Theme
The first day was devoted to an appraisal of the kind of world we have inherited from the past. The participants focused not only on conflicts and divisions but also on the values, assets and visions left us by the 20th century which has been an era of great tragedies but also one that opened up new paths. The second day dealt with the main spiritual, intellectual, political and socio-economic harmonies, disharmonies and tensions present in the modern world. And finally, the third day considered hopes for the future, in other words, the options, responsibilities and dilemmas facing us in our quest for a better world. A key component of the 1997 Forum 2000 was the multi-religious gathering that took place at St. Vitus Cathedral at Prague Castle. Its purpose was to reflect on the responsibilities of religions vis-à-vis the future of humanity. It was undoubtedly a historic and most likely an unprecedented event when the assembled forum participants, guests and the general public listened to representatives of Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Protestantism and Buddhism. The deeper symbolic meaning of Forum 2000 was also expressed at the conclusion of that multi-religious assembly, when sixteen leading conference participants, representing different countries and continents lit candles as an expression of hope and as a token of their determination to struggle against poverty, suffering and violence.
Seldom have so many distinguished personalities from so many backgrounds had the chance to sit down at the same table and freely discuss the main issues of the contemporary world. Those at the table included leading politicians, Nobel Prize winners in the fields of literature, medicine and natural sciences alongside eminent sociologists, philosophers and representatives of the great religions. And moreover, they came from all parts of the world. Although there are countless risks involved with a gathering of this kind where the topics are general and there is no detailed program, the first Prague forum showed that its participants were capable of putting their fingers on a number of key global issues and questions that humanity will have to tackle and resolve in the near future if it is to live in peace, mutual respect and co-operation among its various components.
The following conclusions regarding the main issues of our planet emerged from the discussions of Forum 2000:
1. Even though the world is increasingly interconnected in technological and economic terms and is governed by the principle of a global division of labour, giving rise to growing functional dependency – i.e., it is becoming “one world” – it nonetheless remains divided into politically, socially and culturally distinct and even antagonistic parts. The possibility that the new functional integration of the world will lead to new and unprecedented tensions and conflicts is only a seeming paradox. Thus the first Forum 2000 pointed to the risks of integration based solely on a technological and economic rationale.
2. The world is more divided even as it is more interconnected. Each of the great regions of the world not only has its own intrinsic problems and contradictions but is also increasingly confronted by new and difficult issues as regards its relationship with the other cultures and regions, owing to ever–closer links with them.
3. As regards the internal situation of the Western world, the conference participants voiced their fears about whether secularization and the erosion of the spiritual and religious foundations of Western civilization did not threaten the very existence of the richest and most powerful civilization in the world. Many participants, including Václav Havel, stressed the spiritual and philosophical causes of this crisis, while others, such as Imanuel Wallerstein and Cornelius Costoriadis, pointed to its political and economic roots. The crisis of the Western world also has an environmental dimension with wasteful Western societies consuming our planet’s non–renewable resources without due consideration.
Among the key issues of the Western world is the quest for an optimal balance between the principles of a universal, rational and open culture of knowledge (particularly science), economics and politics, on the one hand, and the principles of human solidarity, social cohesiveness, mutual responsibility and local roots, on the other.
The Forum showed that as a result of the creation of supranational groupings – particularly the European Union – one of the urgent issues facing Western societies is the need to redefine the relationship between the nation - state and new supranational political entities. According to a number of Forum 2000 participants, one of the pressing tasks of the coming years will be to define the specific form and function of the nation- state in a situation of increasing globalization.
4. The representatives of countries that did not belong to the core body of rich and powerful nations expressed less attachment to the principles of cognitive and cultural universalism than the intellectuals and politicians from the West. Where they did espouse universalism was essentially with respect to the spiritual and religious bases of the common world to which they would also like to contribute. They indicated or implied that in this respect they were “richer” than the West. Their contributions laid greater stress on the specific features of cultures and moral principles, as well as of political organizations and economic life. They emphasized the need to maintain the plurality of the world. They had an ambivalent attitude to globalisation and took the view that the poorer and weaker parts of the world would be the losers in the globalisation process. Related to that was the theory that present-day neo-liberalism threatened their part of the world and could unleash uncontrollable nationalisms. So far, nationalism had not been a serious issue in many countries in less developed parts of the world. There the most important problems have tended to be poverty, rapid population growth, inadequate technology and social infrastructures, and unstable and often corrupt state institutions.
Thus, the first Forum 2000 pointed to a number of key problems of our time, to which future conferences will return in different forms.