Excerpt:
"Our Western self-understanding of modernity emerged from the confrontation with our own traditions. The same dialectic between tradition and modernity repeats itself today in other parts of the world. There, too, one reaches back to one’s own traditions to confront the challenges of societal modernization, rather than to succumb to them. Against this background, intercultural discourses about the foundations of a more just international order can no longer be conducted one-sidedly, from the perspective of “first-borns.” These discourses must become habitual [sich einspielen] under the symmetrical conditions of mutual perspective-taking if the global players are to finally bring their social-Darwinist power games under control. The West is one participant among others, and all participants must be willing to be enlightened by others about their respective blind spots. If we were to learn one lesson from the financial crisis, it is that it is high time for the multicultural world society to develop a political constitution."
Click here to read the remainder of this interview [pdf].
Thanks to Thomas Gregersen for the link.
Posts
1 comment:
Now to the matter at hand, and I feel uneasy. If there is a need, this fact is still irrelevant, if there is no feasible way to satisfy this very need. If the financial crisis demonstrates a need for a global constitution, then still everything factually speaks against a real possibility to create precely this. And, should intercultural discourse be mutual? I think so. Who would protest, saying "NO! It must be Western dictate and monologue!" Just asking. So what did Mr. Habermas really say? Flatly nothing at all. And what did we learn hearing it? Blatantly nothing.
- Peter Ingestad, Sweden
Post a Comment