22 Ideas to Fix the World: Conversations with the World's Foremost Thinkers

16. FRED DALLMAYR: “Genuine dialogue requires not only talking but a great deal of listening”

286 ◆ ◆ ◆ 16 “Genuine dialogue requires not only talking but a great deal of listening” FRED DALLMAYR in conversation with Ghoncheh Tazmini Fred Dallmayr is Packey J. Dee Professor in the Departments of Philosophy and Political Science at the University of Notre Dame. He is the past president of the Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy and is presently a cochair of the World Public Forum “Dialogue of Civilizations.” Fred Dallmayr has written and lectured extensively about the need to respect plurality and foster dialogue among cultures, civilizations , and religions. In a thought-provoking conversation with Ghoncheh Tazmini, he expands upon many of the major themes of his life’s work in the context of continuing political crises. Challenging the prevalent either/or approaches used in mainstream accounts of current political events, he offers a more nuanced approach to philosophy and politics that gets at the context and meaning of events. In light of the Arab Spring and persistent American antagonism with Iran, he argues that Islam and democracy are not inherently inimical and that the Photo courtesy of the World Public Forum “Dialogue of Civilizations.” Fred Dallmayr ◆ ◆ ◆ 287 contentious politics of the Middle East can actually be more deliberative and contested than those in often ambivalent liberal democracies. On the other hand, he cautions that popular revolt may not bring about the sort of modernization or liberalization many Western commentators envision but suggests that local developments may create constructive local modernities that need not be threatening to or opposed to the West. He advocates a broad-based approach to study and critique, referencing thinkers from across the political and geographic spectrum, which is rooted in listening, respecting others’ thoughts and contexts, and finding deep understanding before engaging in criticism or action. GT: In the Arab world, we have seen upheaval, protest, changes of leadership , and, in the case of Libya, international armed intervention. There is a battle for democratic pluralism and universal rights, but where is the Arab Spring really going? Do you think that the western European model of a liberal, secular, capitalist modernity is a feasible ideal in the Arab world? FD: I do not much believe in historical inevitability or the operation of some mechanical “laws” of historical evolution. However, if one looks at the development of societies around the world in the past two hundred years, it is hard not to give credence to Alexis de Tocqueville’s feeling that there seems to be something nearly “providential” about the advance of democracy in the world. Actually, I think this move toward democratization is stronger than the move toward a “secular age” (as Charles Taylor assumes); secularism, for me, is only a by-product, and only in some cases. People everywhere simply have a desire for freedom, not to be oppressed by autocratic (including clerical) elites. When David Pryce-Jones ascribes the idea that “Arabs want freedom and democracy” to a “Eurocentric fantasy ” or inability to grasp “how other societies operate,” he seems to be himself succumbing to Eurocentrism: the notion that only Europeans or people in the West are mature enough to aspire to freedom and self-rule.1 The facts on the ground prove him wrong. Of course, it is an entirely different question whether aspiring to freedom and democracy means 288 ◆ ◆ ◆ Question the Role of Democracy simply an “adaptation to Western norms and standards.” If this were the case, it would surely be a “failed adaptation” (as you say). Your question whether “the Western European model of a liberal, secular , capitalist modernity” is a “feasible ideal in the Arab world” cannot be answered directly because it buries too many other questions: What is the meaning of each term (liberal, secular, capitalist, democracy)? All these terms have multiple meanings. Liberalism can refer to libertarianism , laissez-faire neoliberalism, but also to a Hegelian notion of freedom; democracy can mean procedural democracy, deliberative democracy, social democracy, people’s democracy; and there are different forms of capitalism and secularism in all modern Western societies. Arabs and/or Muslims will have to sort out these meanings and see which one best fits their own circumstances. You call it a “home-grown modernity.” As you can see, I am neither an abstract universalist nor a narrow particularist (or relativist). I believe that all human beings have certain common traits or aspirations: the desire for food and shelter and the yearning for freedom and justice. But they pursue these...