A statement by the National Spiritual Assembly of the
Bahá'ís of the United Kingdom.
The
concept of social cohesion as presently most frequently used,
is either heavily influenced by economism or at times simply
defined by circumstances that reflect its noticeable lack in
community life. While this is acceptable at one level in
prevailing approaches to current social issues, a
wider-ranging, more generally-shared sense of what makes a
truly cohesive society would both benefit debate and provide
parameters by which individual policies might be evaluated,
their objectives defined, and programmes and initiatives
directed.
Fundamental
challenges
The subject of
social cohesion has attracted much attention from
inter-governmental, governmental and non-governmental
organisations during the last decade (1),
prompted by a widely-held belief that the quality of public
and civic life is in decline. This point of view is well
expressed in the words of a prominent commentator (2)
that we live in a ‘tense, mistrustful, anxiety-haunted
society’. While this belief may spring from a hankering
for a lost age of social harmony, cultural homogeneity and
commonly-shared values - a recollection perhaps based more in
the imagination than in reality - nevertheless the perceived
fragmentation of society remains a focus of concern both
within this country and elsewhere. Concerns about crime,
persistent undercurrents of racism, and growing distrust of
neighbour and government, have strengthened the attraction to
many of affinity groups. Whether cultural, ethnic, or
religious, each of these potentially offers a close-knit
cohesion of common interest and shared loyalties. By their
nature these can tend to encourage antipathy toward those
outside their particular community.
Whatever the
reality of the past, the yearning for social harmony is deeply
rooted. With society becoming more varied and culturally
diverse, the challenge to satisfy that yearning becomes more
insistent, quickened by an increasing interdependence of the
peoples and nations of the planet. The practicalities of this
global interdependence and the growing interaction among
diverse peoples pose major challenges to old ways of thinking
and acting. How we, as individuals and communities, respond to
these challenges will determine whether our communities become
nurturing, cohesive and progressive, or increasingly
inhospitable, divided and unsustainable.
For Bahá’ís a
truly cohesive society is more than a condition of social
stasis. It is the clear motivation and objective of their
faith’s social teachings, and the focus of their activity in
the world. The nature of such a society, its
characteristics and how it may be achieved are therefore, Bahá’ís
believe, an important subject for study.
An
increasing focus
Since the end of
the Cold War attention has turned toward issues of social
cohesion and this is reflected in the themes of the many
international conferences held in the years after the Rio
Earth Summit in 1992. Under the auspices of the United
Nations, of note were the World Summits on Population (Cairo
1994); Social Development (Copenhagen 1995), and its follow-up
in Geneva 2000; Women (Beijing 1995); and Habitat II (Istanbul
1996).
Others of
interest include the 1995 Roskilde Symposium (Denmark 1995)
‘From Social Exclusion to Social Cohesion: a policy
agenda’, convened on the eve of the Copenhagen
conference, and jointly sponsored by UNESCO, WHO, ILO, and the
European Commission DG XII’; and the Council of Europe’s
Second Summit in Strasbourg 1997. The latter’s Final
Declaration identified social cohesion as ‘one of the
foremost needs of the wider Europe and an essential complement
to the promotion of human rights and dignity’. Tangible
outcomes from this Summit included the European Committee for
Social Cohesion (CDCS) - formed to develop and implement a new
strategy for social cohesion, the establishment of a
Directorate-General of Social Cohesion within the Council’s
Secretariat, and the subsequent European Conference on Social
Development, Dublin 2000.
A number of
features are shared by these conferences and their aftermaths:
a ‘recognition that the world is in a state of
deterioration’; a new and increasing consensus on ‘the
need to put people at the centre of development’;
inadequate post-conference communication between the groups
taking part (i.e. governments, IGOs, NGOs, and specialist and
expert bodies). The frequent failure at national levels to
carry out agreed social programmes; and a predominating
concern for issues of poverty, exclusion and full employment -
reflecting a still-prevailing influence of economism in
deliberations affecting the condition of society(3).
Of note is the scant attention paid to moral and ethical
motivation and the cultivation of those attitudes which foster
the desire to promote constructive inter-personal and
inter-community relationships.
Reaching
for a concept
In certain areas
reaching a more comprehensive, more broadly-based concept of
social cohesion, has been largely limited by well-entrenched
views that closely link social cohesion to economic policy.
For instance,
Articles 2 and 3 of the Treaty establishing the European
Community state that one of its tasks is to ‘promote
throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and
sustainable development of economic activities, a high level
of employment and of social protection, (and) the raising of
the standard of living and quality of life, and economic and
social cohesion and solidarity among Member States’.
Emphasising the link, Title XVII of the Treaty (Articles
158-162), on ‘Economic and social cohesion’
explains that the Community aims to support the cohesion
effort by reducing disparities between the development of
various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured
regions or islands, including rural areas, through the action
it takes through the Structural Funds (4).
Similarly, the Council for Europe and the CDCS defined their
strategy for social cohesion in terms of minimising the risk
of social exclusion through focus on the needs of the poor and
marginalised - concentrating on access to social protection,
housing, employment, health care and education. Another
European Working Group (5)
developed a concept and action plan for social cohesion (Paris
December 2000) which identified employment and vocational
training, social dialogue, social protection, health and
housing as the main areas for which objectives and strategies
had to be developed. Many other governmental and
inter-governmental social policies are defined in terms of
establishing thriving, inclusive and sustainable communities
through tackling poverty, social exclusion and homelessness (6).
A split in the
academic study of the subject also hinders a more holistic
approach to social cohesion. The concept of social exclusion
has generally come within the domain of sociology, whereas
studies of poverty have been usually taken up by economists.
In practice greater weight seems to have been given to
economic studies, and the social sciences have tended to serve
merely as a source of statistics to support economic
decision-makers and the ‘theology of the market’(7).
Economism has not
been altogether unchallenged. A speaker (8)
summing up the European Conference on Social Development,
Dublin 2000, observed that ‘ethnic and religious
tensions are at the root of some of the most acute threats to
social cohesion in Europe today’, but also that
‘The millennium event reminds us too that there
is a spiritual dimension to the human condition’.
Another commentator (9),
referring to the concept of sustainable development called it
a multi-dimensional concept which can only be realised through
an approach ‘where the social is in control, the
ecological is an accepted constraint and the economic is
reduced to its instrumental role’.
Thus, while
recognising that the cancer of poverty is a potent destroyer
of social cohesion in a society where extremes of wealth and
poverty exist close together, it may be observed that a
century of top-down socio-economic initiatives have not yet
been completely successful in delivering contented and
harmonious communities (10).
At root, true
social cohesion derives from the ideals and shared beliefs
that weld society together. Meaningful social change results
as much from the development of qualities and attitudes that
foster constructive patterns of human interaction as from
technical capacities or economic initiatives. ‘True
prosperity - a well- being founded on peace, co-operation,
altruism, dignity, rectitude of conduct and justice - flows
from the light of spiritual awareness and virtue as well as
from material discovery and progress’ (11).
Legal imperatives
and penalties, social programmes and initiatives are
essential, but limited in what they can accomplish. To draw
upon the spiritual roots of motivation that lie at the heart
of human identity and purpose is to tap the one impulse that
can ensure genuine social transformation, and this is
intimately bound up with a process of moral and spiritual
development. The Bahá’í International Community expressed
this concept to the Habitat II conference in 1996: ‘Our
challenge, therefore, is to redesign and develop our
communities around those universal principles - including
love, honesty, moderation, humility, hospitality, justice and
unity - which promote social cohesion, and without which no
community, no matter how economically prosperous,
intellectually endowed or technologically advanced, can long
endure. (12)’
A new
vision
We wish to expand
on some of the attributes of a community conforming to and
envisaged by those principles.
The emergence of
a truly cohesive society, flourishing and perpetuating itself;
distinguished for its abiding sense of security and faith and
for the closely knit fabric of its social life; noted for its
high standard of rectitude and complete freedom from all forms
of prejudice; existing harmoniously with the natural world ;
and marked by the spirit of love among its members and for the
spirit of trust and confidence between its members and its
institutions depends on linking material progress to
fundamental spiritual aspirations, on fully recognising the
increasing interdependence of the peoples and nations of the
planet, and on the active participation of all in its
governance.
Such a community
will take into account the spiritual dimension of human
reality and seek to foster a culture in which the moral,
ethical, emotional and intellectual development of the
individual are of primary concern. The material aspects of
community development - environmental, economic and social
policies; production, distribution, communication and
transportation systems; and political, legal and scientific
processes - will be driven by spiritual principles and
priorities rather than largely determined by material
considerations. We thus envision a fundamentally new
perception of social reality, reflecting a fullness of life
that has not yet been seen - a reality that, above all, in
spirit and practice reflects the principle of the oneness of
humankind.
In such a society
the protection of the family and the promotion of its
well- being will become central to community policies which
will recognise that the family is the primary institution of
society and the principal incubator of the values, attitudes,
beliefs and behaviours which strengthen the fibre of a
spiritually healthy society. Its citizens will naturally
understand that the interests of the individual and of the
community are totally linked, and that the advancement of
human rights calls for full commitment to corresponding
responsibilities. Women will be welcomed into full partnership
in all fields of human endeavour, while at the same time their
rôle as the bearer and first educator of children will be
recognised and accorded full honour. The elderly will continue
to participate in the affairs of the community, their
experience and wisdom sought out and valued.
Social policy
will ensure that the creative energies of every individual
have a suitable channel through which they can be expressed.
Work, as both a means of livelihood for the individual and a
way of contributing to the prosperity of the community as a
whole, will be recognised as adding meaning to life. Working
towards the elimination of extremes of wealth and poverty will
be a feature of public policy. Freedom of religion will be
ensured, and centres of worship established providing a venue
for prayer, meditation, and acts of devotion through which the
individual, drawing closer to the Creator, may strengthen his
or her spiritual capacities for service. As physical monuments
these buildings will also serve to express the cultural genius
of the society. The promotion of beauty, whether natural or
human- made, will be a guiding principle in community
planning, for beauty can touch the heart and inspire the soul
to noble sentiments and actions. Concern for environmental
preservation and rehabilitation will reflect the human
spirit's great need for close contact with the natural world,
while giving careful consideration to the primary role of the
farmer in food and economic security.
The science and
technology now available will be harnessed to serve the
material, intellectual, emotional and spiritual needs of the
entire human family. Technologies that have tended to
desensitise and alienate and to take over from satisfying work
and crafts, to destroy the environment, and to cause sickness
or death, will be reconsidered, redesigned or abandoned.
The cultivation
of virtue as the foundation for personal and collective well-
being will be nurtured in individuals as essential to the
welfare of their families, their communities, their countries
and all mankind. Education, widely-based but with a focus on
moral and ethical development, will encourage thinking in
terms of historical process, seeing in history progress toward
a world civilisation. The concept of unity in diversity will
be fundamental to such teaching. Doctrines that expound
exclusivity or superiority, whether of race, gender or
religion, will be found unacceptable. The concept of
leadership will be recast to foster collective decision making
and collective action, and will find its highest expression in
service to the community as a whole. Consultation - the
operating expression of justice in human affairs - will be the
chief method by which decisions are reached.
These are some of
the salient features of the cohesive society envisioned in Bahá’í
teachings and towards which the Bahá‘í community has bent
its efforts for a century or more.
An
organic process
While such a
vision may be viewed in today’s world as idealistic or
unachievable the Bahá’í Faith views the current world
confusion and the calamitous condition in human affairs as a
natural phase in an organic process that will lead to the
unification of the human race in just such a society. Humanity
has in its long journey passed through stages which can be
compared to the stages of an individual’s infancy and
childhood. It is now in the culminating period of its
turbulent adolescence and is approaching its long- awaited
coming of age.
True religion,
free from the distortions that falsely pose in its name, is an
indispensable source of knowledge and motivation - a
wellspring of values, insights, and energy without which
social cohesion and collective action are difficult if not
impossible to achieve. Through the teachings and moral
guidance of religion, great segments of humanity have learned
to discipline their baser propensities and to develop
qualities that lead to social order and cultural advancement.
Such qualities as trustworthiness, compassion, forbearance,
fidelity, generosity, humility, courage, and willingness to
sacrifice for the common good have constituted the invisible
yet essential foundations of progressive community life.
Religion provides the bricks and mortar of society - the
ethical precepts and vision that unite people into communities
and that give tangible direction and meaning to individual and
collective existence. There is an urgent need for these
qualities to permeate society.
Fulfilling
the promise
We should not
think that a society such as is contemplated here, however
inevitable it may ultimately be, will be achieved without a
major effort and sustained commitment from every element of
society. Fulfilling human destiny will, by its very nature, be
a gradual process. Patterns of response and association will
shift continually as humankind grapples for its future. The
process will be long and at times turbulent, and calls for a
firmly-held vision of the goal towards which it is struggling.
Not only is it an objective worth striving for, it is
humanity’s manifest destiny: the culmination of an ages-long
process of human development, the confident and emphatic
promise of the world’s religions.
The turmoil now
convulsing human affairs is unprecedented, and many of its
consequences may well prove enormously destructive. Many
dangers gather around a distracted humanity. The habits,
attitudes, and institutions that have built up over the
centuries are being subjected to tests that are as necessary
to human development as they are inescapable. Nevertheless,
the ultimate outcome is not in doubt.
The prospect and
promise of such an outcome is more that a fond hope or distant
aspiration, and it suggests multiple fields of endeavour on
which to focus initiatives, programmes, and projects. Indeed
the vigour with which present social initiatives have been
initiated to tackle issues such as exclusion, alleviation of
poverty, educational equality and environmental degradation
signals that a start has been made.
In the meantime
the global Bahá’í community, perhaps unequalled in its
diversity, is itself learning to put into practice the
features adumbrated above - a living, evolving laboratory in
which these ideas and principles are being developed, tested
and expanded. The Bahá’í community is ready to share its
experience with all who are interested.
Over a hundred
years ago, the distinguished orientalist, the late Professor
Edward G. Browne, of Cambridge University visited Bahá'u'lláh
(13) in the year 1890, and
recorded his promise as follows:
‘... That
all nations should become one in faith and all men as
brothers; that the bonds of affection and unity between the
sons of men should be strengthened; that diversity of religion
should cease, and differences of race be annulled - what harm
is there in this? ... Yet so it shall be; these fruitless
strifes, these ruinous wars shall pass away, and the ‘Most
Great Peace' shall come. ... Let not a man glory in this, that
he loves his country; let him rather glory in this, that he
loves his kind. ...’ (14)
Endnotes
