“No other passion is so fatal to the pursuit of truth as fanatical partisanship. Wherever it exists, whether it takes the form of religious intolerance or ferocious patriotism, there is an atrophy of science, learning and all the humane arts.”
Dean Inge
The crucial human issue today is that of survival. As a matter of fact this is far more than a question of whether or not man will become involved in nuclear war, and if so whether there will be any of us left to tell the tale. It embraces questions about the purpose and destiny of mankind and whether our society and civilisation has within it the power of self-renewal, or whether we are settling in to a decline and are doomed to a not too distant extinction like every known civilisation before us.
The great majority of the theories put forward to explain what is happening in the world today and the majority of the systems by which it is proposed man should live are essentially ideological. That is to say each is based on one main idea or concept which is believed to provide the fundamental key for the understanding of history, current events, and the nature and organisation of human society. All other theories are either rejected as untrue or given a position of very secondary importance. Each key idea is thus used as a foundation for the construction of a philosophy and view of life which provides the standard and pattern against which all events and trends are seen and judged. Rightly or wrongly, and for good or ill, the attitude of the ideologist is inevitably coloured and even dominated by the ideology to which he subscribes.
Communism is the supreme example in the modern world of such a system and in its extreme form it illustrates for us both the strength and weakness of all ideologies. On the one hand there is its capacity to inspire and to evoke sacrifice and a fanatical adherence to its doctrines and programme. On the other hand it has been forced times without number to distort the truth in order to justify the interpretation of world events and trends that its doctrines and theories demand.
It should be noted that ideologies are almost invariably created by the followers rather than the founders of the creed. Thus in the religious field it is the followers of Christ who have made an ideology of their religion, and within this fold the Roman Catholic Church is pre-eminent in its elevation of the ideological approach. While the Roman Catholic Church is infinitely more sophisticated in its management of the ideological situation than the Communists, and while the nature and substance of Catholic and Communist doctrines are completely opposed, there are striking similarities in the emphasis each place on the ultimate superiority, validity and pre-ordained success of their systems.
Truth and Totalitarianism
The ideological attitude, though in less extreme forms, is far more widely spread than we may superficially suppose. It can be most readily observed in the political, economic and religious fields where the protagonists of the various special points of view stake their claims to superiority. But it is also to be seen in philosophy, culture, education and the arts in the emergence of “ schools ” and “groups ” devoted to the cause of one particular style, approach or theory. Ideological thinking is even to be found in science, where we should least expect it. There are many scientists so wedded to a materialistic world view that they not only reject the evidence of the “ supra-physical realities ” of religion, philosophy and psychical research, but actually deny the possibilities of their existence. They thus make their own conception of present-day scientific knowledge and understanding the arbiter of all forms and types of truth and claim for it a role which no true scientist would accept. In this they express the essence of the ideological attitude.
Ideologies however would have no power over men were it not for the fact that each is built on the foundation of some basic and fundamental truth. The communist conception is based on an ideal of economic justice and human equality and brotherhood; western democracy is built on the ideal of individual freedom; the scientific emphasis on the inductive and experimental method is based on a profound respect for truth at all costs; and the religious emphasis on the authority and pre-eminence of divine law arises from a recognition of a purpose and design in the universe. But when men take a single principle, however profound and however important, and making of it a God give it pride of place over all others, they have taken the first step along a very dangerous path. Inevitably they create a separating wall between themselves and all who think differently. If they become sufficiently dogmatic and doctrinaire, communication ceases to be possible. The ultimate tragedy is when the protagonists of an ideology seek to impose it on others, for then one has the emergence of totalitarianism, the elimination of all freedom and the possibility of choice or of difference, and this is perhaps the ultimate evil.
“Suckled in a creed outworn”
The seeds of totalitarianism lie hidden therefore in the ideological attitude. If this is so can it be possible that a valid and acceptable interpretation of world events and trends will be found in the terms and theory of any one ideology? Theoretically it would seem to be impossible to produce a synthetic world view and interpretation on the basis of any of the existing ideologies, for they are all accepted as biased and partial except by their adherents. And in practice this turns out to be so. Some of the predictions of the various world ideologies are proving correct, which is only to be expected. But the majority are increasingly divorced from reality. “ The Capitalist Imperialists ” for example of communist ideology are very different in reality to their mythical counterparts. Imperialism and colonialism are dead and shortly to be buried, and it is irrelevant whether this happened because the imperial powers wanted to shed their responsibility or were forced to do so. Likewise the western stereotype of a static communist dictatorship has long ceased to bear any relation to reality. Particularly since the death of Stalin and the comparatively rapid elimination certainly of all the most oppressive totalitarian elements within the system, the “ iron curtain ” countries have moved dramatically into an entirely new phase.
In other fields too the inadequacies of ideological thinking are being shown up by events. Increasing numbers of Christians are demonstrating an awareness that the ideological posture of superior faith cannot be maintained either within Christianity or vis-a-vis the other great religions of the world, and this has been forced on them by the revelation that the other great religions of the world embody profound faiths and philosophies and are not, as was previously supposed, either primitive or barbaric. Equally the “quaint” notions held by peoples of all countries about those who live in distant lands are being destroyed for ever by increased travel and personal contact, and the distorted impressions that we have of ourselves and of our own cultures are being rapidly adjusted, corrected and made realistic by the researches of social scientists, anthropologists and the like. Ideologies of racial and national superiority are also fast disappearing under the pressure of events.
The Emergence of Synthesis
It is clear then that none of the current ideologies can offer a world view that can account for the dynamics of human evolutionary growth or the facts of the human situation today. Not only are the stereotyped pictures they present inadequate and static, but they bear less and less relation to the dynamic and changing realities of the modern world. Ideological barriers and dividing lines are everywhere becoming blurred and indistinct as all over the world and in every field and whether they like it or not, human beings are being forced to come together, to co-exist and in fact to grow closer in almost every important way.
As one looks beyond the ideologies in search of new means of understanding, the dominant reality that seems to emerge is a universal tendency towards human synthesis and integration. This tendency has of course always existed, but until recently it has been relatively weak and unobtrusive in operation. Quite suddenly however it seems to have become one of the major influences at work in the world today.
The emergence into power of this tendency to synthesis is so new, historically speaking, that it is important to examine some of the evidence and the factors at work particularly as they affect the separative tendencies of the ideologies.
A Universal Trend
Science, technology, and modern means of communication are the classic and traditionally cited instances of integrating factors and undoubtedly they have made everything else possible. But they are today supported and reinforced by a whole host of other influences. The growth of mass education and literacy for example has made it possible to bring great literature, art and philosophy within the reach of the average man all over the world. This trend and liberating influence in the world of the mind is not confined to any particular section of humanity. The under-developed peoples are avid for education; and the study of eastern religions and philosophies is so widespread and popular in the west that the provision of such items as books and reproductions of paintings have become commercial propositions and do not even need to be subsidised.
Similarly economic growth and development is bringing peoples together and the lines of difference between the various economic systems – communist, capitalist and socialist are rapidly disappearing. The immense scale of world and national economies and their enforced interrelatedness, and the growth of supranational economic arrangements, have involved states and governments in economic planning and control to a degree that it would have been impossible to forecast a generation ago. There has been a similar revolution in the role of the state in the field of education, welfare and the medical and social services. In the underdeveloped lands the state must perforce take the dominant and leading role. The fact remains however that it also plays the dominant role, and increasingly so, in the vast majority of the countries of the west. In spite of all political and doctrinal differences, various economic systems are growing increasingly alike under the pressure of world economic forces. Perhaps the final irony is that economic and educational development have created a vast middle class in formerly proletarian Russia – a middle class possessing just the same types of expectations as the middle classes in the West. Thus at one stroke we have demonstrated both the success of communism and the removal of one of the major points of difference between east and west. Russia today is, to use dialectical parlance, far more bourgeoise than any of the world’s under-developed nations.
Finally the United Nations must be cited both as a symbol and as a conscious architect of world synthesis. Not only in the General Assembly, but in the work of the Specialised Agencies in every field, does the U.N. provide a focus and a growing point for integration. The critical test through which the United Nations is now passing is in fact accelerating these tendencies.
“The End of the Age”
Thus through science and technology, modern education and culture, economic and political pressures, and the growing awareness of the churches, we find a world that is rapidly coming together on point after point, yet which scarcely realises what is taking place and has no understanding of its significance. It can be said that man has entered a period of history in which the oneness of the world and the inter-relatedness of its parts has become the dominant reality and that tendencies to synthesis and integration have achieved an irreversible momentum. Whatever its origins and nature this tendency to synthesis can already be seen as a prime determining and motivating factor in every field.
If tendencies to synthesis and integration are in fact irreversible, it follows that we must be approaching the end of the ideological era. Thus we can confidently predict the not too distant demise of the cold war because progressive changes in east and west, already well advanced, will bring both sides closer and closer together. Some of the embryonic elements of a co-ordinated world economy can already be seen and can be expected to develop rapidly in the next generation. Rapprochement in the religious field though slow and unspectacular makes steady progress. And with the arrival of many peoples to nationhood and the rapid developments through which they will surely pass, we approach a time when we shall be more conscious of our common humanity than of our relatively superficial differences of race, nation and custom. What then will emerge in this new and non-ideological age into which we are moving so fast? Will all human differences disappear and a dull uniformity result; and if not, how are existing differences to be reconciled with the tendency to synthesis?
The Future is a Question Mark
It should be made clear that “ synthesis ” in no sense implies rigidity, uniformity or a pressure to conform. Essentially it involves the right and creative relationship of parts to the whole, and in particular the balancing and blending of basic elements and fundamental principles. The unity is a unity with the source and must inevitably permit the wide range of diversity in expression that human nature requires for its proper development.
Since we are clearly living in a “ no man’s land ” between the old age and the new, it is difficult to define in any precise sense the nature of the society that will emerge under the pressure to synthesis. It seems certain to be compounded in the first instance of the best elements in the existing world situation and culture and the essential principles on which the current major world ideologies and systems are based. It is the exclusiveness of ideologies that is their besetting sin, and, stripped of this characteristic, there is no reason why they should not achieve right relationships among each other. Each can then be regarded as the exponent of a particular line of thought which can contribute to human welfare, and rather than seeking to impose that line of thought on everybody else, all will recognise that they express but a part of the truth, and that while there may be only one guiding “ direction or Way ” in evolution, there are many equally valid paths for men to tread.
Ultimately, however, the future will be determined by the nature of the purpose and vision for which men will strive. The tendencies to synthesis will clearly lead to the relaxation of major world tension, the establishment of peace and in course of time the creation of a reasonable standard of life and living for all men. Will the achievement of material sufficiency and abundance be then regarded as enough and will man settle back to enjoy the “comfort” he has earned, or will he search for a new and higher goal and a new and better vision ? As yet there is no clear indication of what humanity’s choice will be. Until there is there can be no real certainty about the nature of human society in the New Age. It remains an open question.
