“Alone, we can do so little; together, we can do so much.” — Helen Keller
Communities have always been defined based on location, identity, or organization. This was true till digitization took over. Post which, we have all somehow tried to define communities for ourselves and lost track of what it meant originally.
While identity-based communities have traditionally included sub-cultures, ethnicities, religious views, multicultural groups, or global civilizations; the most widely recognized communities are the ones that showcased a way of life.
The communities that have popularized people’s minds are virtual communities. These are the ones where knowledge and information are the key driving factors. While the physical community boasts of stronger ties, internet communities have larger resonance. They have the unique ability to cover more geography and provide an opportunity for strangers to interact with one another.
Photographers. Nature Lovers. Writers. Thought leaders. Scientists. Artists. The list of communities goes on and on. All of these communities are based on similarities in interest and thought which is shared by their members.
Communities create a sense of belonging for its members. Everyone feels like they’re a part of something important. It becomes a source of pride for the people involved. In social media parlance, many equate this with validation — the need to be accepted. It’s as important as the need for survival. The ‘feeling of belonging’ which we get from a community is so much more than just a group of people. It’s the very fabric which holds our perception as a human being.
A Brief History Of Community
The very first definition of ‘community’ was framed as ‘a group of men having shared values.’
A value system that extended beyond the usual confines of a family or loved ones usually formed the basis for a community. These were more often than not defined by a commonplace or a defined geography. A community would give rise to a culture. A culture would then require governance and hence governments formed. Which led to economies and development and modernization.
The core element of all communities was always ‘Growth.’
This definition of community has been, over time, stretched to include the ever-changing human landscape. Industrialization, internet, and globalization eventually hacked away on the local aspect of every community and opened the world to everyone. Suddenly anyone could be part of multiple communities. There were no boundaries to hold anyone back. And, this was a good thing.
Because of this, the original definition has rarely ever been a fulfilling one. Yes, it has always shown the way towards bigger and better communities, but the divide has grown too. Look at any community in action in the global society of today. Virtually any collective of humans, which we term as a community, has glaring gaps in the form of differences between the members.
These differences stem from the fact that in a global community there are members from different parts of the world. Each with varying degrees of understanding about the world which is formed basis their roots. Because of the difference in the environment an individual develops in their early days the construct of a global community is very different for everyone.
This inherent quality of a global community was adequately captured by Samuel P. Huntington, whose essay “The Clash of Civilizations?” depicted the emergence of a global culture as a utopian fantasy. This theory faced great criticism by leaders and advocates of a global civilization. But Huntington was right.
He knew that “it is human to hate.”
“for self-definition and motivation people need enemies: competition in business, rivals in achievement, opponents in politics” — Samuel P. Huntington
Take any community and we could find this to be an inherent element. The problem began when the scale of a community exploded to involve people from all over the world. This is the reason we see all these digital communities built for ‘everyone’ loses luster in the long run.
There have to be accommodations to a community that addresses this inherent quality of an individual. No, it’s not about controlling how one feels when there are differences from another in a community. It’s about understanding it and providing a common ground that could help each one of us to empathize with the other even in conflict.
The differences between people of different cultures have taken center stage and eventually comes at a cost — growth. But, this doesn’t have to always hold. There could be a better way.
This Is The New Element Of Community We Need
A definition of community that takes care of the human element of differences is the need today. Building global communities need a framework that could hold together the differences from a mutual place of common ground.
Geography as a common ground is not relevant anymore. We need an all-encompassing commonality. One which could hold discussions to help resolve differences with empathy.
The element, the common ground, we need, could be ‘passion.’ Communities based around passion have always understood that every member means well as their passions are common.
One of the fittest definitions of communities then is this — ‘more than the sum of its membership.’
We’d never see a community based on passion lose sight of growth during a debate. Passion based communities are the only exception when it comes to holding counsel and eventually getting to a conclusion. And the truth is that the communities which don’t grow eventually die.
We as a community need passion at its core. To survive and to grow.
