Enlightenment ideas of scientific rationalism and technological domination have reached the edge of an abyss. Unless a new Enlightenment is embraced — one that places ecology and care at its core — there could be no way back.
The Enlightenment that took root in 18th century Europe cast aside old norms and held out the promise of a limitless future. Individuals came to believe that they were free to take charge of their destinies and emancipate themselves from the bonds of religion, tradition and nature.
Rationality would liberate them from prejudice and scarcity, ushering in a new world of peaceful abundance, equality and universal human rights.
Illustration: Constance Chou
The experience of the 20th century suggests that this vision, while commendable in many respects, was deeply flawed and bears some responsibility for a train of environmental degradation and industrial-scale murder.
Indeed, the destructive logic of the false dualism of man and nature continues to threaten civilization.
The new Enlightenment would overcome this dualistic perspective, by bringing about a deep reconsideration of the moral duty toward animals and future generations, and transforming how humans inhabit the Earth.
Instead of thinking of humans as separate from nature, it must be recognized that we are embedded in it, and that even our most mundane actions have significant consequences.
Whatever we eat, wherever we live, however we work — we rely on ecosystems and other living beings.
The new Enlightenment would produce a new social contract that reflects an understanding of this dependence, such as by emphasizing the protection of the biosphere and delivering environmental justice for all people and animals.
An understanding of our earthly condition — the vulnerability that binds us to other living beings and nature — must be central to the new Enlightenment. Rather than focusing exclusively on human freedom, we must recognize the role that corporeality, passivity and interdependence play in defining the human condition. The new Enlightenment must be based on ecology.
Per its Greek etymology, ecology embodies the rationality — logos — of our earthly dwelling — oikos — which is always a cohabitation with others. Ecology can therefore not be reduced only to environmental considerations, such as climate change, biodiversity or pollution.
It also has a social dimension, which demands fairness in the distribution of resources and some changes in the modes of production. It also has an existential dimension, as it demands a deep understanding of ourselves and our place in nature.
Ecology is incompatible with our unbridled exploitation of the natural world and our failure to recognize our vulnerability and finitude.
When paired with instrumental rationality, the denial of our mortal and vulnerable condition, together with our obsession with control, turns ordinary practices of life — working, breeding, governing — into forms of warfare.
Unless we fully acknowledge our limits, it would be impossible to constrain our rights so that they are not a license to do whatever we please.
The new Enlightenment should lead to a reconsideration of agriculture and the role that ordinary workers play in the creation of a more caring society.
Since the Enlightenment, human progress has conventionally been reduced to technological innovation and urbanization. The ancient Greek philosophers believed political order originated in the city — polis.
Karl Marx disparaged the “idiocy” of rural life in his Communist Manifesto: The proletariat herded history, not sheep.
For many Enlightenment thinkers, too, agricultural workers were a backward class.
However, today, the moral revolution that is needed can begin in the village or the fields. While many modern farmers are burdened by debt, long hours and the effects of unsustainable practices, others have broken out of this system and are cultivating new folkways. For example, by replacing monoculture with diversified and ecosystemic agriculture, and moving from intensive livestock production to on-farm models.
They are organizing themselves at the local level, selling healthier food and bringing cooperative ideals to the marketplace. Their efforts have helped to rejuvenate deprived and abandoned regions.
Care includes everything we do to maintain and cultivate the world — including all activities that transform rural and peripheral land — so that we can flourish in it.
By showing deep care for nature and for others, those who practice sustainable farming embody the values that must underpin the new Enlightenment: humility, conviviality and solidarity.
National governments and the EU should support them, instead of providing massive subsidies to industrial farms.
These farmers — and all those who nourish hope for a more caring world — are the quiet laborers and unseen vanguard of the new Enlightenment.
Their creativity is needed to survive what many are calling a global “polycrisis” — climate change, war, debt defaults and more — so we can learn to live well in the 21st century.
Corine Pelluchon is a professor of philosophy at Gustave Eiffel University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with