THE BROTHERHOOD OF MAN
By Avi Davis

In 1971 ex- Beatle John Lennon produced a single which soon became something of an anthem embraced by the world’s utopians.   The song Imagine, with its lilting melody, romanticized imagery and wistful ideals seemed to capture the mood of a post-World War 2 generation, sickened by military conflict and certain that the application of  appropriate amounts of love, peace and compassion would cure the world of its ailments.   True to form, the other ex-Beatles, all at one time or another expressed similar points of view, pumping out the same plea for the elimination of possessions, religion and politics in order to ensure a community of peace and an ultimate “brotherhood of man.

But what kind of brotherhood would it be without actual “brothers” – those who share enough commonalities to give meaning to the appellation -  to fill it?   That is the central question asked by Natan Sharansky in his new book Defending Identity.   A necessary companion to his 2004 work The Case for Democracy, Sharansky reveals, in clear unfettered prose, that the true ailment of Western civilization today, is not the rampant march of materialism, greed, hunger or militarism, but the collapse of identity among the denizens of Western democracy and the genuine catastrophe this bodes for the West’s survival.

Sharansky’s earlier books were framed by his transformative experiences as a prisoner of conscience in the Soviet Gulag during the 70s and  80s and he brings those experiences to bear with full force in his new work.  Much like Viktor Frankl in Man’s Search for Meaning, ( whose experiences took place in a Nazi concentration camp), Sharansky discovers  that under the strains of interrogation and mind control exercised  by the KGB in the Gulag, it was usually only those who retained a strong sense of identity who were ultimately able to resist  the relentless psychological pressure parlayed by their gaolers and survive with their spirits unbroken.

“ Invariably, the ones you could count on to be your allies in resisting the KGB were those who possessed strong identities , who shared this fear of not being worthy of the values of their communities, the histories they were born to…..They could become your partners in resistance, the people you could depend on in your own battle, who would not give in to the KGB, who would be the lat to collaborate. In fact the stronger a prisoner’s identity, the greater the likelihood that the KGB would not succeed in breaking him”

The object of Sharansky’s gaolers, he concludes, was not to permanently destroy their prisoner’s physical freedom ( many were released after some time), but to destroy their inner freedom  - a far more difficult place to penetrate.

In discovering his own Jewish identity, Sharansky finds that strength can be drawn from recognizing the value of belonging and the role any individual can play within a unique community which possesses its own distinctive history.   It is a lesson he urges the West to absorb as it confronts the remorseless mind control of post-identity thinking, with its emphasis on post-nationalism, multiculturalism and moral relativism. 

Sharansky correctly identifies post-identity theory as the single greatest threat to European survival.  With its emphasis on the elimination of a majority identity

(rendering Western values merely one set of  choices that can be elected among a buffet of  others), post-nationalism ( which envisions the development of a global society)  and post modernism – which sees each identity as unstable and all cultural forms as morally equivalent -   it has served to strip Europeans of the belief  in their own Christian origins, trashed Western exceptionalism and internalized the legacy of war and colonialism as if they were inherent guilt complexes.   This, in turn,  has weakened the European resolve to confront ( and often to even identify) the threat posed by the huge influx of Muslim immigrants who contrastingly possess strong national, ethnic and religious identities.

The issue of direction came to a head with the banning of the veil in schools in France.  The French government, seeking to protect non-Muslim female students in predominantly Muslim areas who were being intimidated because they did not wear a head covering to school, banned not just head covering for Muslims but any outward display of religion for any student – which included the wearing of a cross for Christians or a kippah for Jews.  The argument for the ban was that the veil was a mark of distinctiveness and French authorities did not wish to see such differences intrude into neutral public space.

At first sight, this might seem like an admirable solution to a vexing problem.  Permitting the veil, it was thought, could lead to coercion which would place individual choice and liberty at risk.  Underpinning the law, however, is the notion that dramatic expressions of identity weaken and threaten societal cohesion, spurring communal conflict and inequality.

Yet the effect, says Sharansky , is just the opposite. For those who possess a strong sense of identity, the law only exacerbates growing intra-communal resentments, frustration and alienation.

Instead of passing such laws, what the government should have addressed is the reality of the rejection of democracy itself.   Pressure, harassment and violence, like other undemocratic acts or restrictions, need to be forcefully opposed - by legislation, education and other forms of intervention.  A society must make a clear statement that an absolute principle of democratic life is the norm of non-aggression, wherein one cannot forcibly impose one’s views on others.   However, when there are irreconcilable conflicts between customs and democratic norms, customs must give way, whether that means vigorously prosecuting honor killings and genital mutilations or banning underage marriage.

Unfortunately that is not the way things work in Europe today. Instead of defending democratic norms, post-identity Europe undermines them. Citizenship is granted without requiring language skills, civic education or even conformity to laws against polygamy.  Mosques and schools receive state funding despite anti-Western agitation and indoctrination. Rioters and thieves are not prosecuted but submitted to social therapy. While European countries have pursued many different strategies, from multiculturalism to assimilation to  address growing societal fragmentation, none seem to be working.  The record only reveals disintegration, not integration and the continuing collapse of social cohesion.

Ultimately the panacea for Europe’s ills is not to deny the distinctiveness of cultural identity but to encourage and propagate a reverence for democratic values.  Herein all identities subscribe to an overarching framework of generally agreed upon laws and moral standards but. which ensure individual rights and communal freedom. Democracy and identity are not in conflict, as many post-identity Europeans intellectuals and leaders would have us believe. They actually work in perfect synchronicity and are necessary for one another’s survival.  

 It is an alarming sign of our times that this central building block of Western civilization should need to be restated and defended as if it is a new idea.  But that is exactly what Sharansky feels compelled to do as he see the magnificent accomplishments of Western civilization under greater threat than ever before.  John Lennon’s brotherhood ideal was also not new – having been explored by the Romantics in the late 18^th Century and  the Fabians in the early 20^th. But what is new is the attempt of an entire society to co-opt it. Hapless, naive and perverse, we should should no longer look upon the political leaders, bureaucrats, and intellectuals leading this charge as only  charming “dreamers” bound by the best intentions.   Instead, we should view them as reckless acolytes of an empty philosophy which threatens freedomand is aimed at destroying the very social compact upon which our democracies are built.

The Western Word - An International Weekly Digest   8-15-2008