Torgeir,
In Isaac Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy, history moved in accordance with the
predictions of the history-prophet Hari Seldon until something utterly
unexpected occurred: “the Mule.” After that, Harry Seldon’s followers had to
scramble in order to get history back on track and reduce the prophesied future
period of chaos from 30,000 years to 1,000.
Asimov was a biochemist who wrote Science Fiction. Francis Fukuyama is a
political scientist and political economist who wrote The End of History and
the Last Man. Fukuyama argued that since the two challenges to Liberal
Democracy, Fascism and Communism, have been defeated, Liberal Democracy will
prevail for the foreseeable future. We have avoided the chaos that Fascism and
Communism portended and have entered a period (more and more as time goes on)
of Liberal Democratic peace and prosperity.
Though I have subscribed to Fukuyama’s The National Interest since its
inception, I fear I have fallen into a period of unbelief. Surely the Japanese
for example are great examples of a Fukuyama Liberal Democratic success story,
and yet to this day the Chinese (many if not most of them) fear them. I can
still believe Fukuyama’s theory applies to the Japanese, but when I look at
Europe I have a problem.
When did Europe become a relatively coherent whole? Marcel Gauchet in his The
Disenchantment of the World, a Political History of Religion, agrees with those
who argue that Europe (the then-known “world”) was (following Weber)
“enchanted” by Christianity. The enchanted Christian nations did not, as
Fukuyama’s future Liberal Democratic nations have in this relatively short
period of their having ended history, refrain from attacking each other.
Hitler (a Western European) could be understood as (very likely) thinking that
not only was Western Europe in the forefront of civilization’s advance but
Germany was in the forefront of Western Europe and it behooved Germany’s
leaders to step up and take responsibility for further advances into a
paradisiacal future. Hitler is gone and the German generation that followed
repudiated him, but some of those who remember those years when Hitler exulted,
might be forgiven for wondering just what it is that turns a people like the
Japanese and Germans into nations of warriors bent upon conquering large swaths
of the world. Walk up and down the streets of Yokohama or Berlin and you won’t
find orators advocating a need for lebensraum, but within my lifetime those
arguments were embraced by majorities in both Japan and Germany. And while
this generation in those nations does not embrace such arguments (at least not
in large numbers), what guarantee or argument exists to assuage the fears of
old folk who still remember the glory days of the Japanese and Germans?
When Britain approved Brexit, I was relieved. I personally thought that EU
nations welcoming immigrants holding views hostile to those EU nations was
naïve and self-destructive in the extreme. Either Islamists are going to
soften through association with more enlightened Europeans (as Western European
“enlightened” believers seem to believe) or Islamists will continue engaging in
their present practices which will force EU leadership to finally concede that
it has subscribed to naïve and self-destructive practices.
Another look at Torgeir’s question: “Our question is different -- and far more
traditional than the Federalist against Free Trade Agreement division. How is
it possible, we shall ask, to unearth a sense of Europe -- as a continent, as
destiny, as people -- that goes deeper and covers more ground literally as well
as metaphorically, than either of the approaches to Europe outlined above?
Much is at stake: can Europe continue to hold the imagination of our people
together even beyond the apparent immediacy of our current social and political
upheavals?’
Moving away from politics to genetics, a few years ago I sent my DNA to
Ancestry.com and learned that I am “100% European.” They break it down as
Europe West 52%, Ireland 22%, Scandinavia 9% and Italy/Greece 9%.
Family tradition had it that we were primarily British and if one clicks on
Europe West one does find “Also found in: England, Denmark, Italy, Slovenia,
Czech Republic.” This is all very frustrating if one is attempting to narrow
down one’s genealogy, but for the purposes of this discussion Ancestry.com
seems very confident in declaring that I am 100% European.
So, I ask myself, do I “feel” a sense of being European? Perhaps in a way. I
speak English, I have been raised and educated in Western traditions, but I
don’t live on the European Continent. I live In California and have done
except for 13 months in Korea during the Korean War and its truce period. The
words “as a destiny” make me squirm a bit. I should like to know more about
the destinies Europeans have to choose from. “As a people” here in a
melting-pot American state that doesn’t mean much. Or rather it doesn’t mean
anything European. If I look up and down my street I can’t recall ever
thinking that any particular person might or might not be European.
I must admit, for example, that I found the poems I’ve read by Rolf Jacobsen (a
Norwegian) totally accessible. On the other hand I don’t feel that the poems
of John Ashbery are accessible (an American).
As to Europe holding the imagination of Europeans, I missed out on that. I
remember the idea of Europe advanced during the war years, but then afterwards
there was the revisionism of De Gaulle. When American and British troops
advanced through France in 1944, the stunned French (I’ve read) treated us as
nothing more than a new set of conquerors. The French have done some strange
things with their Vichy period.
I know more about France during that period then Norway, but I recall that they
had their Quisling and were embarrassed by Hamsun (a member of the NS) being
their Nobel Prize Laureate. Also, Norway was neutral during WWI and attempted
neutrality during WWII. I wonder if there is regret over not having opposed
Germany earlier. Or if not, perhaps that might be the reason for less concern
over a possible Deutschland uber alles resurgence.
Lawrence
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of T Fjeld
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 11:52 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Beyond Europe as immediacy
There is a thought on Europe that goes something like this: out of common
interest there will grow a shared sense of belonging and responsibility, and
such progress, it is claimed, will eventually cause some kind of institutional
framework to cover over the fractures of this continent.
Against this there are numerous -- too numerous some say -- objections: after
the popular decision to drift away from the union by the larger of the two
islands in the North Sea (granted, there are more than two, and the less large
of them have a bit of drift in it itself, innit?) others would follow. This
scenario has not materialised. More likely it seems that a solidification of
the perspective on Europe we shall call the Federalist Stance in the -- largely
-- Western states, while the more recently joined countries to the East -- and,
to a lesser degree, to the North -- will want a connextion that more resembles
an ordinary free-trade agreement.
There's lots of if's, but's and what have you's with all of these positions.
Our question is different -- and far more traditional than the Federalist
against Free Trade Agreement division. How is it possible, we shall ask, to
unearth a sense of Europe -- as a continent, as destiny, as people -- that goes
deeper and covers more ground literally as well as metaphorically, than either
of the approaches to Europe outlined above?
Much is at stake: can Europe continue to hold the imagination of our people
together even beyond the apparent immediacy of our current social and political
upheavals?
Mvh. / Yours sincerely,
Torgeir Fjeld, PhD
http://torgeirfjeld.com/