World Affairs
Vol. 4, Number 1 (Jan.–Mar. 2000)

Farewell to the Millennium: Reflections of a European
By Henryk Skolimowski

 

The glories of Western progress and scientific achievement have been much celebrated, but Western civilisation is also marred by centuries of self-serving arrogance and intolerance. What redeems it is its artistic legacy.

Henryk Skolimowski

The glory of science ... or was it? The second millennium was dominated by the white race and its scientific achievements. One of the proudest chapters of Western civilisation is science—its development and application. In science, Sir Isaac Newton has been a towering figure. His book, Principia Mathematica Philosophia Naturalis, is considered to be the greatest scientific book ever written; and because science is regarded as the most important human endeavour, this book stands as a sort of pinnacle of human achievement.

Yet it is a curiously marred book. Newton was very anxious to present a neat set of results. So he fudged some data which was discovered only recently. He wanted to formulate the ultimate Laws of Nature, which would stand in the treasury of human knowledge forever. Sir Isaac was so sure of the iron-clad nature of his pronouncements that he emphatically insisted: Hypotheses non fingo (I don’t feign hypotheses). Poor Newton, in the course of time his theories were found to be merely approximations, a bunch of tentative hypotheses, applicable only in some realms of our space-time; not applicable in the realm of subatomic particles or in temperatures close to absolute zero. Twentieth century physics has demonstrated that Newtonian mechanics was not the ultimate knowledge of the universe, and therefore not unshakable and unalterable. It was merely a frail fragment of physical knowledge.

In short, with Newton’s demise the whole presumption of Western culture that it had found indubitable knowledge based on firm scientific rationality simply collapsed. We (in the West) know it. But we are so attached to the alleged glory and superiority of scientific knowledge that we do not want to admit it. Nor do we want to draw appropriate conclusions (from the collapse of scientific rationality) for the whole culture.

There is another peculiar aspect of the Newtonian legacy. There is a definite theological flavour in Newton’s cosmology. The whole structure, with its insistence on absoluteness, dependability, immutability — to which we must succumb — is very much in the image of Jehovah. The ramblings of the Old Testament can be heard through the pages of Newton’s Principia. Newtonian dogmatism and arrogance became hallmarks for the whole of Western culture, which suppressed other cultures assuming that it had the mandate from heaven and Mr. Newton.

The West celebrated the three hundredth anniversary of Newton’s Principia in 1986 — with some fanfare, and also some misgivings. I do not think this book will be so celebrated in another 300 years. In the long run, Cervantes’ Don Quixote will be considered a more important book.

So what about the glory of science? At present the whole of Western scientific knowledge is in shambles. Nobody knows what it is supposed to describe, what its relationship with reality is, and what is the meaning of reality within present science.

The protagonist of the Western scientific world may still argue as follows: even if science did not deliver what it had promised, look at our technology. Surely it is a success story of Western civilisation. We may pause and ask: but is it really? What parts of it are so undoubtedly successful? The most spectacular examples of human prowess and power are nuclear weapons. Should we consider these weapons to be the greatest glory of technology? We scratch our heads and say, "No, not this. We don’t wish to identify ourselves with these murderous toys." What then? Landing on the moon? Yes, this is a good example, we want to say. But is it? At the time of the event, we were all excited. Our imagination of reaching beyond earth made us gasp with wonder. But what is the legacy of this moon landing now? How did it help the human race? What have we learnt about ourselves? Yes, there were some conveniences developed for space travellers which spillover into society, such as teflon frying pans. Thus we have obtained some interesting appliances. Sure enough, we consume some exotic items which would not have been available if it were not for space travel. Is that all?

While dazzled by technological gadgets, we forget to ask: who controls technology? Whom does it serve? Who reaps the major profits? But also such questions as: why have we devastated ecology through our seemingly benign technologies? Why have we cheapened human lives? Why have we eliminated the sacred from our existence?

One answer is because we have not been thinking but only obeying the scientific-technological imperative: what can be done (in the scientific material sphere) must be done. When the Chinese invented gunpowder, they decided not to use it for destructive purposes. We did not have this kind of wisdom while developing our technologies.

We are now told that new electronic technologies will deliver us the paradise of virtual reality. Is this not another delusion of arrogant, unthinking people?

So many people have chosen Albert Einstein as the man of the twentieth century. And even of the whole millennium. But he is an ambiguous genius, as Newton was. He signed the letter which led to the production and explosion of the bomb; this fact he considered the greatest mistake of his life. But he was a scientific genius, was he not? Yes, he was. But would the twentieth century have been better off if E=mc2 were never discovered? I dare say — yes. Furthermore, if A-bombs and then H-bombs were never invented? All this stupendous technology has translated into a march of destruction.

And who have benefited from it? Perhaps the answer is provided by the English weekly, The Economist, in which the following appeared under the heading, "The Fear of Multinationals" just before the Davos Conference in January 2000:

"Take the bosses of the world’s 1,000 largest companies, accounting for four-fifths of the world industrial output, and 33 national leaders, including the president of the United States. Assemble them in a secluded Swiss ski resort, and then surround them with gun-toting police. Is it any wonder that the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum has become, to some, a sign that there is a global economic conspiracy perpetrated by white men in dark suits who run the world’s multinational corporations"?

White Man’s Burden

Our problems did not start with the seventeenth century. This century had high dreams. They were laudable, but not deep enough as the seventeenth century wanted to make people happy, but only in material terms. Because its vision was too shallow the salvation proved to be abortive.

Serious problems emerged at the very beginning of the millennium. Many Christians expected that the year 1000 would signify "the end of the world," that is to say, the end of material existence on earth. In great concentration, they waited. And waited. When "the end" did not come, the accumulated energy of waiting for Godot did not find any outlet. Here lies the beginning of a major problem. The people did not know what to do with this accumulated energy, born of the expectation of an early departure to heaven.

A similar situation occurred in ancient Greece; but with astoundingly different results. After the Greeks repulsed the Persians in the wars of 495-491 BC, they still could not believe that they were so lucky and alive. They waited for another big Persian army to come and crush them. They were concentrated. They were prepared to die. They waited. When the Persians did not come they started using this accumulated energy in a most creative manner. They built the Parthenon, the Erachteion, the temple of Nike — all on the Athenian Acropolis. They exploded with creative exuberance in every realm of human endeavour and left the masterpieces which became the yardstick of the highest and best in Western culture.

Mediaeval Europe after the year 1000 went another way. Instead of going from one flowering to another flowering, the path has been one of conquest to conquest. First, the Crusades were organised to "liberate" the Holy Land. They were a failure. But accumulated aggressive energy had been set in motion. Some crusader units attacked and sacked Christian communities. Then another Crusade was organised to stamp out what was deemed the Cathars’ heresy. In the thirteenth century with the blessings of Pope Innocent III, hundreds of thousands of Cathars were killed with strange cruelty.

After the Cathars tragedy, the institution of the Inquisition was established in 1231. Its purpose was to "eliminate" infidels and heretics from among the Christians. The wheel of the Inquisition revolved mercilessly for the next four centuries. Millions of alleged heretics died an unnatural death by being burnt at the stake. Among these heretics an overwhelming number were women, who were condemned as witches. Some six million were ruthlessly exterminated with the flimsiest of evidence, or no evidence at all, for their alleged involvement in non-Christian powers or practices. What a stain on the Western conscience. This stain is still not fully recognised, acknowledged or dealt with.

In the meantime, there were wars for domination between the (German) Emperor and the Pope. And also religious wars between the Christians and the Muslims. Then later on we witnessed the religious wars of the seventeenth century between Christians and Christians.

These aggressive energies were also running high as Europe prepared for the conquest of the world in colonial wars. Faraway countries were invaded. Populations subdued. Natural treasuries, and especially gold, robbed. Resisting tribes slaughtered, sometimes whole populations; at times even those natives who cooperated with the conquistadors were killed.

One raises one’s eyebrows while examining this history. For we are talking about a Christian civilisation. Yet the modes of its behaviour were distinctly not the ones which Christ would condone. Are we truly Christian? Or only clever hypocrites? The turning of the millennium would seem an appropriate time to reflect and mediate on deeper subjects such as: what is it in the Western psyche that makes it so restless and aggressive?

The Causes of the Demise

What were the main causes of the anaemia of Western culture in the second millennium? What were the causes which led to the shattering of the whole culture, in spite of much intellectual brilliance and undoubted technical achievement?

The first cause was the religious straight-jacket. The intolerance of Christianity and its rigid, and at times brutal control — at least during the first five centuries of the second millennium — which constantly undermined whatever ascent to light and to a truly compassionate society was attempted.

This can be seen in the exploitation of peasants in early mediaeval society. While the peasants were starving, the Church and the monks were having a ball, which Boccaccio, the fourteenth century Italian poet describes so vividly and eloquently in his Decameron.

The intolerance and brutal control can be seen in the institution of the Inquisition and its "works". This institution is one of the shames of the "enlightened" Western civilisation. And also of the Christian Church, allegedly based on love.

This intolerance can be seen in religious wars which produced so much venom, so much tragedy and so much lasting bad karma that it has stained Western conscience, of which Western people are not even aware. One of the strange consequences of Christianity going haywire has been the treacherous and grasping legacy of modern capitalism. The foundation of Christianity is the teaching of Jesus Christ. The essential pillar of this teaching is the quest for justice and equality, care for the poor, and disapproval of the rich. "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God," Jesus preached. This teaching was altered by Calvinism and Protestantism, and then by the ideology of capitalism to such a degree that the poor are now seen as responsible for their own plight, while triumphant capitalism thrives on greed, exploitation, ruthlessness and utter social irresponsibility. We may say, therefore, that the second millennium was not a good one for Christianity. By the same token, it was not a good one for Western civilisations; in spite of our claims to the contrary.

The second cause was the shallowness and timidity of Western thinking which turned potential brilliance and even genius into the civilisation of trivial pursuits. We did not have enough spiritual substance to safeguard the brilliance of our minds. We have become a cocky, arrogant people who have become a menace to other people and the whole of creation. Our alleged superiority over other races led us to blindness and cruelty. Only recently have we been able to see this aspect of our nature. But instead of making amends and apologising to the exploited and the mistreated (by our arrogance and drunken power), we have developed globalism — a new tool for exploitation and colonialism.

On the positive side, we have developed the Charter of Human Rights. We have tried to share with others our concept of democracy which has proved better than vicious dictatorships. However, industrial democracy has so often proved to be a mixed blessing. Instead of helping other people, we have reaped the major economic benefits. Hence the gap between the rich and the poor is widening.

Yet another cause of the malaise of Western civilisation is our unclean moral conscience. The legacy of exploitation and conquest of many lands and peoples over centuries has been deeply unsettling for our psyche. These conquests were often justified as the white man’s burden to bring civilisation to "savages". In actual fact, this whole story is one of colossal savagery. This savagery is not fully recognised in the collective memory of Western people. There exists a strange amnesia with regard to the wrongs we have done. Yes, the past millennium was the white man’s millennium. But at what price? And with what consequences and damage?

The bad karma has been nagging our moral conscious all the time, the karma of war, aggression, conquest, poisoning of the mind and consciousness of Western people. What is to be done to redeem this bad karma? Who is going to purify our sullied souls. Are we waiting for a new Messiah?

This is the real cross of the past millennium. Let us not talk about our technical achievements. Let us talk about our sullied psyche and how we can purify it to become human again. The least we can do is to repent and apologise, to ask for forgiveness. To start this process we must become fully aware that we want to begin an altogether new journey as we enter the new millennium. Do we have enough courage and substance to do that? Or will we continue to be the victims of our treacherous cleverness?

The Redeeming Nature of Art

Against the spurious euphoria of technocrats, who have been destroying the earth, our link with nature, and our capacity to think independently and deeply, I shall declare: "Long live art and the artists for they are the true redeemers of the world."

The Italian Renaissance was a fresh breath of robust air. It showed what the human being can be when inspired by a great idea and released from the chains of dogmas. It is breathtaking to think that so many great individuals appeared on the scene at the same time.

Art was a great catalysing agent, a miracle-maker. It released the powerful energies of human beings. It unlocked the secrets of creativity. It taught people to be creative. The Renaissance alone would be sufficient to redeem the shortcomings of other epochs (but not to redeem the moral sins committed through conquests and barbarian behaviour).

Let us not forget that the West was blessed with sublime artists throughout the millennium, not only during the Renaissance period. Through their Protean visions and transcendental yearning, they kept us from our smallness and often from our misdeeds. To them we owe the fact that Western civilisation did not degenerate any further or deeper.

For what would we have been if we did not have Giotto, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Rembrandt; Dante, Shakespeare, Cervantes, Moliere, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky? What we would have been without Monteverdi, Vivaldi, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven? These are the proud names of Western culture. The celestial sounds of Monteverdi and Mozart have kept alive our souls in the last two centuries of darkness. The language of Shakespeare, of Cervantes, of Blake have been our nourishment, counteracting the sterile jargon and flat philosophy of the positivists who have been destroying our minds and our language.

In every epoch there were people who kept alive the flaming torch of light. They were usually artists. The creative light, burning bright within some individuals, is what brings us closest to divinity. This is what makes us human. Everything else is a pale shadow. Long live the artists for they are the true saviours of humanity.

In Summary

The third millennium will not belong to the white race if only because there will not be a white race at the end of the millennium. Our ranks have been diminishing. There were about 50 per cent white faces at the beginning of the twentieth century. Now there are about 20 per cent. Then we will become 10 per cent. Then five per cent. And then we shall be absorbed in a pool of more interesting colours. In this way we shall survive as a larger pool of humanity. A less interesting scenario would be if the dominant people of colour decide to isolate the remaining two to three per cent of pure white faces and lock us in some kind of reservation — perhaps in the Scandinavian peninsula. That would be a bit cruel. I will not mention how paradoxical it would be.

Looking at Western people over the last millennium, one is struck by these impressions. Lots of energy bursting in so many places. Unfortunately, most of it has been an ill-directed energy. Thus the first part of our trauma: boundless but ill-directed energy.

So much activity. People always in a rush. Never having time for reflection. All action, action, action … but to what end? "Never mind that. We are people of action. We do not have time for spurious reflection". This attitude alone was bound to create problems in the long run.

So we see the spectacle of people always in action. But also suffering so much. Mainly because they elected as their guide the suffering Christianity. Throughout the millennium one is struck by the crucified Christianity. Painful, and inflicting pain. Never able to get off the cross to become a life-inspiring and life-sustaining religion ... according to the words of Jesus Christ: "I bring you life abundant".

Also people were intoxicated with power, with the Faustian myth: You only live once. Therefore you have a ball on earth, at whatever or whoever’s expense. Unsure of their identity, while losing their spiritual depth, people opted out for the aphrodisiac of power. And those lesser characters, settled for consumption.

Taking a more Olympian perspective, we can say that this was the millennium of lost opportunities. This was the millennium of some luminous lights burning on our horizons — such as early mediaeval mystics, including St Francis of Assisi, and above all such lights as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo; only to be followed by much darkness, confusion and evil. This was the millennium of the brilliant flowering of a handful of great scientific minds, whose creative genius, alas, was used later to trivialise the whole civilisation and to negate the spiritual depth of the people. This was the millennium of auspicious beginnings, such as the French and the American Revolutions, whose lofty ideals later led to vicious and degenerative ideologies of communism and capitalism, each equally devastating to human freedom and human happiness.

This was the millennium which has left behind wounded humanity, shattered dreams, skeletons of human beings — frantically searching for fulfilment and so often settling for addictive drugs, or in the least harmful of scenarios, for unthinking consumption. The best thing we can say for the twentieth century is that we did not blow ourselves to bits in one spectacular nuclear fireball. We were saved by the last vestiges of sanity and this indomitable human force called the courage to live. These elemental forces of sanity and courage are our best advisors as we travel through the third millennium.