World Order

FRANCIS FUKUYAMA ■ MIKHAIL GORBACHEV

RYSZARD KAPUSCINSKI ■ SAMUEL HUNTINGTON

WOLE SOYINKA ■ RENÉ GIRARD ■ JOHN GRAY

BERNARD-HENRI LÉVY ■ KISHORE MAHBUBANI

AHMED ZEWAIL ■ FARIDA FAOUZIA CHARFI

AMARTYA SEN ■ HOMI BHABHA

Going through a protracted period of transition since the end of the Cold War, the

world order in the making is neither what was nor what it is yet to become. It is in

“the middle of the future.”

To get our bearings in this uncertain transition, we explore the two grand post-

Cold War narratives —“The End of History” as posited by Francis Fukuyama and

“The Clash of Civilizations” posited by the late Samuel Huntington. Mikhail Gorbachev

looks back at his policies that brought the old order to collapse. The British philoso-

pher John Gray critiques the supposed “universality” of liberalism and, with Homi

Bhabha, sees a world of hybrid identities and localized cultures. The Singaporean

theorist Kishore Mahbubani peels away the “veneer” of Western dominance.

Amartya Sen, the economist and Nobel laureate, assesses whether democratic India

or autocratic China is better at building “human capacity” in their societies.

30 FALL 2013
The Gospel and Globalization
RENÉ GIRARD, a prominent Roman Catholic conservative and author of the seminal
book Violence and the Sacred, is an emeritus professor of anthropology at Stanford
University. His more recent books include Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the
World and I See Satan Fall Like Lightning. He spoke with NPQ in 2005.

NPQ | When Pope Benedict XVI recently denounced what he saw as the
“dictatorship of relativism,” especially in European culture, it caused great con-
troversy. Is the Pope right that we live in such a dictatorship?
RENÉ GIRARD | Yes, he is right. This formula—the dictatorship of rela-
tivism—is excellent. It is going to establish a new discourse in the same way that John
Paul II’s idea of recovering “a culture of life” from the “culture of death” has framed a
whole set of issues, from abortion to stem cell research, capital punishment and war.
It makes sense that this formula comes from a man—(the former) Cardinal
Ratzinger—whose specialty is dogma and theory.
This reign of relativism which is so striking today is due, in part, to the necessi-
Because all truths are treated
ties of our time. Societies are so mixed, with such plurality of peoples. You have to
as equal, since there is said
keep a balance between various creeds. You must not take sides. Every belief is sup-
to be no objective Truth, you
posed to be accorded equal value. Inevitably, even if you are not a relativist, you must
are forced to be banal and
sound like one if not act like one.
superficial. You cannot be truly
As a result, we have more and more relativism. And we have more and more peo-
committed to anything, to be
ple who hate any kind of faith. This is especially the case in the university. And it hurts
“for” something — even if only
intellectual life. Because all truths are treated as equal, since there is said to be no
for the time being.
objective Truth, you are forced to be banal and superficial. You cannot be truly com-
mitted to anything, to be “for” something—even if only for the time being.
Like Ratzinger, however, I believe in commitment. After all, we are both con-
vinced by the idea that responsibility demands we must be committed to one position
and follow it through.
NPQ | For all the controversy Pope Benedict’s comment caused, it was really
in the stead of the late John Paul II’s encyclical “Veritatis Splendor,” which criti-
cized “postmodern” society as becoming indifferent to values — disbelief — in the
name of tolerance. His fear was a new nihilism that could plunge the world into
dehumanizing will-to-power episodes akin to the fascist and communist disasters
of the 20th century.
GIRARD | Postmodernism is dramatic in saying there are no absolute values,
that there is no Truth, that language can’t reach the truth. Like Pope John Paul in the
encyclical you mention, Pope Benedict is engaging this battle head-on by attacking

FALL 2013 59
 this vogue of disbelief in the world today, especially in Europe. Like John Paul II, he
knows from personal experience that, without religion, societies go to the dogs. And
he doesn’t hesitate to say it.
I hope his message resonates. His challenge to relativism is important not only for
the Church and for Europe, but for the whole world.
NPQ | Even Jean Baudrillard once agreed that “the whole world, including
China and Japan, is implicated in the postmodern fragmentation and uprooted-
ness that leaves values behind. There is one exception: Islam. It stands as a chal-
lenge to the radical indifference sweeping the world.”
Isn’t it true that Islam remains the only civilization fully based in faith, and
thus is in conflict with our secular postmodern culture the same way Ratzinger
is? After all, despite Pope John Paul II’s determined efforts, the drafters of the EU
Constitution rejected any mention of the Christian heritage of the West. Every
state in the Islamic world mentions Islam as its cultural foundation.
GIRARD | Western civilization is, no doubt, predominantly on the side of sec-
ular relativism. That is not true in the Islamic world, where faith dominates. This vic-
tory of relativism is precisely why Pope Benedict has made defending the Christian
Western civilization is, no
Truth his central mission.
doubt, predominantly on the
Having said this, I should also say that American secularism—which arose in
side of secular relativism. That
defense of freedom of religion—and French laicite—which arose from the Jacobin
is not true in the Islamic world,
opposition to the Church—are more similar than most people recognize because
where faith dominates. This
they are experienced in the same way at the personal level.
victory of relativism is precisely
I feared that, after 9/11, the project of integrating Muslim youth into French
why Pope Benedict has made
society would break apart. Many predicted that banning the head scarf for girls in
defending the Christian Truth
French public schools would cause endless turmoil. It hasn’t. Young girls have
his central mission.
adapted, carrying on their religious belief in a way that doesn’t conflict with the
state. They are really at the nexus of integration, finding ways to live in both
worlds. In France, and I think in Muslim societies generally, women are more on the
side of the West.
NPQ | It is not only the Pope who doesn’t like the relativism he sees in
Europe, where the churches may be empty but the mosques are full. It is also the
radical Muslims like the young Moroccan who slit Theo Van Gogh’s throat in the
Netherlands, possibly the world capital of relativism.
GIRARD | This conflict, you are right, is most acute in Europe, especially in the
Netherlands, where the postmodern idea of equality of cultures has been most
enshrined in policy. God knows they are so liberal, which is why this violence should
not have happened.

60 FALL 2013
 In America, there is not really a recognition of how far things have gone—that,
in France, for example, one child out of three is born a Muslim.
At the same time, again, when you see these Muslim girls with their head scarves
debating on French TV, their cultural level is high. They are brilliant and articulate. I
wouldn’t give up on integration, even if the dynamics today are in the opposite direc-
tion. It is our only hope. What would we do if Europe went Muslim?
NPQ | Just as there is clash within Islam between tradition and modernity,
doesn’t Pope Benedict’s crusade against relativism also announce a clash within
the West? But the issue in the West is not about accommodating faith with reason.
It is about resisting a culture of materialism and disbelief by insisting on values, as
the Pope has put it, beyond “egoism and desire.” Figuratively, the conflict is
between the Pope and Madonna (the pop singer).
GIRARD | It is a culture war, yes. I agree. But it is not Ratzinger who has some-
It is a culture war, yes. I agree.
how changed and suddenly become reactionary and conservative. It is the secular cul-
But it is not Ratzinger who
ture that has drifted beyond the pale.
has somehow changed and
Remember, Ratzinger was a supporter of the Vatican II Council that reformed the
suddenly become reactionary
Church in the 1960s. He opposed the idea that the Church should stand still in a mod-
and conservative. It is the
ernizing world. For him, to be a Roman Catholic is to accept that the Church has some-
secular culture that has drifted
thing to learn from the world. At the same time, there is a Truth that doesn’t change:
beyond the pale.
The Gospel. Today, he is just reaffirming his position. He is just standing his ground.
Ratzinger is an intelligent conservative. He wants to avoid the fundamentalism of
some Muslims and Christians—no change at all—but also avoid this idea that what-
ever is new is better than what is old. He wants to resist this dissolving of the Church
in whichever direction the world goes. In this sense, I am pro-Ratzinger.
NPQ | Shortly after 9/11, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, a Catholic,
was widely condemned for saying that Christianity was superior to Islam. When
Ratzinger said a few years ago that Christianity was a superior religion, he also
caused controversy. In 1990, in the encyclical “Redemptoris Missio,” Pope John
Paul II said the same thing.
It should not be surprising that believers would affirm their faith as the true
one. Perhaps it is a mark of the very relativist dominance Pope Benedict con-
demns that this is somehow controversial?
GIRARD | Why would you be a Christian if you didn’t believe in Christ?
Paradoxically, we have become so ethnocentric in our relativism that we feel it is only
OK for others—not us—to think their religion is superior! We are the only ones
with no centrism.
NPQ | Is Christianity superior to other religions?

FALL 2013 61
 GIRARD | Yes. All of my work has been an effort to show that Christianity is
superior and not just another mythology. In mythology, a furious mob mobilizes
against scapegoats held responsible for some huge crisis. The sacrifice of the guilty
victim through collective violence ends the crisis and founds a new order ordained by
the divine. Violence and scapegoating are always present in the mythological defini-
tion of the divine itself.
It is true that the structure of the Gospels is similar to that of mythology in which
a crisis is resolved through a single victim who unites everybody against him, thus rec-
onciling the community. As the Greeks thought, the shock of death of the victim
brings about a catharsis that reconciles. It extinguishes the appetite for violence. For
the Greeks, the tragic death of the hero enabled ordinary people to go back to their
Violence and scapegoating
peaceful lives.
are always present in the
However, in this case, the victim is innocent and the victimizers are guilty.
mythological definition of
Collective violence against the scapegoat as a sacred, founding act is revealed as a lie.
the divine itself.
Christ redeems the victimizers through enduring his suffering, imploring God to
“forgive them for they know not what they do.” He refuses to plead to God to avenge
his victimhood with reciprocal violence. Rather, he turns the other cheek.
The victory of the Cross is a victory of love against the scapegoating cycle of vio-
lence. It punctures the idea that hatred is a sacred duty.
The Gospels do everything that the (Old Testament) Bible had done before, reha-
bilitating a victimized prophet, a wrongly accused victim. But they also universalize
this rehabilitation. They show that, since the foundation of the world, the victims of
all Passion-like murders have been victims of the same mob contagion as Jesus. The
Gospels make this revelation complete because they give to the biblical denunciation
of idolatry a concrete demonstration of how false gods and their violent cultural sys-
tems are generated.
This is the truth missing from mythology, the truth that subverts the violent sys-
tem of this world. This revelation of collective violence as a lie is the earmark of
Christianity. This is what is unique about Christianity. And this uniqueness is true.
NPQ | Leszek Kolakowski, the Marxist humanist philosopher who late in life
wrote The Revenge of the Sacred in Secular Culture, made a distinction between
“pluralistic tolerance”— the respect for other beliefs — and “indifferent toler-
ance,” which refuses to believe there can be any superior Truth. One can be
opposed, as you and Ratzinger are, to value indifference, but must that imply a
kind of theocratic intolerance?
GIRARD | That would be foolish. Christians cannot turn others into scape-
goats in the name of the innocent victim! You don’t have to approve of

62 FALL 2013
Charlemagne converting the Saxons by force or the Crusades to be a good
Christian. Ratzinger is not for that.
NPQ | Unlike his predecessor, who was seen as ecumenical, Benedict is
seen as a sectarian who will not reach out to other religions. Don’t such strong
views against relativism limit an ecumenical approach?
GIRARD | I did not find the famous Assisi meeting scandalous—when John
Paul invited other religious leaders for dialogue and kissed the Koran—as some con-
servatives did. I see no conflict between Benedict strongly affirming his Christian
beliefs in the presence of others who believe as strongly in their own faiths. No one
should imagine that ecumenicism means giving up your belief in the superiority of
your faith.
NPQ | Pope Benedict has also criticized globalization as spreading the
secular relativism he sees as such a great threat around the world. Do you see
this link?
GIRARD | Yes, I think so. It is very difficult for Christianity to defend itself, to
The victory of the Cross is a
resist the demagoguery that says you must go to the extreme and give up the superi-
victory of love against the
ority of Christianity because, after all, it is what every other cult in our global civi-
scapegoating cycle of violence.
lization says about itself.
It punctures the idea that
In this global information age, Christianity doesn’t have the protections against
hatred is a sacred duty.
knowledge that archaic religions have. It favors the truth. It is rational. It opens up to
science, as John Paul II showed, for example, when he said there is no problem with
evolution if you conceive it in a Christian context.
NPQ | One of your most famous theories is of “mimetic rivalry”— that it
is not differences that drive conflict but the desire to possess what the other
possesses. Isn’t globalization “mimetic rivalry” on a planetary scale — pure
competitive rivalry unmediated by respect for the dignity of the person con-
ferred by Christianity? Is Ratzinger also right to worry about globalization from
this standpoint?
GIRARD | Yes. We live in a mimetic world. A century ago, those great world
expositions in Paris or London anticipated globalization by envisioning a world in
which everyone was the friend of everyone else. Today, we are more realistic. We are
aware that globalization doesn’t mean global friendship, but global competition and,
therefore, conflict. That doesn’t mean we will all destroy each other, but it is no happy
global village either.
One can say that globalization started in the 15th century when the Portuguese
sailed around Africa to get to Asia, but now the process is complete across the world.
It is a consequence of Western civilization and, as such, it was Christianity that unified

FALL 2013 63
 the world. But if the world is not unified for the greater responsibility of making
peace, it endangers itself.
NPQ | As you suggest in your theory, the dilution of difference doesn’t end
conflict. In some ways, becoming the same intensifies rivalry. Look at the recent
problems in Asia now that China is modernizing like Japan.
GIRARD | Exactly. This is a bit scary, and it is a rivalry in which the West is not
involved. It has resulted, in my view, from China’s self-assertion. What has happened
to Japan is a mystery. The West was always criticizing it for being too competitive.
Now it no longer seems to want to compete. Isn’t there some wisdom there?
NPQ | What do you think of the rise of the religious right in America?
GIRARD | What we see in America today is more the rise of the Republican
Party than the religious right. I don’t think there are more Christian fundamentalists
What has happened to Japan is
in America today than 30 years ago; it is just that they have become politicized.
a mystery. The West was always
Republicans have focused on issues that bring them to the ballot box. And that is a big
criticizing it for being too
change indeed.
competitive. Now it no longer
The problem with the Christian fundamentalists, though not as much as with the
seems to want to compete.
Muslims, is their view of the violence of God. They often talk these days about the
Isn’t there some wisdom there?
Apocalypse. And there is certainly reason to be concerned about where the world is
headed. But the violence will not come, as they suggest, from God. I find that incred-
ible. It is we humans who are responsible. That, in many ways, is one of the key mes-
sages of the Gospels.
The whole point of the Incarnation is to say that the human and divine are inter-
related in a way that is unique to Christian theology, unthinkable in any other religion
and, in my view, absolutely superior.
Whether in the case of Muslims focused on martyrdom or the fundamentalist
Christians focused on the Apocalypse, the old Greek conception of a God apart from
man is not enough. That is really the meaning of all my work.

64 FALL 2013