The Long Road From I to We

Me? No, you! Amazingly, the first words uttered by babies are not about themselves but about others: mummy, daddy, grandma. They only begin to develop a sense of self after their first birthday. It is possible to test whether the development of this sense of self by marking the child's forehead with a coloured spot and holding up a mirror. Does the child wipe its forehead to remove the spot? One small step for a child but a giant step for mankind. Are we seeing the origins of egoism? Is this how it all begins, the whole catastrophe of self-interest, hunger for power, animosity and fear?

Yes and no. The development of one's own, separate personality does indeed lie at the heart of many serious aberrations. Yet at the same time, contradictory as it sounds, separation is an absolute prerequisite for community. Only healthy, stable personalities are able to connect with others without losing themselves in the group and becoming unhealthy. The birth of the ego marks the start of a lifelong battle. From now on, we will spend our lives vacillating between a desire for autonomy and a longing for togetherness. There are times when these two poles tear us in two. But they can also provide us with magical moments of pure bliss.

Brain researcher Gerald Hüther comments in this respect: "People are always happy when they have an opportunity to satisfy their basic need for connection and closeness on the one hand and growth, autonomy and freedom on the other." Yet the Zeitgeist of past eras gave a very different interpretation to the tensions between these two poles. Over the last 150 years, Western civilization has been dominated by the belief that our lives are dog-eat-dog, where only the strongest survive. Supporters of this view have backed it up by quoting the theories of naturalist Charles Darwin. Have they misunderstood his findings, or consciously twisted them in order to come up with a biological justification for war, egoism and boundless greed? Darwin himself did not identify aggression as being man's driving force. In fact he believed the opposite, that treating people well garners the respect of one's fellow man and earns the love of the people one lives with. This is what he called the greatest joy on earth.

Cooperation drives evolution. This is also something that can be observed in young children. They learn everything from the people around them. The extreme example of 'wolf children' who grow up far from human contact and cannot even walk shows how much we depend on learning from each other. There is an African saying that it takes a village to raise a child. Neurobiology describes the human brain as a social organ which develops its complex connections in relation to other people. We have always intuitively known that we are nothing without others.

Cooperation drives evolution. This is also something that can be observed in young children.

There is a stronger sense of community when a group of people discovers that, when working together, they can handle challenges that they could not tackle alone – whether it is helping neighbours to build a house or developing complex legal systems. Or when they discover the wonderful way in which society as a whole is more than the sum of its parts. Brainstorming produces ideas that the participants would not have come up with on their own, with one thought inspiring the next and collective intelligence coming into play. The philosopher Peter Sloterdijk concludes that: "A group of people is always one degree 'more real' than each of its members."

Wilkinson's surprising message to the developed nations is as follows: when it comes to quality of life, it is not GDP that counts but the strength of a society's solidarity. If there is nothing to bind people together, then societies waste many of the benefits that were the reason for their creation. While communities grow organically, underpinned by shared values, societies are based on the specific expectation of fair exchange between its members. Yet the yawning gap between rich and poor and the lack of social mobility are a threat to the balance of give and take. The foundations of the social contract are crumbling. Cultural expert Christina von Braun also believes that, in extreme cases, the monetary system is at risk: "Any currency can crash if people lose trust in the community."

The global distribution of labour and the constant acceleration of production and innovation require a new type of worker, labelled 'flexible people' by US sociologist Richard Sennett. Mobile, connected and always on the move; new nomads who – if they want to keep their jobs – cannot stay long in one place or build ties with a group of people. In parallel, virtual sociotopes such as Facebook and Twitter have emerged on the Internet. They provide a new relaxed, loose and liquid definition of community and cohesion. The consequences of this remain to be seen. In the real world, social innovators are forging new paths between freedom and solidarity.

But what if it doesn't go smoothly? The dark side of communities is their tendency to shut themselves off. They build walls, and those who are left outside bang their heads against them in frustration. Recent studies by psychologists and brain researchers suggest that aggression is not a basic human instinct but rather a reaction to painful experiences, which often include exclusion. An investigation into the motives of young school shooters showed that 70 percent felt a sense of social exclusion. Whether it is fights between gangs of youths or international conflicts between minorities, when people are denied their basic need to belong, it unleashes a storm within them. But building ramparts does nothing to hold back the storm. Not when those battering themselves against them are determined to get inside at all costs.

If the journey from I to We goes smoothly, then the Self does not get left behind but is a travelling companion that grows and flourishes.

A Fortress Europe with outer borders secured by metre-high fences, soldiers in night-vision goggles and aerial surveillance is something of an anachronism in this respect. Migrants are attracted by the promise of a better life, or indeed are driven by the basic need to survive. Any attempt to prevent them from entering what is – in their eyes – the promised land of Europe will fail because of the sheer numbers of migrants and the boldness engendered by desperation. 

It would make more sense to allow a culture of integration to flourish, which would make it possible for newcomers (generally the bolder, more powerful personalities) to develop their potential. This would also benefit of Europe as a whole. The EU's motto is 'United in Diversity'. The ups and downs of its often-bloody history mean that Europe is particularly suited to promoting a culture of diversity. How many centuries did princedoms and small states have to fight, conquer and subjugate each other before the idea of a nation state took hold, followed by the concept of a common market?

When I was growing up in the 1970s, it was still something special to have an exchange friend in France. In fact there were times when I was called a "sal boche", a dirty Boche. It was still just a few short years since these two neighbours had been arch enemies. And today? They are the closest of allies and are the stable core of NATO and the EU.

Europe has learned its lesson. Really. Tolerance for diversity, the knowledge of how to organize immigration in a constructive way – all the cultural ingredients are present that will allow people from other regions, traditions and religions to join the social majority. There are populist mouthpieces which like to stoke people's fear that Europe will be overrun by foreigners. Sections of the population who rarely have contact with migrants are often particularly susceptible to these messages. They fear foreigners when there are no foreigners.

When people or whole societies feel insecure, there is always a temptation to play the 'ethnic card'. For example, I have just returned from a research trip to Northeast India. Eight states, 45 million people, most of whom have Chinese or Mongolian features. They look different from other Indians. So they are excluded. Young people who go to Delhi to study are sworn at, bullied and beaten. At the same time, the central government neglects the northeastern states and for years has treated them more like a colony than an equal member of the federation.

The barricading of an entire continent stands in stark contrast to the clear economic need for migration.

Experts have identified 300 tribes and subtribes in this region. And now, at a time of globalization and lack of access to money, power and jobs, many members of this ethnic group are beginning to shout loudly about their cultural identity. They are becoming increasingly chauvinistic. They claim a desire to return to their traditions, their roots, but in reality it is about their rights as a minority. They are playing a power game that in its extreme form has led to the creation of armed militias for their 'defence'. A second example relates to a young Serb who beat a 23-year-old Turkish woman to death on a McDonald's car park. He had a history of failed attempts to gain a foothold in German society. In his deep insecurity, his frustration about feeling excluded and his injured pride, what did he do? He boasted on Facebook that he was a Sandžak. Sandžak is a largely Muslim region of Serbia. Yet this young man was neither religious nor Muslim. He was someone who had nothing but simply wanted to be a proud member of a community. A desperate attempt to compensate for the pain caused by his sense of exclusion.

We need a global domestic policy, but this finds itself facing a countertrend, which I would like to call fragmentation. Along with the social and material inequalities already mentioned, there are other very dangerous trends that can tear societies apart. Secular, moderate groups have to find a way to get along with fundamentalist groups. The privatization of common resources, sometimes through the use of military force, creates social divisions. Terrorist movements such as Islamic State or Boko Haram seem to be appearing out of thin air. Separatist movements old and new are now challenging national borders that have long been considered sacrosanct.

The task they face is to move on to the next stage and create an 'individualized community' on a global scale that is bound together by universal values but still provides room for personal and national growth.

Two seemingly contradictory developments are now emerging. On the one hand, the planet seems to be torn apart, full of conflict and divided by individual interests. But on the other hand, there have never been so many people on earth who realize that the great challenges of our time, such as dwindling energy resources, the environment and violent conflict, can only be overcome if we have a functioning global community. It is time for humanity to bite the bullet. This is a greater challenge than any mission to Mars. Perhaps we should call this ambitious project 'We are the world'!