The appartenence of humans to the religious, cultural organisation, has also developed in the new Europe, of changing and reconstruction, painfully and gratefully, with the roots of the ideological lineages , which will have again and again conflicts with the fluctuant progression of the structures under the influences of traditions. The passivity and the activity of the multicultural currents does not need only tolerance and-culture reception, but also it needs the ability to be homogen and transposable ,under the norms of the real news democracy and for human beings a collocation of the human rights and a collocation of respect.
The breakups of the political systems in the Eastern block countries with bloody and ideological revolutions, the idea of exoneration and liberation from the communistic tyranny, has been interpreted in west Europe variedly, it hat also been critisized, because in the West, the rebels who didn’t observe the law, were very easily punished.
The manipulation of might , and the instruction of Multimedia programs also followed variedly some concepts of interpretation about the roles of revolution with positive and negative purpose. They brought (like it happens in wars),masses of refugees at the doors of the rich countries, which had to get an asylum, like it should be in the human rights to accept these people, but it is limited in a system of numbers, of the strict criteria of proof, which was established. The rebels of the Eastern Block countries were sceptical, they were even regarded sneeringly from some authorities of some countries, especially those, who didn’t have any proof for their political pursuit. And in the tragic reality things were like , that these dissidents, who were often tortured, abused and put in prison, didn’t have proofs at all, about the political persecution, because on the papers , no communistic official would write on the redundancy letter of the prison, that the rebel was a traitor or a fighter against the regime, but they wrote more or less that the rebel was a criminal, a thief or a maniac .Even nowadays
some dissidents are regarded as criminals and as team –incapable committers in the countries of new Europe, because they had the courage , to defy a political game. This hard fate persecute them their whole life, without the possibility of rebellion. Inspirited by the story of fate of the migration and the criminals of culture, the Arab Bassam Tibis conceived a new political philosophy; about the transmutation of the new system of European values and about the fate of people without a country, who aren’t or who have difficulties to integrate in new Europe because of their culture, religion or because of their political concepts An Europe without any identity is a content with mixed cultures, but which occurs fragmentarily, not assimilating because of the conflicts of socialisation and because of the civilisation of multicultural influences, which are pessimistically manifested, in their desperate attempts to find a context, with constructive dialogue. In his book he describes generally the disastrous policy opposite to the migrants, and the miserable existence difficulty of the refugees, moreover he describes the categorisation of the migrants, the world category of other people, who have another religion, another culture and other customs. The appearance of the Ghettos at the limits of the States are aware constructed reservations , , like the old principle of integrated Indians from America , who were forced to live in reservations , or to live after the principle of Theodor Herzl, who thought something similar about the Jews in Germany.
Unconsciously, these individuals are separated from the rest of society, separated from the normal individuals; they are ordered at the other social, and cultural places of society, integrated and isolated from people , who speak the same language.
The moral and social substrate hardly can be noticed, because there are very good, nets prepared, to create a perfect isolation.
The system degrades the pronunciation, the ideas, the personality will be cleaved, or ´ll be totally destroyed , the memory will be destroyed, the self-confidence will be degraded and insecure.
That makes the new candidates of the new democracy good slaves for the society , they accept the workstations for the illiterates , which aren´ t even accepted by the illiterates themselves , who slowly let them assimilate, now formed, transformed in the new phases of self-destruction.
When they are “valuable”, people tell them that they aren´t, they criticise works from those, who are intellectually gifted as kitschy and onerous , untalented and valueless.
The migrants want to assure their places , in a society without discrimination, to let them assimilate themselves , as new commoner with the same rights , like other commoners.
The identity of the commoners is often interpreted by their behaviour, by their traditional culture and religious appartenence. The philosophy in our century doesn’t only engages in programs for orientation of the new Europeans, it also asks questions about the possibilities and the purpose of integration, about the acceptance of new, foreign cultures of other religions and acts impartially, every once in a while it acts aggressively.
Many philosophies deal with these questions about the integration of foreigners for almost 70 years,-
They deal with the migration and with the situation of desidents , who come from countries , from the eastern Block or who come from countries , where unjust wars take place.(Wars between the civilians /civil war).
In the 70-ies there was a core of scientists, philosophies, culture-specialists , who were all interested in new ideas for values and the of difficulty foreigners, the emigrants from the Eastern Block. Regularly meetings and podium- discussions were established; they persuaded politicians, they talked about solutions because of the conflicts and problems of the multicultural societies.
In September 15, 1977, at a very important appointment for a podium –discussion about the problems of East and West, there met important personalities from France, Russia, Pollen, as Eugene Ionesco, Wladimir bukowsky, the Russian philosopher Alexandri Pjatigorsky, the French author Andre Glucksmann, and jJean Francois Revel, as Ilias Janakakis, the emigrated Greek in Czechoslovakia.
He lives in France since 1968, and he is till today professor at the university in Lille.
A reported participant was also Michael Focault, but he wasn’t content with the course of the discussion and that’s the reason why he didn’t want to publish his contribution.
He participated in discussions and was he was an organiser and an editor of periodicals from France doie publisher, Ullstein, Gallimard from Paris, and many people of dissidents .
The identity of the two categories from people, from the West and from the East was a crucial point of this debate, because it dealt with the uniformisation, disinformation and with lies;
The transformation in the middle of the joint practice provokes. Humans are also culturally manipulable , they can either accept or not with a correct policy and culture representative or they can cleave.
On this note, ”Pjatigorsky”, talked about the problem of abstraction , with terms, and definitions like “West” or “westward human”; over dimensionality or rumours about the story, which is cleaved in a community of humans with racist, xenophobic, nationalistic concept and belief , masked from the policy and influenced by the Ministry of interior, and strategists, who arrange psychological wars, to conceive unaware impulses.
“We say, the West must”, “The west has to understand “:-I assure you, the west hasn’t to do anything.” In front of the eyes of the whole world, it is declared in the letter. The world hasn’t got awarness. There isn’t collective awarness. When I review my life as philosopher , from my childhood of the flight of the West, so I can’t regard myself neither as talented, nor as intelligent. They have betrayed us, because, we were blockheads. As well, like in 1792, and 1793, they betrayed the blockheads, how they will be betrayed further on”(…..)..”I understand it, when courageous people , who have been tortured , talk to us about the problem of voting. I understand it very well. But this problem, should be imposed on another human,, it isn’t even allowed to address this problem to another human, because then we are captives of the eternal dichotomy of good and evil which the powerful will make it anytime to this advantage and he will know to use the weaker ones and here no culture can help us; neither the westward one, nor the east one; neither the Russian nor the American or the African. I believe that as long the problem of good, and evil remains a problem of relationship between a group and the society, between a human and two, who gets along with each other as an unity, as long this problem will be insolvable. I think, that there is only one possibility , we don’t want to solve this problem, to put is back, it will come again, when each single person stands in a dialogue for good and evil; in a dialogue without other people, but with god .
But, I’m afraid , that neither the collective nor the church can help him.
Terminatory, I take the liberty to say a word about the philosophy. We have adapted to live in a world , which is dualistically cloven in being and awareness” 1
( Continent-podium discussion.pjatigorsky-238):
Janakakis talked about the limit and about the prohibitions of the people from the east, and about the east mentality. The east mentality and individuality from the collected migrants, are thraumatisated elements of the society, which are set two times under the prohibitions :one time under the east dictators; two times under the west arrogant ideologies, which discriminate against migrants.



We come to the crucial point of the discussion: namely about the item