One of the more consistent concerns of this blog is the challenge of unity. What is the reason why unity is such a great challenge for us? As might be expected, there are a variety of reasons, some of which are more important in certain circumstances, while other concerns are more important in other circumstances. Nonetheless, there are some consistent concerns and trends that keep us from unifying, issues of trust that appear over and over and over again. Given that these problems appear consistent in all parts of life and in all parts of the world, we might ponder the issue and think of what common elements are drastically affecting this world and its people. What we find, as might be expected, is a mix of concerns involving people and a mix of concerns involving the situations that people are in. There are no surprises there.

One of the challenges to unite is fragmentation [1], a problem we discussed recently. It is hard to unite when people are divided into different and narrowly focused blocs. As people shrink their interests to narrow and selfish concerns, and lose interest and knowledge of the state of others, it is fairly easy to divide and conquer. Fragmentation is related to technology, in that technology has enabled people to fragment, but unless the people had narrow concerns already, then fragmentation would not be inevitable. Technology provides options, but the way those options are used depends on our own character. We determine how we take advantage of the choices that we have. All too often we choose to divide rather than unite–and that is our responsibility.

This tendency to divide is often reinforced by history. Our identity is often formed by ways that we are different from others–it is those distinctions in culture and behavior and beliefs that define us, and so long as we are defined by what makes us different, we will be inattentive to that which brings us together. Sadly, when we unite, all too often we unite against a common enemy, and so that smaller-scale unity is forged in larger scale conflict. Fragmented terror groups unite in their hatred of the United States and the pervasive influence of Western civilization. Political coalitions unite in hostility to opposing coalitions and their leaders, and on and on. People divide based on personal history (where bad experiences with individuals leads to mistrust of collective identities) and also divide on larger historical patterns (as economic and political factors reinforce longtime cultural and historical trends). Only if we can reverse those trends and our interpretation of them can we unite, and even then our unity is likely to require the inducement of a common enemy.

Because unity forces us to confront our past (where certain people are default enemies) and confront our own frequent contemporary mindset that leads us to hold on to grudges and wrongs and seek our own selfish inclinations without concern for others, unity is elusive. The fault is not in our times or our situation so much as ourselves. We could choose differently if we so wished. If we wanted to have unity with others, that unity could be found, as most people long for the same love and respect that we do. If we were capable of giving to others what we demanded from them, we could bridge many of the divides that we face. But sadly, we would prefer to fight than to love. Certainly my own native inclination is to fight, and that inclination, from what I have seen, is shared by many others. We surely have to fight these inclinations and see the larger aim of what we are all about.

[1] https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/the-dilemma-of-choice/