AN impending, or ongoing, clash of civilisations is fashionably blamed by politicians, political scientists, et al, for the current demonstration of uncivilised conduct the world over. A ruthless resort to terrorism, whether physical or intellectual, defines the daily trade of interpersonal relationships amongst the peoples of the world. Is it a clash of civilisations, or degeneration of civilisation per se?

Technologically the postmodern world may be at the apex of scientific advancement; but where is it morally, sociologically? Star wars, robotics, super computers, unfolding the grand design of the creation of the universe are the pride of achievement. But have humans learned to live together in a satisfying social environment?

We are elated at the proximities driven by the communications revolution. But in this global village there is more hate than love, more disaffection than satisfaction, more intolerance than togetherness. There is no social compact amongst the people of the world to promote concern and compassion rather than hegemony.

The world has witnessed obscurantism in much of the Muslim world.

There is the West — the self-acclaimed champion of freedom, faith and expression particularly. Barely three quarters of a century after the Holocaust and with a continuing denial of life and property to the Palestinians, there is no end to pontifications emanating from the West exhorting others to honour freedoms of their choice. This is accompanied with a twisted, perverted definition of freedom — of speech particularly.

Recently after the horrid, indefensible murder of some sick-minded Parisian intellectuals, the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, the Pope understandably tried to mitigate the situation calling for limits to an unbridled freedom of speech. In an unabashed retort, David Cameron, the British prime minister defended the right to speech that gives offence to others’ religious beliefs.

Cameron said the West must show that its values, like free speech, are stronger than those of Islamist extremists pursuing a “poisonous death cult narrative”. There is no need to remind him of thousands of innocent lives lost in needless death knells rung in gruesome, unprovoked wars recently imposed by the West.

The West speaks of the value and law of free speech. But for civilised societies there is a higher law — the moral high ground. Freedom, Mr Cameron, is the right to do what you ought, not the right to do what you like. Liberty is not licence.

That was the story of one side only; and our hypothesis is that civilisations are not clashing but global civilisation as a whole is degrading. Flesh has ousted the soul as the focus of human endeavor. Technology is the thrust of all attention. Geniuses are more enamoured of cyber war or command over cyberspace.

But where have all the philosophers gone? Buried in their books in libraries unattended, philosophers of yore are yearning to see another philosopher — political or moral — to lead this world of great technologies to a higher level of human civilisation. So far this world does not seem to cater to that yearning.

In the bargain, this age, which has harnessed so much of the universe, cannot harness its instincts of the flesh, to be recalled as a great civilisation by posterity.

There are other contributors to this decay also. In the last more than half a century, the world has witnessed the entrenchment of obscurantism in a vast swathe of the Muslim world, nurtured by global politics to initially keep the emerging new Muslim states on a leash, amenable to discipline by the West. These societies were encouraged to relapse into a decadent worldview incongruous with the glorious Muslim civilisation between the 8th and 13th centuries.

Somehow over a period of some 700 years Muslim societies, even where these were politically strong, stopped growing intellectually. The only saving graces were the inclusionary and universally tolerant Sufi orders. Their message of love and peace, though, remained confined in measure and expanse. Slowly Muslim societies declined and pursuit of knowledge gave way to legacy degenerating into a debilitating nostalgia.

The 20th century produced some Muslim reformers — intolerant extremists militant in the enforcement of their self-righteous proclamations. Many have been promoting dogma ingrained in them, often for pecuniary benefit. The orthodox Wahabist/Salafist worldview is a prime example of financially inspired export of a particular religious interpretation averse to a discourse on differences of opinion.

Does the world need philosopher kings? If that be an impracticable ideal, the political leadership of the entire world needs to recognise that compassionate humanity alone can crown this technologically advanced era as a great civilisation. Great powers should not merely try to selfishly guarantee a secure and resource rich niche for themselves.

We need to make this world one niche of humanity and compassion for all.

The writer is a retired civil servant.

Published in Dawn, February 8th, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play