Question: You speak about the need of uniting the whole nation into one family, but isn’t this the dream of the extremist right wing in Europe: “We are one family, and they are not!”?
Answer: The problem of the extremist right wing is that it puts its nation in a special position, above the other nations. Here, on the other hand, we don’t speak about being superior to others but about unity among the people, so why not?
If I am French, for example, other countries don’t interest me; France is quite enough for me and I don’t want those who are not considered French to live in it. What is more being French is a matter of culture and not nationality.
They may be Belgian and even Jews but as long as we have one general unified culture and a common perspective, France is our common state and we accept its constitution and its laws, its customs, its norms, and its language.
Thus, if a certain sector intensifies this unity, it makes no difference if he is from the right, the left, or the center of the political map, this attitude is good as long as it isn’t fulfilled at the expense of other countries. I don’t look at others. I simply want my state to live in peace and harmony, to be happy and to prosper.
What’s wrong with that? A person worries about his country and wants his people to live as one family, and even if he lacks the wide perspective or the moral powers to worry about the citizens of other countries and even if it is called nationalism, it is in a good sense. He isn’t a chauvinist and doesn’t hate others and foreigners. He only cares about his own people but not at the expense of others.
It is true that in this case the country is unwilling to be part of organizations like the current EU, but it is actually unnecessary to be part of them. First, the specific nation undergoes a new form of education, aspiring for equality, unity, and a general common standard of living that everyone accepts. People gradually absorb new values and already wish to attain some equal optimal average basket of basic goods and services for everyone.
We don’t measure everyone by the same standard, of course. A comfortable life can still mean different things to different people to some extent, but on the whole the differences are small and merely a social act and not a social abyss as we see today.
Question: Will the extremist right wing be more successful if they accept such an approach?
Answer: Of course, but in order to do so the law has to be changed in the right direction. On the whole, all the citizens of the state have to accept the state culture and they have to be French, for example, regardless of any religious faith. A person has to be loyal to country he lives in.
African Americans in the US, for example, do not act against their country. They actually feel that they are Americans. They have conflicts with other sectors but they live in their homeland.
Accordingly, even if you are Muslim living in Europe, you have to be loyal to the country you live in, since otherwise you will be denied the right to live there.
Question: Is this kind of national unity a precondition for global unity?
Answer: No, but now we are speaking about a specific region, about European states where the tension between different sectors is growing and with regard to that a unified Europe is not yet part of the agenda. We can speak about economic and military cooperation, but this isn’t unity, only cooperation based on contracts.
On the other hand, true unity symbolizes the transition to family relations. It is much more intense, intimate, deep, and comprehensive when all of Europe actually becomes the common home of all its inhabitants. But they are unable to achieve that today because they are very far from it.
From KabTV’s “A New Life” 9/9/14