A very interesting and engaging perspective
“The political thought of John Gray provides an unblinking vision of the world, a perspective of unclouded realism which reveals the intractability of today’s most pressing problems. Both Christian and Enlightenment ideologies have perpetuated the myth that humanity’s problems can be overcome, that history is a narrative of man’s progression and perfectibility. According to Gray, such ideas, which were typified by the Positivist movement, have come to rest at the core of liberal political philosophies, and are exemplified by Fukuyaman assertion that the ideals of Western liberalism represent the historical end-point of man’s ideological evolution. For Gray, however, claims to this effect are grounded on a number of flawed assumptions. In the first instance, they reproduce a Christian anthropocentrism which elevates the ‘story of mankind’ to a position of unparalleled significance. Secondly, they assume that ‘humanity’ exists, that divergent and conflicting humans constitute a collective body, a body which not only has a shared past, but also a unique destiny. Thirdly, they sustain the Eurocentric ideology of modernisation, which not only assumes that the advance of human knowledge enforces the authority of Western liberal values, but that there can be rational agreement on a single way of life. In short, Gray argues that these assumptions ignore the enduring realities of the human species. Humanity cannot progress because humanity does not exist; there are only humans, driven by conflicting needs and incommensurable definitions of the best way of life. As they have done throughout history, these conflicts of values will continue to emerge, and it is only in the presence of generic evils* – the effects of which can only be minimised rather than eradicated – that a specific way of life might be considered inferior to others. The advance of human knowledge will not bring about convergence on an ideal form of life, and will not precipitate gains in ethics and politics, as history is an unending cycle. For Gray, this is the world as history has shown it to exist, not the utopian illusion which history has failed to deliver.”
__________
“Whilst he argues that there is no regime which we can call the best, Gray does not suggest that all regimes are capable of satisfying ‘generically human needs’, the needs which are common to all human beings. On these grounds, Gray has tentatively suggested a series of conditions which do not figure as part of the ‘diversity of goods and evils’, and so cannot be endured or imposed as simply a different definition of the good. These are what might be referred to generic evils, and it is only in their presence that one way of life can be judged in respect to others. Among them, Gray includes the subjection of individuals or groups to enduring poverty, preventable disease, persecution, torture and genocide (Gray, 2004b: 66), yet to the extent that conflicts between values cannot be overcome, Gray suggests that the presence of these evils cannot be suppressed indefinitely. For Gray, history is a cycle between civilisation and barbarism, and whilst some evils may be held back for a time, these gains are never cumulative, guaranteed or absolute.
—Kyle Piper, 2010
Comments