Bahrain has its own way of building bridges of rapprochement with its human surroundings and adopting the language of quiet and rational dialogue in times of war as in peace. And for her humble conversation, a special glow, and it provides the world with the privacy of its unique and ancient experience in embracing the values of tolerance and reviving it in the fields of life.
In Bahrain, no matter how volatile circumstances or intensity, freedoms remain protected and rights are guaranteed. And we witnessed this continued social, cultural, political and economic development, in addition to the realization of its society that the tendency of peace and adherence to its values is the way to eliminate the dictatorship of intolerance and the lesions of abhorrent hostility.
In response to its last call at the headquarters of the United Nations, the international family became on an annual date – every January 28 – to remind the global conscience of the purposes of this civilized call, which we summarize in: 1- The inevitability of civilized coexistence between human societies, based on respecting the peer as a face of integration, instead of selfish domination and competitiveness, which is assumed by the global order to get rid of its sediments through preaching from the long experiences of long history of history Wars and fighting.
2- Mastering the practices of human coexistence within societies, to address social and intellectual diseases by embracing the “pluralism” approach to coexistence in the space of life interactions. The intended pluralism starts from the base of the pyramid of the social structure, that is, the family nucleus, and extends through the institutions of intellectual enlightenment and civil maturity, to the end of it to the convictions of flexible coexistence that bring between beliefs and opinions, whatever it is, The degree of contrast.
If this understanding is true to achieve the idealism of peaceful coexistence with its dimensions and multiple levels, then the fundamental question arises: How can societies succeed in translating these ideals – as an urgent human necessity – into a practical reality that goes beyond coexistence disturbances, such as the estate and the crisis of trust, and the confiscation of freedoms and rights of others?
Upon dropping this contradiction to our Islamic -Arab history, we find clear warp between the position of coexistence and tolerance, and the controls of preserving and protecting rights and freedoms that are legally demanded, and the harsh “tolerance” phenomenon that infiltrates our societies from time to time. The latest of these examples, the Syrian coast massacre, which showed, not only the fragility of the social structure on which the ideal of preaching is based on principles, but its complete collapse under the repeated attacks of the waves of hostility and bloody violence.
This hostile tendency, which overlooks its ugly face from time to time, is not limited to religions, doctrines, or conflicting nationalities, but rather extends to the debt or doctrine itself, and within the tribe or one clan. Even between the party factions or the same political movement. Al -Ansari thinker described this phenomenon as a state of “collective schizophrenia” of treatment.
Tolerance and the acceptance of the other – the two pillars of peaceful coexistence – are not reduced to teachings that are received or speeches, nor are they “instinct in which human beings are born”, so that societies automatically turn into reconciliation entities, but rather a living behavior that stems from “practice in the first place”, otherwise, these ideal principles will continue to fly over our heads, while we are fierce on our faces.
And if we assume that the theoretical understanding of coexistence is the first way to accept and overcome intellectual and ideological differences, then the course of it requires a correct foundation of the dialogue channels close to the distances between the views, and the consciousness of the considerations of the management of the dispute and its control in a civilized control that does not escape with the escape and contradiction of opinions. Here, the role required for the institutions responsible for building a person, and raising him religiously, civil, and culturally highlights.
Then comes the role of the state’s regulations and laws to supply any attempts to rob the “gift” of diversity and pluralism, and narrow the gap between the principles in its theoretical form and practical practice, which must be associated with a real conversion to those values that are saved for human survival, so the human being is a brother of man: either in religion or a counterpart in creation, as Imam Ali bin Abi Talib, may God be pleased with him, said.
As for the password to release us from the “tolerance” prisons, it is to get rid of the crisis of “dwarf” the national identity of the university in front of the majority of the majority and the wealth of the minority, while preventing the hidden hands from infiltrating through the rear doors.
