voters will always prefer originals to copies though they may face the abandonment of freedoms. Rather it is in the construction of one or many new positive ideologies. Speaking at least for myself, the answer is clear: to be of service to the next generations; it is the key to our own happiness, and it is through this rational altruism that we need to come up with an idea of society based on empathy, collaboration, the pleasure of being of service. Such positive ideology gives a much more attractive answer to the threats of climate change and terrorism than negative ideologies: it is in taking actions in the interest of future generations that the necessary energy resources changes will be made, without needing totalitarian prohibitions. And it is by helping in their country those who are currently arriving and will soon arrive in numbers to our shores, and by receiving with dignity those we must host, that we will prevent frustrations that create a feeling of humiliation in some, and an impression of invasion in others. And this is how the conditions for a balanced, sustainable and democratic world will be created, respectful of life, in all its forms.

j@attali.com