Harry Geels: To play or not to play petanque with some Russians
Harry Geels: To play or not to play petanque with some Russians
This column was originally written in Dutch. This is an English translation.
By Harry Geels
Going on holidays to faraway places increasingly yields unexpected insights, especially as I get older. That happened to me this time in Egypt, where I had two revelations, one about ethics and one about the climate.
Over the past two weeks, my wife and I had the privilege of touring Egypt. Don't worry, this isn't going to be a travelogue, but a few moments were, for me at least, special enough to mention. The first special moment was during a visit to the Aswan Dam, built in the 1960s, which created a large reservoir, Lake Nasser, full of crocodiles that no longer swam into the Nile after the dam was built.
The guide who accompanied us at the time told us that the dam, intended to keep the water level in the Egyptian Nile constant, was initially to be co-financed by the US, the UK and the World Bank, but that they withdrew their funding in 1956 when Egypt refused to sign an anti-communist pact (the Baghdad Pact), after which the Soviet Union took over the financing. A monument was built at the Aswan Dam to seal the cooperation between Russia and Egypt.
Two unexpected questions
As we passed the monument, the guide asked if we would like to have our photo taken there. “No, that's not necessary,” we said. The guide was somewhat surprised and asked again once or twice. When I muttered something about a war in Ukraine, he looked at me blankly. The second moment took place at the end of the holiday, when we were recovering from our tour in an all-inclusive hotel on the Red Sea. An entertainer asked if I wanted to play petanque.
Admittedly, petanque is one of my guilty pleasures. But I still felt uncomfortable when I saw that the group consisted entirely of Russian tourists (the hotel was also full of them, by the way). Playing a game like that didn't feel right, even though the guests were warm and cheerful. How differently are Russians viewed in the world? In Egypt, Russians simply play petanque, but here they are not welcome. Suddenly I realised: ethics are not universal, but local or context-bound.
The philosophical twist
That thought stayed with me. What would Immanuel Kant have said about my dilemma? His deontological ethics revolve around duty and universality, not personal preferences. Act according to a rule of conduct that you would want to become a universal law, he says. So suppose my principle is “I don't play games with people from countries that have started a war”. Can you want this to apply universally? No, because then no one would ever be allowed to play with anyone from a conflict zone.
An alternative: “I treat people as individuals, not as representatives of their state”. That can be elevated to universal law. Kant would therefore say: play along. Not because it has to be fun, but because it is your “duty” to see people as autonomous beings, separate from political instrumentalisation. John Stuart Mill, the utilitarian, would take a different approach: ethics is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Participating brings pleasure to you and the Russians, without direct harm.
Not participating out of political conviction? That does not increase happiness. From a utilitarian perspective, participating is therefore better. And then there is Adam Smith, with his Theory of Moral Sentiments. He would say: put yourself in the other person's shoes. How does it feel for them? They are on holiday, want to relax, not discuss geopolitics. The “impartial spectator” would say: participate, show humanity. Three philosophers, one conclusion: I should have participated. Kant out of duty, Mill out of happiness, Smith out of empathy.
Another revelation
That wasn't my only insight, by the way. My view of the climate transition also took a considerable knock. While we in Europe discuss sustainability, in Egypt, for example, our old smelly diesel cars happily drive around. Electric charging points? I didn't see a single one. The rubbish and diesel fumes were so painful that they even detracted from my holiday enjoyment. Ten years ago, on a holiday in Morocco, it was a similar story. But then it didn't bother me, now it does. Apparently, my perception of the world has been influenced over the past decade.
There was also a positive revelation. We were accompanied in Cairo for two days by a Muslim woman. She was independent, critical of the paternalistic Muslim society and divorced. She was raising her disabled child alone. She told us that more and more women are not wearing headscarves, that women are becoming more independent and that the number of divorces is increasing. She told us how Copts and Muslims live in symbiosis. While we think that the Arab world is not changing, a slow transformation is indeed taking place there.
Conclusion
We tend to view things primarily through the lens of our own interests. There are wars everywhere, but we are mainly interested in the cases that affect us more closely, such as Ukraine and Palestine. This confronts us with the philosophical question: how absolute are our moral frameworks? Are they universal, or merely a product of our own bubble? While we polarise, others are simply playing a game. Perhaps it is even a lesson: the world is not black and white, but a sand-coloured playing field with a few grey metal balls.
This article contains the personal opinion of Harry Geels