I was recently asked a simple question: What are your thoughts about the world today? The word ‘thought’ is what stayed with me. The thought of the individual.
In this vast and complex world, individuals are not lacking thoughts. We are not unaware. In fact, we are hyper-aware. We read headlines in real time. We analyze global events. We debate politics, culture, economics, climate and technology. Each individual forms opinions about what is wrong and what should be done. But here’s the disconnect: awareness is not action. True change has never come from isolated thought. It requires collective will and despite widespread awareness, we struggle to unify in meaningful ways.
Sociologist Émile Durkheim introduced the concept of collective consciousness which is the shared beliefs and moral attitudes that bind a society together. In theory, collective consciousness produces cohesion and coordinated action. It allows communities to respond decisively to threats and opportunities.
Generations during the 1960s Civil Rights era experienced a shared collective consciousness to injustice. The individual understood the meaning of the word, injustice, the group shared the same meaning of the word and people mobilized together and took action; based on my interpretation of Emile Durkheim where collective consciousness produces cohesive action to threats.
But what happens when we experience what might be called an un-collective consciousness; meaning when millions share concern but remain fragmented and paralyzed in action? We see the problem. We discuss the problem. We post about the problem. But we rarely move together when it truly counts. It reminds me of adults standing on a sidewalk watching two teenagers fighting in the street. Each person thinks, “Someone should step in. I should do something.” Many are thinking the same thing at the same time having a collective thought, but no one does anything. Like the story Nobody – Somebody- Anybody- Anyone. This is not ignorance. This is an example of collectively conscious paralysis.
Another example is those who witness injustice years after the Civile Rights era. If the individual and the group do not exhibit a collective consciousness, if they don’t understand the meaning of words, will they respond the same as those over 40 years ago? My point, which I will clarity again…words today don’t have the same meaning for past generations. If people don’t have the same meaning as generations before they will respond differently.
Psychologists refer to a related phenomenon as the diffusion of responsibility meaning the more people who witness a problem, the less likely any one individual is to act. In many ways, generations after the Civil Rights era have become non-responsive due to becoming desensitized.
In a digitally connected world, we are witnessing everything, all the time with noticeable contradictions, therefore, we are in a fight — socially, culturally, economically, environmentally. Deep down, many of us know it, yet instead of unified movement, we often witness strong reaction to distractions, such as trending outrage, viral moments, short-lived collective bursts that dissolve as quickly as they form. In many ways, it seems reminiscent of the film Idiocracy… not because people lack intelligence, but because distraction has become dominant and sustained attention has eroded.
So what is the solution? Perhaps it begins smaller than you think. Before we attempt to solve global dysfunction… we might start by repairing local connections by…
If collective consciousness binds society, then rebuilding genuine connections may be the first step toward meaningful unity and not forced uniformity. Perhaps the world does not change when millions think the same thing. Perhaps it changes when millions decide to move together in one conscious thought. –
TRAUMA COACHING AND TRAINING CENTER (TCNTC)
Twaski Simmons, TICP
Begin your journey toward trauma-informed growth and healing.
