Baha’i Perspectives

leila May 4th, 2008

“If you want to preserve heritage, you must keep poverty.”

This was the claim of Laurent A. Rampon, director of the cultural preservation in Luang Prabang, Laos, in response to the city’s cultural erosion at the hands of tourist influx.

In my last post, I touched on the debate surrounding modernization. I presented both sides: that globalization’s opponents are wary of “development” because of its effects on culture, while its advocates maintain that it’s the price to be paid to bring nations out of poverty.

But, is there a middle ground? Can’t we argue that poverty, along with certain harmful traditions (among which are those that degrade women, such as the ever-contentious practice of female genital mutilation) are what prevent human advancement? Can we not argue that such traditions as slavery are likewise “cultural heritages” that needed to be abolished? Bahá’u'lláh counsels, in His Hidden Words:

Noble I made thee, wherewith dost thou abase thyself?

And similarly, would it be wrong to suggest that modernization need not equal the “Westoxification” that many see as stripping nations of their culture? That prosperity can result sans McDonald’s, The Gap, and Wal-Mart on every street corner, without the blossoming of mini-malls and homogenized suburbia? Are capitalism and socialism mutually exclusive, or can the “invisible hand,” as suggested by Adam Smith, be guided to lessen the wealth-poverty gap?

Bahá’u'lláh, the Prophet-Founder of the Bahá’í Faith, has revealed that the unification of humankind is a necessary and inevitable end to which we are working, whether we realize it or not. This vision, in turn, necessitates, and works toward, economic equality—for how are communities steeped in poverty able to effectively and equitably participate in the global arena?

This process of modernization and development is a slow and painful one, to be sure. But if we examine the history of humankind, we realize that out of disintegration comes integration. The growth pains are a painful but necessary part of humanity’s evolution. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá clarifies this concept another work, Some Answered Questions:

All beings, whether large or small, were created perfect and complete from the first, but their perfections appear in them by degrees. The organization of God is one; the evolution of existence is one; the divine system is one. … When you consider this universal system, you see that there is not one of the beings which at its coming into existence has reached the limit of perfection. No, they gradually grow and develop, and then attain the degree of perfection.

(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions, page 199)

Just as the messages of Prophets past were divinely ordained to unify family, tribe, and state, at the crux of Bahá’u’lláh’s message is the oneness of humankind. These processes were gradual, tumultuous, and often violent. If we look at today’s world, can we not argue that we are undertaking a similar, and far grander, project?

In this light, modernization, however flawed and sometimes harmful it may be in its present shape, is but a manifestation of this move toward oneness. As the world awakens and learns to cope with this reality, so too will the phenomenon of modernization and globalization begin to take on a more mature and culturally conscious form.

Tags: culture, modernization

• Baha'i Concepts , General Interest , Society
• Comments(2)

leila April 19th, 2008

Modernization, Westernization, Development, Globalization. Whatever you call it, it evokes the fiery, if not ubiquitous, debate that has raged in recent years. Is modernization an evil, or a panacea? Does modernization necessarily equal Westernization? Can modernization and cultural preservation go hand-in-hand?

A recent article published in the New York Times tells the story of Luang Prabang, a Laotian town whose idyll has been shattered in the past decade. Since its selection as a Unesco World Heritage Site in 1995, camera-toting tourists have flocked to town, with its daily procession of Buddhist monks and its centuries-old architecture. With the tourist boom, pizza parlors, bars, and even day spas have sprouted alongside the quaint narrow streets and traditional structures. Jobs and wealth have emerged as a result: those same monks, donned in their bright orange robes, abandon their monastic lives to cash in on the tourism industry.

Despite the economic upturn, many ask: is it worth it?

Laurent A. Rampon, the director of Luang Prabang’s cultural preservation office, sees it this way:

The paradox is that Unesco gives out the Heritage Site label partly to reduce poverty, but reducing poverty is reducing heritage. If you want to preserve heritage, you must keep poverty.

Though the development-versus-culture debate has been seen as a twenty-first century phenomenon, I’ll let you in on a little-known fact: it’s actually raged for centuries.

Back in nineteenth-century Persia, modernization was the issue of the moment. Many Persians yearned for the kinds of prosperity and advancement that Europe and neighbouring Russia enjoyed, not only because of their pride, but for their own self-preservation. With the humiliating defeat of the Persian army at the hands of the Russian forces during the Russo-Persian wars, it became clear that Persia needed to modernize in order to survive.

Yet, for all those pro-modernizers that passionately appealed to the Persian people and rulers to advance the cause of modernization, there were those who clung to fears of Westernization. Would Persia lose its culture at the hands of modernization? The clergy likewise feared a loss of power and influence, with the development of judicial and educational institutions that threatened their sway over the populace.

‘Abdu’l-Bahá addressed this question in 1875 in His scintillating treatise, The Secret of Divine Civilization. In it, He outlines the necessity of modernization and its requisite components: democratic governance, a just rule of law, scientific and technological advancements, human rights, universal education, and economic development.

But He similarly rejects the notion of modernization as synonymous with Westernization. It is possible, He asserts, to glean those aspects of modern society that will contribute to the advancement of a nation’s people without losing those unique aspects of one’s culture. He states:

Those who maintain that these modern concepts apply only to other countries and are irrelevant in Iran, that they do not satisfy her requirements or suit her way of life, disregard the fact that other nations were once as we are now…. Would the extension of education, the development of useful arts and sciences, the promotion of industry and technology, be harmful things? For such endeavor lifts the individual within the mass and raises him out of the depths of ignorance to the highest reaches of knowledge and human excellence. Would the setting up of just legislation, in accord with the Divine laws which guarantee the happiness of society and protect the rights of all mankind and are an impregnable proof against assault — would such laws, insuring the integrity of the members of society and their equality before the law, inhibit their prosperity and success?

(Abdu’l-Bahá, The Secret of Divine Civilization, p. 13-14)

So when Rampon claimed, in the article, that cultural heritage can only be preserved by maintaining poverty, it first made me angry, but then it made me think. Those opponents of globalization loathe so-called development because of its perceived destruction of culture, while its advocates maintain that it’s the price to be paid for increased global wealth, at any expense.

But what of a middle ground? In part two, I’ll explore the idea of a middle ground, and the Baha’i model of modernity.

Tags: culture, modernization, poverty

• Baha'i Concepts , Society
• Comments(2)