Belonging can unite people, but it can also be misused to exclude others.

Group boundaries can change, allowing people to build a wider sense of “we.”

Stronger communities require shared spaces, trust, and institutions that foster belonging.

This month, as the United States celebrated its 250th anniversary, the immortal phrase “we the people” appeared on parade banners, in commemorative essays, in speeches, and across celebrations. The phrase evokes the possibility that people across a diverse society can hold a meaningful identity in common. Even beyond the United States, in countries around the world, “we the people” is shorthand for the idea of the shared public good.

Still, at a time of deep polarization and political gridlock, those three words that form the opening of the preamble of the Constitution can feel more and more elusive as an everyday reality.

Looking at the state of societies globally, it’s now an open question:

Is “we the people” still possible?

Or are we more realistically consigned to a world of “us versus them”?

It’s easy to conclude that “us versus them” is one of the oldest features of human nature. We are group-forming beings. We sort, compare, and defend our own. This is part of how people have survived, organized, and defended themselves across history. The fact is that it’s easier to organize people when there’s an “other.”

Consider the challenge of climate mobilization. For a time, many climate campaigners tried to frame the climate crisis as requiring a “World War II–style mobilization.” The point was understandable—climate change is an existential threat that demands........

© Psychology Today