Theorizing Alternative Futures of Asia: Activating ... - Springer Link

Theorizing Alternative Futures of Asia: Activating Enabling Traditions Marcus Bussey

Setting the Scene History and the future are powerfully connected in populist enthusiasms and in our theorizing. In the past lie our roots and in the future our hopes and our fears. We stand in the present, which is always an epiphenomenon of the past–future nexus. The present, as a result, is fragile, open, vulnerable, and utterly remarkable. In this fleeting present, activists—those of us who wish to engage with this fleeting present in an attempt to create optimal futures for whatever constituency or tribe we hold allegiance to—can be either reactive or proactive. Generally speaking, activists who react seek a withdrawal of some kind from present stresses, a return to an idealized past, a utopia, a time of order and the legitimacy of tradition (think Islamic State). This path leads to terror. On the other hand, activists who proact seek to reach out selectively to elements of the past, the present and the future. Such proactivism, while mindful of the realities of the present, draws on the riches of the past and the aspirations for the future to weave, dance and dream alternative futures into focus in an attempt to bring into people’s lives the possibility of transformation and expansion.

M. Bussey (*) University of Sunshine Coast, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia © The Author(s) 2018 A. K. Giri (ed.), Social Theory and Asian Dialogues, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7095-2_3

35

36

M. BUSSEY

This chapter suggests that, as activists and social theorists, we can be of the proactive variety. This is, of course, a question of temperament. How comfortable are we with disorder? With Chaosmos? Answers to such questions hinge on identity: how much we have invested of ourselves in the present Order? How attached are we to our titles and honours and thus complicit in current regimes of Truth? This also brings up the issue of how we understand ourselves, situate and ground ourselves in the structures that hold our reality, our context together? Furthermore, we should also ask: how much do we identify with the system? And such identification can be both positive and negative—to wish to overthrow the system is just a form of negative identification. It is quite possible to premise our identity as ‘social theorist’, ‘radical’, ‘activist’, ‘freedom fighter’ and even ‘terrorist’ on resistance to regimes of Truth while not recognizing that such regimes need our resistance to sustain their own identity. So, paradoxically, what terrorists fail to see is that they actually feed that which they attack. All this is said to introduce a vulnerable, partial and open social theory that works with the kind of futures thinking that will create a forum for theorizing alternative futures for Asia. As was noted above, the whole point of any such enterprise is to optimize the possibilities for the people of Asia to achieve rich, meaningful and sustainable futures for themselves, their families and their communities. In a globalizing world, human scale is still the reality for most of us. So home, village, town and region are still valid units to acknowledge, even when using such a concept as ‘Asia’. The reality is that Asian Futures means the futures of such human units. And, shifting the lens again, it also means the futures of villages worldwide, and of the ecosystems that sustain them, because Asia is also part of a global experience in which separation and distance are collapsing as new socio- economic and technological realities keep driving our collective consciousnesses towards an integration and identification (whether we like it or not) with the Other in all its forms.

Asian Futures Some years ago a gathering at Tamkang University in Taiwan (3–5 November 2010) examined the topic of ‘Global Transitions and Asia 2060’. My friends and colleagues Professor Sohail Inayatullah and Dr Dada Shumbhushivananda both presented sets of scenarios for Asia 2060. Inayatullah proposed four scenarios: Asian Fusions, in which a robust Asian cultural identity continued to engage with global possibilities,

THEORIZING ALTERNATIVE FUTURES OF ASIA: ACTIVATING ENABLING…

37

ltimately giving birth to some kind of Asian Union; the second he called u “Divided ‘Asias’” in which he saw the nationalist tensions and entrenched interests that are rooted in narrow histories vying for power over the coming century; in the third he saw the ongoing effects of colonialism and the post-colonial malaise that many Asians bought into manifesting in what he called the “Used and Discarded Futures of the West”; which he felt would lead to the fourth scenario of “Snakes and Ladders”—the experience of anxious growth followed by periods of decline. He acknowledged that, while we might all wish for a resilient Asia to take charge of its own future, there were many factors playing out across the cultural, political and economic spheres. Inayatullah, a self-declared optimist, pointed to the richness of Asia’s multiple traditions and argued that these would underpin the continued ascendancy of Asia on the global stage. This ascendancy he feels will not just be economic, but also cultural. However, he saw nationalism, authoritarianism, endemic corruption, baroque bureaucracy, gender disparity and the wounds of the past as significant hurdles to its realization. For him the way forward lay in the embracing of those rich traditions of Asia (Hindu, Islamic, Buddhist, Confucian, Taoist, Shinto, Christian and so on) that promote universal well-being, personal and social realization, deep governance, gender and social equity, and individual and social meaning for all. Shambhushivananda, a monk of Ananda Marga, unsurprisingly took an unashamedly spiritual position. He saw the issue of an Asian renaissance hinging on the tension between materialist and spiritual worldviews. He offered three scenarios for Asia’s future. The first was matter-centred and would doom Asians to a diminished future in which cultural identity was eroded and the quality of life for many would decline. This he dubbed “The Tragedy of the Commons.” The second scenario was an Idealist vision he called “Utopias of the Enlightened and the Wise” in which deep governance would be sustained by Dharmic leaders who served the interests of all, both human and non-human, and challenged the vested interests of those who would exploit the planet and its people. The third scenario he called “The Middle Path: the only viable option for Asia.” This scenario draws on the Buddha’s description of the Middle Path (madhyamāpratipad) in which the realities of the moment are negotiated both collectively and individually and on a daily basis as Asia moves towards not only coherence but also greater equity and a renewed confidence (hence renaissance) in its traditions. Thus Shambhushivananda concluded:

38

M. BUSSEY

The core issue of Asia’s social renaissance will be to establish and align with the Cosmic Ideal; place Dharma (universal welfare) as the guiding faculty behind knowledge; and, to act decisively to eliminate wide disparities prevalent in every walk of human life.

Theorizing Asian Futures Through ‘Enabling Traditions’ The work of both Inayatullah and Shambhushivananda points to the role of tradition in underwriting positive futures for Asia. Inayatullah’s approach (Ramos 2003) is that of a political scientist whose work is a subtle combination of structuralist and post-structuralist thinking, while including his own lived experience as a post-colonial Pakistani whose father worked for the UN and whose education has largely been in the West (he holds a PhD from the University of Hawaii) (Inayatullah and Milojević 2015). Shambhushivananda, who also completed his higher degree work in the USA and has a PhD from the Wharton Business School University of Pennsylvania, is explicitly Tantric in his worldview and draws on this tradition, and related traditions such as Buddhism, to shape his scenarios. For him, social reality is the Kurukshetra (Battlefield of the Mahabharata) in which Krishna, as Higher Consciousness, is birthed into human social and individual forms (Shambhushivananda 2006). Both scholars have a deep connection with the work of Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar (1921–1990) and his understanding of social evolution and spiritual transformation and yet this connection takes markedly different forms in their work. In this way we can see the interplay of tradition with the filters of biography and context in which Inayatullah acts both as an academic and as a consultant to government and non-government agencies; while Shambhshivananda is Kulapati (Chancellor) of the Ananda Marga Gurukula University (www.gurukul.edu/) and a trainer of novice monks and nuns at a seminary in Sweden. This point finally brings me to the role of what Cornel West describes as ‘enabling traditions’ (West 1999, p. 171) in enriching the theoretical context. West is specifically pointing to religious as opposed to secular traditions, though I see no reason why secular traditions cannot be enabling.1 Again, biography helps us understand West’s position. He is an African American looking to leverage his deep commitment to his Christian faith in order to better understand and engage with his world, in which the suffering and disadvantage of his fellow African Americans stares him


39

in the face. For him faith and social critique do not simply go hand in hand, they are fundamental to his being. I do not think it possible to put forward rational defenses of one’s faith that verify its veracity or even persuade one’s critics. Yet it is possible to convey to others the sense of deep emptiness and pervasive meaninglessness one feels if one is not critically aligned with an enabling tradition. One risks not logical inconsistency, but actual insanity; the issue is not reason or irrationality, but life or death. (ibid.)

West asserts this in the face of what he describes, in conversation with bell hooks2, as the ‘pervasive impoverishment of the spirit’ that marks contemporary society (hooks and West 1991, p. 51). He sees this condition as notable of peoples who have been multiply marginalized, such as poor African Americans: far from the centre of the economy; bound by class/caste; racially discriminated against; and for (black) women, also subject to patriarchy. In such a context he develops a prophetic pragmatism to promote liberation from the spiritual bonds that underpin the psychic bondages that, in turn, underpin the economic bondages of materialist modernity. He develops this prophetic stance as a form of pragmatism and links it to the ontological roots of his thinking in his faith: I believe that Christian stories and narratives provide insight into our very brief pilgrimage and sojourn on this globe. It provides us with a way to demand that service and sacrifice, care and love sit at the center of what it is to be human. It reaffirms that we are human to the degree that we love, and care and serve. (hooks and West 1991, p. 53)

For West, Christianity can be an enabling tradition—one that supplies categories and the epistemic coordinates for a revived ethics of engagement with civil society. By introducing a prophetic discourse into both analysis and action, West seeks to establish a basis for critical renewal at both social and personal levels. In education, for example, this means acknowledging the role tradition has in shaping education and directing its concerns. Prophetic imagination (Bussey 2015b) thus challenges current educational forms that seek to strip it of deeper meaning—the stories of becoming that have held earlier civilizational projects together. Yet, to avoid the hegemonic and colonizing aspirations of much unilateral civilizational discourse, West grounds his thinking intercivilizationally in

40

M. BUSSEY

his vision of the prophetic pragmatist who speaks beyond the dominant discourse while affirming local voice and democratic process. This intention he makes absolutely clear in his description of the prophetic pragmatist: The distinctive hallmarks of a prophetic pragmatist are a universal consciousness that promotes an all-embracing democratic and libertarian moral vision, a historical consciousness that acknowledges human finitude and conditionedness and a critical consciousness that encourages relentless critique and self-criticism for the aims of social change and personal humility. (1999, p. 170)

West is arguing for a broad and ethical engagement with the antidemocratic, parochial, ahistorical and limited populism of American culture. In this he is arguing for an engaged citizenship that is legible within the Christian and democratic context of American life. His theoretical spark is the combination of Christian ethics and moral purpose with a critical theoretical approach focused on practical (i.e. pragmatic) engagement with society and culture.

Relentless Critique In West, Inayatullah and Shambhushivananda we find practical theorists who draw on deep traditions to reframe their contexts. Such traditions are embedded in their biography so they can be understood as sources of deep narrative, story and myth that create a meaning field that is spiritually and emotionally, as well as intellectually, sustaining. Yet, as we all know, traditions are not ‘pure’ or ‘good’, they are the result of cultural evolution and therefore are riddled with lacuna, contradiction and violence (Bussey 2013, 2014). They are the sum of the human condition and therefore reflect both the good and the bad. It is for this reason that West includes in his profile of a prophetic pragmatist the commitment to ‘relentless critique and self-criticism’. It is not enough to simply have a tradition and accept it passively, one must be an activist within and on behalf of the tradition, leveraging strengths and rooting out weaknesses. This is a clear process as a pragmatist, because the pragmatist judges the worth of something by its effects. Similarly Sarkar proposes to assess tradition and human action according to how much opportunity it offers humanity to realize their potential as spiritual, intel-


41

lectual and physical beings (Bussey 2010; Sarkar 1982). This pragmatic agenda, which also measures the worth of a tradition by its effects, offers a neohumanism based on a critical spirituality designed to enable activism within traditions (Bussey 2000). So a simple rule of thumb emerges: if something is good it maximizes the potential of all those in a situation without diminishing the potentiality of others or the environment; if it fails to do this, it is a cultural aberration that is inimical to those who practise it and should be dropped from the cultural script. This is a dangerous task which requires strategy, foresight and courage. It is also a necessary task and has been part of the heroic human story since we left the jungles of Africa for the savannah a couple of million years ago. The intersection of critique with theory is the source of cultural innovation and renewal. It lies at the heart of what Shambhushivananda meant by renaissance—the taking of desired and valued elements of the past in a culture, those that maximize the good in a situation, and renewing them through the lens of contemporary need. Heritage and tradition become sources of futures thinking and anticipatory action (Bussey 2015a). Similarly, we find in the work of both Ziauddin Sardar (2005) and Ashis Nandy (2004) a critical traditionalism in which, like West, they seek to challenge the dominant theoretical framing of the future, as linear, developmental and a repeat of the past, and suggest diversity and meaning lie in the richness of culture rather than in its decimation, fragmentation and commodification. Such a proactive creative cultural enterprise resets the scene for imagining alternative futures for Asia that affirm tradition as the source of the meaning in life. This, as Giri points out, is the essence of a lived critique in which life is linked to a striving, a longing for wholeness that though denied by the human condition still enlivens it: Life means multiple webs of relationship and criticism is an enquiry into the quality of these relationships. Criticism also seeks to understand whether the modes of togetherness suggested in life’s architecture of relationships genuinely holds together or not. Criticism begins with a description of the dynamics of relationships in life; observes and describes both coherence and incoherence, harmonies and contradictions at work in life; and seeks to move from incoherence to coherence, darkness to light, and from light to more light. An eternal desire to move from one summit of perfection to another is the objective of criticism, which is not a specialized attribute of life; it is life itself. (2006, p. 2)

42

M. BUSSEY

An Asian/Human Renaissance Sarkar also spoke of a human renaissance in which the parts (Asia, Africa, the Americas, Oceania, for instance) and the whole reaffirm the value and strength of tradition while casting aside defective culture, what he called pseudo-culture, in order to liberate human potentiality. This potential, he argued, is burdened by millennia of habit that masquerades as culture (1982). Like Giri, he argued that humanity has a need for wholeness that is expressed spiritually as a ‘longing for the Great’ (Sarkar 1997). Such a longing is a source of cultural critique and renewal and is definitional of our humanity. Sarkar argued that offering a neohumanism premised on a critical spirituality, that to return to our potential as critical beings who use thought and tradition instead of being possessed by them, heralds a renaissance of meaning and purpose. In this we see a neohumanity as the basis for a new renaissance. This renaissance has been described by Sarkar as a liberation of intellect, one which demands of humanity that they ‘wake up’ and ‘and do something in all the spheres of life’ (1982). Renaissance of course, as I argue elsewhere (Bussey 2016), is a profoundly evocative, even provocative, term. It is used here precisely because it is such. An Asian renaissance may well be under way. But what is being reborn? Old imperialist aspirations? Tribal certitudes? Or a sense of awakened post-colonial promise? Are the traditions being looked to enabling of the majority or privileging a minority? Here we walk the fine edge between the open promise and the closed definitional moment (Bussey 2014). Critical spirituality, anchored in the awakened sense of cultural co-creativity seeks to harness tradition and release its potential while not foreclosing on the exciting developments born from the intercivilizational ferment that so troubles, but also so excites, many today. A critical renaissance is concerned with unlocking the dynamic energy of this contradiction and heralds a rethinking of human agency beyond traditional conformity. This rethinking pushes us away from a unified singular worldview to one which is multiple and layered. In this recognition of the layered nature of reality in which ‘diverse movements of the infinite’ generate hybrid formulations, new critical expressions appear, such as West’s prophetic pragmatist. This movement also reinvigorated, via neohumanism, the humanism of the European Renaissance, which challenged humanity to see itself as one family rather than as tribal units.


43

As noted above, Sarkar offers a neohumanism to extend this task of humanism to the entire universe (1982). Neohumanism is one of the voices of the emergent renaissance of critical consciousness in which intellect expands to incorporate the prediscursive, the embodied and the spiritual, and human identity expands from tribal allegiance to species, the humanist project, to a universalist neohumanist recognition of Self as participant and co-creator in the universe of forms (Bussey 2006).

Traditions at Play in the Cultural Field Traditions are a rich source of story. They provide an aesthetic order for enabling social innovation. No change happens in a vacuum and when viewed historically can be seen to have been brewing, often unnoticed, for many generations. Timing is everything here, as is a sense of the collective potential within any situation combined with the desire to leap into unknown futures. The future, however, will not be a repeat of the past because something new is occurring. For the first time humanity is coming to understand that we are part of a dynamic web of interactions in which no one story can or should, from an ethical and pragmatic point of view, dominate. The human voice—as tribe, people, culture—lived for generations in isolation, but has now become a chorus in which hybrid forms are the norm rather than the exception. This is a rich world of possibility in which the great faiths have a part to play along with the modern secular wisdoms of the humanities, the sciences and general human goodwill. Innovators abound: with David Loy (2002) reframing Buddhism in a dialogue with its Western shadow; the Dalai Lama leading a sense of renewed wonder in which Tibet is now part of everyone’s soul; Giri, Shambhushivananda, Ziauddin Sardar (2005) and other savvy emissaries of the subcontinent activating Vedantic, Tantric, yogic and Islamic narratives, forms and aesthetics; Philip Wexler (2000) drawing on Judaism; and Cornel West (1999) on Christianity. And this is just the tip of an enormous iceberg. The work is going on everywhere and is also attracting people who represent a fusion of positions. Inayatullah has successfully integrated political science, history and a post-structural sensibility, with a rich spiritual narrative, and similarly the African American feminist scholar bell hooks has woven Buddhism with a deep Christianity (2000). As the Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh so eloquently put it, we all inter-are (1988). And this inter-being is expressed in our encounters and

44

M. BUSSEY

our conversations and given form in our actions—our activism. In this new condition power appears to be centralized but, in fact, is spread more equitably throughout the system in which such theorists and leaders act as authority hubs within a dynamic cultural field. Inter-being and the authority that stems from it is our dormant potentiality. The great Islamic historiographer Ibn Khaldun observed centuries ago that when power gets corrupt moral forces will be renewed and sweep it aside. In his worldview these forces always came from the desert, like a cleansing wind, to sweep away the decadence of an overly indulgent civilization. This was his asabiyah in which the needs of the collective are reaffirmed. He saw this as a pendulum process of rise and fall (Galtung and Inayatullah 1997). Asia is reclaiming the right of the collective to not simply the necessities of existence, but also to a rich and fulfilling life in which the spiritual, intellectual and physical potentialities of each individual are supported. But as we inter-are this can no longer simply be an Asian issue. It is now a global process of deep relating in which traditions are meeting, dialoguing and hybridizing as a new sense of humanity emerges to frame personal and collective agency in unique, diverse and unexpected ways. The pressure of circumstances—environmental, social, economic, political and civilizational—all point to the emergence of relationship as a theme in any viable future. The great traditions act in this process as shelters and guides, forward-fostering hope, imagination and a sense of mission that can underpin our collective struggles towards a range of new identities and governance structures.

Conclusion: The Horizon Beckons The horizon beckons but the kind of that future lies ahead depends on the extent we, as a global community, can reinvent ourselves in the light of the past but with an eye to the future. In this way we ensure a dynamic mix of tradition, continuity and change. As Fig. 1 illustrates, tunnel vision offers a closed future for all. When we expand the nature of the forward view through recourse to the metaphors and insights of tradition we deepen the possibilities before us. It must be noted that traditions are powerful sources of inspiration and critical reflection that can deepen our thinking about Asian and global futures:


45

Fig. 1 From tunnel vision to futures for all

• Traditions offer new forms to dream by (i.e. imaginative resources). • Traditions possess the critical tools needed to rethink and enable the human condition. • Traditions are relevant social theory in action. • Traditions are resilient social narratives that enable proactivism. • Traditions, finally, also carry a sense of continuity in which identity still functions within a meaningful and secure context. Yet traditions can also trap us in endgame and reductionist logic, in which the future is diminished and premised on reactive and violent scenarios, in which identity is brittle and fed on outmoded historical tropes. We find models of this in the evangelical Christian assurance of salvation to come and the jihadii dreams of heaven. The scenarios discussed earlier in this chapter flag up the fact that such a suite of conditions can lead to vastly different outcomes. A critical approach to our own traditions, in which substance is distilled from habit, can begin the cultural renewal discussed above in which the expansive logic of the greater good is applied to both collective and personal domains in an attempt to reaffirm our humanity.

46

M. BUSSEY

Notes 1. West would no doubt agree and his approach to Marxism demonstrates this. He engages to transform both his own and Marxist praxis. Inayatullah can be seen to enrich the philosophical domain by also activating a Tantric worldview to enrich and problematize accepted categories and processes. His short article on CLA demonstrates this (S. Inayatullah 1998), see also (S. Inayatullah 1997); and the work by José Ramos who interviews him highlights the same (Ramos 2003). 2. hooks (Gloria Watson) deliberately writes her nom de plume in lower case.

References Bussey, M. (2000). Critical Spirituality: Neo Humanism as Method. Journal of Futures Studies, 5(2), 21–35. Bussey, M. (2006). Mapping Neohumanist Futures in Education. In S. Inayatullah, Bussey, M., and Milojevic, I. (Ed.), Neohumanist Educational Futures: Liberating the Pedagogical Intellect (pp. 7–24). Taipei, Taiwan: Tamkang University Press. Bussey, M. (2010). Education for Liberation. In J. Karlyle, and Towsey, Michael (Ed.), Understanding Prout: Essays on Sustainability and Transformation (Vol. 1, pp. 77–104). Maleny, Australia: Proutist Universal. Bussey, M. (2013). Culture, Harmony and Prama. Gandhi Marga, 35(1), 25–30. Bussey, M. (2014). Concepts and Effects: ordering and practice in foresight. foresight, 16(1), 1–16. Bussey, M. (2015a). Heritage Futures: Thow Kwang Dragon Kiln and Creative Traditionalism in Singapore. In M. Butcher (Ed.), An Angel By the Water: Essays in Honour of Dennis Reginald O’Hoy (pp. 128–140). Kennington, Vic: Holland Press. Bussey, M. (2015b). Intuition, Rationality and Imagination Journal of Futures Studies, 20(1), 139–148. Bussey, M. (2016). Forms to Dream By: New Histories, New Research, and a Neo Humanity. In A. K. Giri (Ed.), Research as Realization: Science, Spirituality and Harmony. Delhi: Primus. Galtung, J., & Inayatullah, Sohail (Ed.). (1997). Macrohistory and Macrohistorians: Perspective on Individual, Social, and Civilizational Change. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger. Giri, A. K. (2006). New Horizons of Social Theory: Conversations, Transformations and Beyond. Jaipur: Rawat Publications. Hạnh, T. N. (1988). The Heart of Understanding: Commentaries on the Prajnaparamita Heart Sutra. Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press.


47

hooks, b. (2000). Building a Community of Love: bell hooks and Thich Nhat Hanh. Shambhala Sun: Buddhism, Culture, Meditation, Life, January, http:// www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=1844 hooks, b., & West, Cornel. (1991). Breaking Bread: Insurgent Black Intellectual Life. Boston, MA: South End Press. Inayatullah, S. (1997). Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar: Agency, Structure, and Transcendence. In J. Galtung, & Inayatullah, Sohail (Ed.), Macrohistory and Macrohistorians: Perspectives on Individual, Social, and Civilizational Change (pp. 132–140). Westport, CT: Praeger. Inayatullah, S. (1998). Causal Layered Analysis: Poststructuralism as method. Futures, 30(8), 815–829. Inayatullah, S., and Milojević, Ivana (Ed.). (2015). CLA 2.0: Transformative Research in Theory and Practice. Tamsui, Taiwan: Tamkang University Press. Loy, D. R. (2002). A Buddhist History of the West: Studies in Lack. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Nandy, A. (2004). Bonfire of Creeds: The Essential Ashis Nandy. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Ramos, J. M. (2003). From Critique To Cultural Recovery: Critical futures studies and Causal Layered Analysis. Melbourne: Australian Foresight Institute: Swinburne University of Technology. Sardar, Z. (2005). Desperately Seeking Paradise: Journeys of a Sceptical Muslim. London: Granta UK. Sarkar, P. R. (1982). The Liberation of Intellect: Neohumanism. Calcutta: Ananda Marga Publications. Sarkar, P. R. (1997). Subhasita Samgraha (Vol. 24). Calcutta: Ananda Marga Publications. Shambhushivananda. (2006). Towards a Cosmic Society: A Tantric Perspective. Journal of Futures Studies, 10(4), 61–70. West, C. (1999). The Cornel West Reader. New York: Basic Civitas Books. Wexler, P. (2000). Mystical Society: an Emerging Social Vision. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.