(January 28th, 1998)

Insight and practice draw human beings into the political realm.

On the nature of Truth
On the nature of history
On institutions and practices
On conflict
On liberal thought and practice
A liberal model based on these conceptions

On the nature of Truth
Truth is a construct of our mind with the tool of language. Truth differs with time and people.

Undeniably, there is also a reality that is perceived essentially as existent, albeit in different ways. The language games we play must necessarily conform to, or express, that reality in a way that we subjectively feel to be true; that is, as an authentic expression of our perception.

Of course, language and perception and acquired knowledge (the consistent belief that something is true) play into one another. In the end, what is important is that we feel that "ends meet", that language and perception and knowledge express and answer our wonders about the world and our place in it satisfactorily.

At all times, we should never forget that what we dismiss so easily as "a construct" is deadly serious business to the overwhelming majority of mankind. Truth is nothing we can easily re-describe. Indeed, to rewrite truth continues to cost many people's lives all over the world.

On the nature of history
Truths change in the course of time and with the passing of history. History is the account of a narrative as it is told by specific people (or one person) at a specific point in time. Of course, no history, as a construct of language, can be untruthful to the evidence of what we choose to perceive of, and as, reality.

History as a narrative provides a community of people with a language, and thus with conceptions of themselves or others that underlie the language. The framework of conceptions, as a narrative that is history has arranged it, promises us answers to our wonders. It lends expression to our  perception and relates it to other conceptions, creating a meaningful context, one that commonly makes sense to us. In other words, history - personal or communal - accords us a place in relation to events and peoples and ideas that we may find to "meet our ends", being authentically ours (or not authentic ours, in which case we may choose to re-write our history).

If we feel an account of what was or is makes sense to us, we term that account to be 'true'. As was said, this truth is likely to differ from place to place and time to time. It is a political truth in the sense that a) it is not an absolute Truth but b) is only a helpful concept which we can use to live and act. It doesn't actually matter whether that truth is really a Truth, as long as people believe it to be 'true'.

The sense a narrative provides us with by according us "a place in relation" is what we call identity. It changes with the narrative, but again, is also bound to what we perceive as existent reality. History itself should be understood in a broader sense: everybody has a personal history, a community has a history, a society, a nation, civilizations, the world. I mean all of these.

On institutions and practices
Institutions - government institutions as well as societal institutions, laws, norms ect. - are manifestations and expressions of a given narrative. So are practices.

However, institutions and practices also form perceptions, language and knowledge, and thus our narrative. Like a narrative, and likely re-enforcing the current truth of a narrative at the time of the practices' or institutions' creation, both practice and institutions provide for a framework in which's structure we relate. Narratives on one hand, and institutions and practices on the other reinforce one another, and provide for relative stability, and a sense of truth and authentic existence for the individual as well as a community.

(One could say with Hannah Arendt that speaking and acting are really one).

On conflict
When the "places in relation" accorded to us by our narrative and institutions and practices conflict with the place accorded to us by other narratives, institutions and practices, our sense of balance, or idea of truth, is challenged. The perception of the severity of a challenge determines the quality of our response. In (post)modern times, we have increased the tolerance level for conflicting narratives, either by according to differing narratives not enough importance for a challenge, or by recognizing the right of people to tell a different narrative.

One important conflict resolution method has been to find common ground, which are inclusive meta-narratives. Common ground is found (a meta-narrative is forged) by the use of what I would like to call buoy-terms (and have called  "anchor terms" before). Examples of buoy-terms are "equal before the law", "before God", "humankind" ect. These buoy-terms provide a link from one narrative into a meta-narrative we have begun to weave in order to make possible the inclusion of people with a different narrative.

Resolving conflicts, as every International Relations major can tell, requires the establishment of a regime. So parallel to the weaving of a meta-narrative, we have begun to establish institutions and practices (regimes) that re-inforce that meta-narrative. The establishment of higher courts, or higher levels of government, of larger spiritual communities, and international political associations are expressions of the changing nature of the meta-narrative. Another example may be the Middle-East Peace Process.

Over time, many conflicts have been resolved by numerous meta-narratives that have been written, which have gradually replaced, or completed, more particular, often local narratives. So have the institutions. Weaving the meta-narratives, establishing a structure in which we can relate ourselves and our more particular narratives to without feeling "out of place", is an ongoing effort. As parameters of self-perceptions change, so do narratives and so must the meta-narrative. There is no end of history, as long as there is no end to self-perception. No order can be taken for granted. And telling the meta-narrative, weaving particular narratives into it, becomes increasingly more difficult as narratives diversify.

On liberal thought and practice
Liberal thought cherishes the individual, and in my (German) twist of the narrative ought to preserve human dignity at all cost. Human dignity, foremost, in my German reading, is granted in an authentic existence (the content of which differs over time and from person to person). In other words, Liberals, in my view, should work for conditions that allow authentic existence.

Liberal practice has sought to establish a realm in which we are free to pursue an authentic existence, and by and large has been successful. However, liberal practice can not remain a blind exercise. The parameters of self-perception have changed. Kant surely felt his emphasis on the concept of rationality, and the insitutions and practices established by the language of rationality, was a genuine, authentic expression of himself, and maybe of his time. Marx felt "Das Kapital" was the narrative that gave him the place in life where he felt "ends met" (Hegel’s expression?).

According, the "procedural state" is an invention of a particular time. It may, in it's blindness of particular identities, not be suited to the perception of many people today in search for particular identities. And this is not, I remind you, an aesthetic problem of matching up two stories with the help of hypertext. It is about alienation, the disenchantment of the world, and the dangerous result of Weber's projected bureaucratization, the practice that expresses the Enlightenment enthusiasm for rationality, and that has turned us into McCitizens of a McDonaldized McWorld. (Look over there... there is Benjamin Barber waving his Jihad vs.McWorld!)

The question becomes how to maintain an inclusive meta-narrative (Emerson’s ecumenical horizon?) and it's institutions that make possible toleration and integration (in short, practices aiming at stability and peace), without alienating particular local or regional or national narratives to the point where stability is threatened. Finding that balance is a work in progress.

 
 Go to the next page A liberal model based on these conceptions