by Londonbear
Thu Feb 9th, 2006 at 09:42:18 AM EST
Not really since the Roman Empire have we had a culture that unified (most of) modern Europe. Now none of us want to see a homogenised society yet we must move towards a shared European identity within the EU if we are to deepen let alone widen the Union. What I'd like to do is explore how move towards that and at the same time cherish our own traditions but share those of others.
This is prompted by the current discussions over the tension between Islamic sensitivities over the cartoons and freedom of speech but I want to widen it away from that narrow base. In many ways a seminal moment for me was in Prague during the Accession. People whose country for my parents was "a far away land of which we know little" were those whose dashed Spring hopes I mourned and who were now becoming my fellow citizens.
How then do we relate to those who are different from us but share a common citizenship and personal aspirations of at least a decently comfortable life with what Roosevelt dubbed the four freedoms.
From the front page - whataboutbob
Maybe I can kick off by reproducing a slightly edited comment I made in Daily Kos in the context of the Mohammed cartoons which sets out what I see as different approaches to national identies that we might use as ways forward. As you will realise it way intially address to a mainly American audience.
There are two very different models of a multi-racial/multi-cultural society emerging. One is the US/French model of what might be called a "melting pot" where there is assumed to be a unifying and unified ideal of nationality into which differences are subsumed. Here a degree of uniformity is imposed so for example you on the one hand demand separation of Church and state in an fundamentalist form of Rationalism which has about as much to do with the Enlightenment as the Southern Baptists have to do with the teachings of Christ. This ideal of uniformity leads to other dangers like the assumption that your ideals and aspirations should be everybody's and series of Presidents who end their speeches "and may God bless America".
The other is a very much an urban British model (although I suggest it is also part of the ways in which the EU can to cope with the traditions of the 25 members) that attempts to share and celebrate differences. Thus a state primary school in the East End of London will get the children to make "Easter Bonnets" to re-enact the parades traditional in that area and have a party at the end of Ramadan if it falls in term time (during the semester)If there are children of other faiths, the older ones might be asked to give a presentation about a particular religious holiday like Hannukah or the Festival of Lights during the morning assembly. That by the way is mandated by law as having to be a "predominantly Christian" meeting unless special dispensation has been obtained or the school is run by another faith. I don't believe any school in the country has applied for this but the law is extremely widely ignored in most inner-city state schools. In school meals, halal meat is used if there will be a sufficient demand and a contractor can supply it but a vegetarian option is available to accommodate dietary requirements. The ideal is not uniformity but (to use a word much devalued by Blair using it) to respect others for their difference. If that means making a head covering and a long skirt or slacks an option for the school uniform, so what? If you let the girls play team games in track suits, who are you harming?
I suppose its a matter of a couple of republics which had to be invented by committee with powerful presidents and a monarchy that tried republicanism over 300 years ago and gave it up as encouraging religious fanatics. Now we have a virtually powerless head of state who retains a Catholic title of Defender of The Faith while being the head of an established Protestant church which is ignored by the vast majority of its nominal members except when it involves "hatch, match or dispatch" as it does rites of passage rather well or attend so they can get their children into the schools it runs as they have an unjustified reputation that the teaching is better than state schools. Well I did say we were not worried about being Rational!
Perhaps what I am saying is that we should revisit the religious tolerance of ancient Rome but remember that the muslim Ottoman Empire was the direct successor of the Eastern Roman Empire. What we share is far more powerful than that which divides us. But instead of trying to wipe out differences between us let's recognise that our neighbour's unique qualities enrich us too. Most of all, let's abandon the agressive eagles of Rome, the Czars, the Kaisers and the American Republic. At least if we cannot fully embrace the dove, let's make the eagle like the friendly "fat hen" of the Bonn Bundestag. Important, let's relax, throw away preconceptions and get to know each other. We'll find after all that we're not that bad.
