Part 7 – is it possible to find a concept that will unify the world?

Anatoly Belyakov: We have slipped off the topic of ancient Greeks in the Kremlin

Oleg Matveychev: Yes. Getting back to our virtual meeting in the Kremlin on creating a worldwide unifying concept. We conclude that we cannot create a meta-meta-narration for already existing meta-narratives, meta-religion for already existing religions, because they transcend any “meta”. All of them are such that there is nothing “higher”. We will keep in reserve the idea of the coming of the Last God as a meta-meta event which will explain everything and unite everybody.

Second, we cannot follow a path down “the zero alternative”, or the rejection of the meta-narratives, because this rejection is already a meta-narration known to the others. And, by the way, known as a hostile alternative, included already as “the enemy”, and causing allergic reactions such as terrorism. We will leave the possibility of technology to split all meta-narratives into their own corners in an enormous virtual space, so they can create ideal worlds and lifestyles in which followers would fully realize their ambitions and did not create conflicts in the real world. Neither the possibility of the Last God or the possibility of a technical virtual world is in our capabilities, so we have them on the horizon in general. There are two extremes, unifying Last God and virtual world separating everything into their own burrows. Inside these two extremes there lies something that can become modern practical politics. What are we going to do, particularly with ideology? What if it was ordered right now?

A.B:  And?

O.M: I see it this way. If we take these universal ideologies as philosophies, we will fall into a kind of endless analysis. If we start to scientifically disassemble and dissect them, we will fall into the “zero alternative”, atheism, and we already talked about that alternative. If we take these universal ideologies as whole systems that not a brick could be moved from, we will come across a struggle of ambitions where everyone is shouting, “God is with us!” and only the Last God can say whom he “is with.” So, neither the scientific approach nor the religion approach will work with these ideologies, and they won’t work for us as a worldwide unifying concept.
What will work is the approach from the point of view; art. “Beauty will save the world!” Here is one historical anecdote. When Luther was protesting against indulgences and was translating the Bible so it was finally understood by common people, at least Germans, Rome answered back that money collected from indulgences goes to finance the Sistine Chapel, which will make the Bible understood by everybody!

Art is language, understood by all without exceptions, understood without words. We look at paintings, sculptures, architecture, listen to music. Art is a common unifier. Even language arts, losing something in translation, are still quite synthetic. Remember Wagner who wanted to make opera such a language for all Germans and all Europe and the world. Additionally, he thought of opera as a unifier of all the arts. Art had developed since that time, now synthetic art will be interactive. It has the spectator as the performer, participant of the show and not a passive object. A game is such art; for example, a computer game; a game that the whole world is playing and is building something, like a civilization or an epic.
So, I am thinking that the ancient Greeks were not stupid, sitting at the meeting of the imagined Lycurgus. It’s possible they may have been dealing not with individual gods, but with the established universal religion of each god. Who told us Poseidon was only the god of the sea? We know that from post-Hesiod and post-Lycurgus reform! One particular god – the brother of Zeus. What if there was a whole religion, “Poseidonism”, with all nymphs and other small deities and supreme attributes? And maybe this religion was so universal, that it did not need anything? And who said that the same thing didn’t happen to other gods who became specific gods as a result of the Lycurgus reform?

A.B: Continuing your thought, it is easy to imagine a fantastic situation where a very powerful conqueror subjugated the Earth and that he was so mighty that he could by force impose a universal religion, in which Sabaoth (Thunder Maker) would be the major god, and Allah, for example, would be his younger brother, a patron of travellers, and Yahweh would be another brother and the patron of merchants. And also Buddha would be the son and patron god for doctors; or something like that.

Now in 3000 years try to go and tell your distant descendants that initially, there were independent religions with individual gods! They would make fun of you!