Political and Social
Are we going to survive?
The evolutionary drive is a
primordial and fundamental force. If we fail to fulfil its pre-requisites, it
is logical that we humans shall be destroyed -manouvered into destroying
ourselves- or made non-viable and replaced.
No one can argue that the evolutionary journey from fishes to frogs to
lizards to birds to bees to elephants to whales to wolves to monkeys to
dolphins to humans has been solely to
recreate fishes, frogs and bees again. Was biological evolution totally
haphazard? Was it solely survival of the fittest? Or was there some deep
consciousness, yearning behind this incredible journey of development.
It it would seem that
biological evolution had reached its goal with the emergence of Homo
sapiens. At this point of birth of human
intelligence that had emerged in the scheme and intelligent form of life that
is capable of life preservation, procreation and preservation of spevies
without the ruthless cruel life destructive drama of survival of the fittest.
The evolution of Homo sapiens represents an endpoint of biological
evolution. The driving force behind
biological evolution being the creation of a life supporting form of life that
can resort to consciousness and intelligence and not to programmed violence and
blind force or wile for survival.
How can we come to terms
with the sense of the big matrix of love and yearning for consciousness and
none violence being the driving force of biological evolution without head on collision with the
closed dogmatic concepts of the religious fanatics. It is a terrible and
recurrent disappointment to find various sects and religions trying to import a
cruel inflexible "God" into every scientific or logical argument or
into any new illuminating concept. I
preferred to think of the yearning for love and consciousness and life
preservation and life love through none violence as an inherent quality within conscious
life itself at its first birth. You can
call that; survival through love what you will.
You can call it God or you can call it inherent consciousness. There is no need at all to quarel about
that! To transcend ruthless violence and
destruction to other on the road of self-preservation, intelligent life achieved in the emergence of
the human being what seems to be a paradoxically regressive step! The human being is a life form born with the
least amount of programming! Compared to
most or even all other living forms human beings are the most vulnerable and
remains most vulnerable for a long time as they acquire by experiential interactive
learning the knowledge required for life preservation through the complex
interaction of sensory input including the unique special senses and the
feedback from motor output, skills acquisition, and the unique ability for
creativity and four interactive creative relations with self other self, other
beings and the environment.
If we see the human
evolutionary breakthrough as the potential for survival of the species without
violence to self other self and environment, then very rich and exciting potentials
are open to Homo sapiens.
Let us now jump many
centuries into the contemporary world situation. Why in the context of brute capitalism and of
brute Darwinian survival of the fittest should the powerful and wealthy be
concerned with the weak and poor?!
It can be argued,
what is the motivation of the rich and powerful to give away some of their
privileges, in favour of a more just and pluralistic world.
It is not only the
new dynamics of threatened village earth but the recognition that we are all in
crisis and we all need each other.
There is real
complementarity in the order of things and we would be fools not to take advantage of that complementarity and
opt instead to maintain our short- sighted exclusive privileges.
When Ghandi, Saad Zaghlool,
Martin Luther King, the many great Asia pacific philosophers and
visionaries, the youth of Europe and
America, the many unknown and
unpublicised men and women individuals and groups who all moved with
essentially non-violent means to make their point and express their commitment
to change towards humanism and justice, taking enormous risks physical,
psychological and emotional, against the full weight of entrenched
"power", they were also moving for the "other". If they were moving towards more justice they
were moving towards dialogue and harmony
and new essentially interactive relations responsive in wisdom to the interests
of all parties.
If they were moving
towards interactive justice they were not after mere reversal of roles between
oppressor and oppressed. They were concerned with the challenge of listening
and understanding of the "other".
These courageous men
and women determined to achieve
interactive harmony frequently had to face in the beginning the resistance and
aggression of oppressors and oppressed alike.
A priori rigid assumptions are easier.
The win/lose, either/or, baddies/goodies formulae are much easier. They unfortunately are still the norm. Every crisis has to have the goodies with all
the right on their side and the villains who are evil through and through. It is so easy to respond to Eurocentrism with
I-centrism. It is easy to respond to "other" racism with me-racism,
"other" prejudice with me-prejudice.
transcend this win/lose circuit and are thereby essentially non-violent were,
and still are, lessons for us all. They
are effective lessons from the oppressed to transcend the win/lose, either/or
principle into the arena of interactive harmony, balance of interests and
interactive justice. They represent initiatives not just for the liberation and
salvation of Indians, Egyptians, Palestinians, Asians, Afric