FAQ

In Maslow’s famous Hierarchy of Needs, “belongingness” sits just above basic physiological requirements like nourishment and safety, perhaps the clearest acknowledgment that belonging is a fundamental need for all of us. At OBI, our interest in belongingness is guided by the question of how we can embed belonging within the systems and structures that shape our lives. Our focus on structures reflects the reality that interpersonal work alone cannot fix systemic and structural othering, as illustrated by the wide disparities we see in public health, housing, and educational outcomes across a variety of identity groups.

At its core, structural belonging requires mutual power, access, and opportunity among all groups and individuals within a shared container (such as a society, organization, club, etc). Operationalizing belonging means that all groups and individuals can contribute to the evolution or definition of that to which they seek to belong, which may entail a profound transformation of the container itself, not just the inclusion of individuals within them.

Indeed, in contrast to important concepts related to equity like “diversity” or “inclusion,” belonging is not merely a transactional solution, such as filling seats at a table or being included in existing structures. Rather, belonging is about the transactional and the transformational: it’s building the table together—or maybe deciding we need something other than a table to meet our needs altogether.

“Othering” occurs when a person or group is not seen as a full member of society, as an outsider or “less than” or inferior to other people or groups. It happens at an interpersonal level across many dimensions such as race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, and others, but is also expressed at the group level. When governments and other elites participate in the othering of certain groups, othering reaches its most dangerous level, and can lead to violence, and even genocide.

One of the mechanisms of othering is the practice of breaking—the antithesis of bridging. Breaking occurs when members of a group not only turn inward (known as “bonding,” in social capital terms), but also turn against the “outsider” group or the other. The otherness and threat of the out-group can be used to build psychological or physical walls. It tells the other, “You are not one of us. You don’t belong and you should not get the same public resources or attention and regard that my group gets.” Breaking emerges from a belief that people who are not part of the favored group are somehow dangerous or unworthy. It is largely based on fear, and a feeling of insecurity. These emotions may be grounded on a belief that “those people”—whoever they are—are stealing our jobs, harming our neighborhoods, or that they pose a threat to our sacred values and norms. Read more.

Bridging is a project aimed at crossing identity-based lines and is an essential tool for building belonging. To bridge involves two or more individuals or groups coming together across acknowledged lines of difference in a way that both affirms their distinct identities, and allows for a new, more expansive identity.

Bridging addresses tensions or “breaking” dynamics that sustain division, in order to develop a new “we” that is not only more inclusive, but cohesive, durable, and consistent with bringing about belonging and greater social justice. The new “we” that results need not agree on everything, or even very much; but its members should have a shared empathy and lasting stake in one another. Bridging rejects all strict “us versus them” framings, but without erasing what is different and unique in each party.

Breaking causes fractures; bridging fosters cohesion. When we break, we propagate a fabricated notion of separateness. When we bridge, we soften our identities. We discover multiple identities.

But it’s important to note that bridging is not same-ing. Colorblindness, assimilation and smoothing over difference as though it does not matter bypasses much needed repairs we need to make. Bridging is about increasing acceptance of diverse peoples, values and beliefs while giving us greater access to different parts of ourselves. Building bridges can help expand our social networks, revitalize our communities and establish a more fair and equitable society. It can help us build a large “we” that does not demand assimilation.

Democracy is a core manifestation of belonging at the structural level, as our conception of belonging means that actors in any system have the right to not only be included in that system, but to make demands on it and even change the structure of the system itself. On the shoulders of democracy rests the capacity to make appeals for human rights, the possibility of structural reforms to protect minority groups, and the fundamental ability of individuals to make demands upon key societal institutions.

Despite the importance of democratic norms and structures in our pursuit of belonging, democracy is increasingly being eroded in states globally. In 2022, the V-Dem Institute Democracy Report recorded a record number of nations autocratizing in the last 50 years—33 countries home to 36 percent of the world population, or 2.8 billion people. We must urgently act to counter democratic erosion and the rise of authoritarianism in the US, Europe, and globally.

For more than a decade, we have been experiencing a democratic backsliding in democracies that were deemed “consolidated” (or consolidating). Previously, commonplace belief was that once a democracy matures (when democratic practices and norms become institutionalized), it is unlikely to revert back to undemocratic forms of governance or practices.

In recent years, however, that idea has been challenged, as we have witnessed the erosion of democracy in the United States and in European countries. This democratic erosion is likely a result of different phenomena, including a significant increase in polarization. According to a recent study of 52 countries “where democracies reached pernicious levels of polarization,” exactly half “experienced a downgrading of their democratic rating.”

Pernicious polarization can result in a society splitting into two, or multiple, mutually distrusting groups. Affective polarization, a component of toxic polarization characterized by positive feelings towards those we deem like us and dislike of “the other,” blinds us to our shared humanity and leads citizens to turn a blind eye to undemocratic and exclusionary practices. In this context, what matters is loyalty to the in-group to the detriment of the core democratic norms and systems that underpin belonging at the structural level. It also makes tackling collective challenges, such as growing authoritarianism or the climate crisis, increasingly difficult.

In turn, pervasive mistrust feeds polarization, creating a vicious cycle that is hard to escape without deliberate efforts at building back trust, tackling the sources of grievance, and building a larger “us” where all can belong and play a part in shaping a common future.

Democracy and human rights have a mutually reinforcing and interdependent relationship. Belonging and respect for human rights, including the rights and belonging of minorities, are an essential element of democracy. At the same time, it is democracy that provides an environment where rights and freedoms can be guaranteed and belonging for minorities advanced.

We are seeing the dynamics of polarization and democratic degradation (particularly “us vs. them” breaking across identity lines, the “stacking” of various types of identity, like religious affiliation and race, with partisan identity, and high mistrust towards institutions and each other), playing out globally, but particularly in Europe and the US—two regions that share many political, cultural, and economic dynamics.

The biggest barrier to tackling this shared challenge is not a lack of interest or will, but rather the siloization of existing efforts, coupled with a dearth of open channels for circulating resources, knowledge, and learnings across the field. In Europe, this is the result of social good activities being largely funded by state governments, limiting potential for intra-national efforts. Across the Atlantic, even ostensibly progressive-minded civil society actors have few resources or channels to engage beyond US borders. US actors are further burdened by increasing polarization within the left itself, as progressives clash with each other over issues of identity and strategy, suggesting that widespread “breaking” may be standing in the way of an effective defense of democracy and belonging. In this way, external actors, such as those working in the European context, may bring valuable insight that can complexify and enrich ongoing debates within the US’ pro-democracy left.

We are tackling this siloization by developing novel pathways for the exchange of knowledge, resources, and ideas between relevant actors in both regions. Towards this end, we host private gatherings, curate public conferences and virtual events, and disseminate key research and other resources for use by members of the Forum. The Forum cultivates cross-sector, cross-ideological, and cross-geographical opportunities for bridging and experimentation between members through small grants, mentorship, and other opportunities.

Our goal is to jointly expand our capacity to counter authoritarianism, advance belonging for marginalized groups, and strengthen democracy in Europe, the US, and across the globe.

Learn more about our work on our Activities page.

The Forum is for civic leaders of any political or ideological perspective who are committed to both bridging across difference and advancing belonging for marginalized and minority groups. In particular, the Forum hosts leaders and people with influence working in the nonprofit, public, private, and cultural sectors who are concerned about heightened polarization, rising authoritarianism, and increased “breaking” between identity groups in Europe and the US.

We welcome any leader who shares our belief in the dignity of all people and the importance of building belonging for everyone—even if we may disagree on how we can get there.

The forum is an outgrowth of OBI's vision of belonging as a universal, a commitment which has kept the Institute focused on global issues from its earliest days, including its work exploring Islamophobia in Europe and the US and combating anti-Black racism globally through its participation as an anchor institution in the Atlantic Fellows for Racial Equity program.

In Europe, this commitment led to an 18-month pilot program in 2019 called Toward Belonging. This work, shepherded by OBI Director john a. powell and Rachelle Galloway-Popotas, was a partnership initiative between OBI and four European entities: More in Common, Queen Mary University of London, Sciences Po in Paris, and Counterpoint LLC. Leaders from these organizations, who are European scholars and practitioners with a deep understanding of the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion in Europe, joined OBI in exploring how to approach the work of using the framework of belonging in Europe, and how it could most beneficially be translated in both context and practice. The partners worked together on a set of activities to begin this work: hosting a daylong convening in Paris with 30+ scholars and practitioners from Europe and the US; a set of commissioned papers on belonging in Europe; a series of livestream events; and the awarding of a Creative Fellow to bring a cultural lens to belonging.

As the global pandemic continued to reshape priorities, the initial Toward Belonging pilot wrapped up in mid-2021. In early 2022, OBI reformulated its work in Europe with a focus on belonging, democracy, and polarization, including a specific interest in exploring the tensions between the demands of advancing social justice and those of strengthening multiracial democracy in a time of widespread identity-based breaking and mistrust. After an extended strategy process that included deep listening sessions with 50+ civil society actors and scholars from Europe and the US, the Democracy & Belonging Forum launched in June 2022 with the goal of connecting and resourcing civic leaders in both regions who are committed to centering the needs and concerns of marginalized groups while bridging across lines of difference to counter populist authoritarianism and democratic degradation.

Let us know you’re interested in joining the Forum by filling out this form (link).

You can also follow our work and gain first access to our public events, new research and other content, and further resources by signing up for our e-newsletter here