Themes for Celebration

   This is a pre-publication draft of an article submitted to Peace and Conflict

Themes for the Celebration of Global Community

 

        The attainment and maintenance of international justice requires the establishment of a global community consciousness based on the emerging solidarity of mutual relationships. Such a community, and its requisite community consciousness, provides a base for international organization and needs to be distinguished from the conformity implicit in a superordinate world group. Any such community would require inclusionary rituals that would celebrate an all-inclusive unity involving common concerns, rituals with themes that could be celebrated by all peoples. After considering the nature of the rituals that are needed, eight possible themes are presented. To see if these themes might be used in a celebration of global community an international research team translated the themes into 16 different languages and conducted a survey of over two thousand people from 25 different nations. All eight of the themes were desired by over 80% of the respondents. When asked if they would like to participate in a celebration of global community, 78% of the sample answered “probably” or “definitely” with over 65% wanting to participate from all but 2 of the sampled nations. The study’s limitations may be addressed by seeing if the themes can be used to create effective celebrations of global community.

Global community; Rituals; Celebrations; International justice; Human communalities  

        Deutsch, Marcus, and Brazaitis (2015) point out that a socio-psychological prerequisite for effective cooperation is a strong community and that the international cooperation needed to deal with global problems requires the development of a global community. We are at a time when we need to imagine ourselves as living in a global community of persons who are conscious of their interdependence and responsibility for one another and a common earth. Studies have begun to explore the concept of global identification: Der-Karabetian, Cao, and Alfaro (2014) have shown that in both the U.S. and Taiwan those who report more global belonging engage in more sustainable environmental behavior. Hackett, Omoto, and Matthews (2015) have shown that those with more of a sense of global community have more concern for human rights and are more apt to donate to Doctors without Borders. Reese and Kohlmann (2015) show that those who endorse items indicating a strong connection to the “world community as a whole” are more apt to choose a small “fair trade” chocolate over a much larger regular bar. McFarland (2016) has summarized the results of numerous studies showing that those who report identifying with “all humanity” rather than with simply local or national community know more about global humanitarian concerns, are more likely to choose to read about humanitarian and human rights issues, and are more likely to give cash winnings to international humanitarian relief. Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013, 858) define global citizenship as, “awareness, caring, and embracing cultural diversity while promoting social justice and sustainability, coupled with a sense of responsibility to act.” And Liu and MacDonald (2016) describe a global dialogic consciousness that compels positive action beyond the limits of local communities.         

        Such investigations suggest that some are beginning to think of themselves as related to others who live in distant nations and that a global community is beginning to form. However, participating in this nascent community needs to be distinguished from an ideal identification with a superordinate national group. The mutuality required by global community cannot be adequately conceptualized by thinking that individuals belonging to a superordinate group based on a conceptual distinction such as our being Earthlings rather than Martians or Homo sapiens rather than chimpanzees. There is a tendency to conflate the concept of community with the concept of group and to fail to distinguish between a personal identity that is dependent on the mutual emotional relations involved in community and the social identity involved in group membership. Community, as conceptualized by John Macmurray (1961a) depends on mutual socioemotional relationships and common concerns whereas a group may be simply based on similar interests, a shared goal, or even a similar name. A global community requires a widespread consciousness that our existence involves us as active contributing members of an actual human community and not simply an ideal commitment to the good of all mankind. It must be based on the socio-emotional relations and the caring inter-actions that are basic to our human identity and allow us to recognize our identity with others regardless of our group boundaries and conceptions or class categories. An actual global community requires a willingness to dialogue with different others and to commit to the promotion of justice, security and well-being for all.  

        Rather than being a superordinate group, a community is a type of society and Kirkpatrick (1986) contrasts Macmurray’s model of community with both individualistic and collectivist models of society: An individualistic society may be conceived in terms of economic contracts between individuals who exercise choices for self-gain in a free market. A collectivist society may be seen as an organic group in which people are functional parts of a greater organism, conform to what is good for the whole, and submit to the laws of a state.  By contrast, Macmurray’s community entails an individuality that is based on socio-emotional relations and caring inter-actions.  It is a community of mutuality, of persons whose trust is greater than their fear, who intend justice for all, and who care for a common earth,

        Even early “natural” human communities, based on kinship and marriage, were held together by ceremonial rituals that reinforced emotional bonds. As these communities grew too large to afford face-to-face contact they became expanded into social entities such as tribal formations, nationalities, religions, and nation-states that were, in an important sense, artificially constructed (Anderson, 1991; de Rivera, 2014). For such constructed entities to be viable a sense of unity and a feeling of belonging had to be intended and cultivated and Durkheim (1912/2008) has described how early societies created a sense of unity by assuming a common ancestor and using ancestor worship or totem ceremonials to create a feeling of oneness. He showed how more modern peoples used analogous rituals to help transcend individual and group differences and reinforce national and religious identities. Throughout history, humans have struggled to deal with the conflicts that tear societies apart. From a sociological perspective, a religion functions to unify a society. And Macmurray (1961b) points out that religion, unlike science and art, attempts to deal with conflict and the problems posed by love and fear. Rather than thought or contemplation, it  uses a different form of a symbolic action—ritual—that is designed to unify communities. 

        Much modern society has become secularized and contemporary religions are often used to divide rather than unify. Indeed, Durkheim noted how the increased spatial size of societies and the increasing division of labor made it difficult for contemporary persons to identify with a common community. However, Durkheim (1898/1975, p. 63) argued that a new “religion of humanity” was necessary and possible. Arguing that religion distinguishes between the sacred and the profane, he suggested that the new religion would be based on a belief of the sacredness of personhood. Might such a belief be developing?  From an historical perspective, Joas (2013) argues that the development of taboos against torture and slavery and an increasing respect for human rights are examples of such a sacralization of personhood.

        If Durkheim and the historians of religion are correct the unity of a global community will require celebratory rituals that reinforce a sense of unity and common values, ceremonies that can create emotional unity and develop and encourage a consciousness of a global community identity. Such celebrations must use rituals with themes that reflect and symbolically intend a common unity. They must express and encourage a caring for others that is greater than fearful self-concern, and that express the sentiment that we are glad to belong together.  

        Whitehouse and Lanman (2014) distinguish between high intensity rituals that create identity fusion and routinized rituals that contribute to group identification, and Collins (2004) has pointed out how community is dependent on ordinary interaction rituals (such as handshaking). However, many are suspicious of ritual that involves emotion (Bellah, 2006). The emotional rituals involved in the formation of France contributed to the suppression of local communities and languages, and the rituals uniting Nazi Germany excluded non-Aryans and other undesirables.” Rituals involving initiation and secret signs may be used to create the elite groups, and hate groups involved in totalitarian societies. However, rituals may also be used to unite people in ways that focus on inclusion rather than exclusion and on equality rather than domination and the submergence of individuality. Páez and Rimé (in press) have shown that the coordinated activity involved in collective gatherings such as marches, concerts, and demonstrations enhances emotions and social integration and can encourage participants to experience the self to be a “we.”        What we must distinguish is activities where the “we” excludes more than it includes. Exclusionary ritual use language that emphasizes belonging to a group and makes contrasts that exclude others by using words that contrast “us” or “our” with “them.” In the case of inclusionary rituals people are united by encouraging participation in communities that welcome others in common celebrations. The rituals that are involved include shared meals, common dances, joint worship, or fairs that have an atmosphere of togetherness that can serve to connect all those who participate. Although such communities may be difficult for outsiders to access, the members within are involved in personal relationships. Membership is not defined by boundaries that distinguish those who belong from those who do not belong to a group, but by a belonging that is dependent on a sense of communality human dignity and responsibility.

        Contemporary nation-states often offer both types of ritual. Compare the words of the U.S. national anthem, “our flag is still there,” with its reference to group conflict, to those in the American folk song “this land is your land, this land is my land.” Both songs invoke togetherness, but the national anthem accents group belonging. By contrast, Woody Guthrie’s folk song accentuates common relationship as in the lines: “this land belongs to you and me.” Currently most of the people of the world live in nation-states that compete for trade and participate in faith communities and ethnic identities that tend to constrain rather than enhance the possibility of mutuality. Yet, local ethnic, religious, and national identities do not have to involve group comparison nor involve exclusionary rituals. We can distinguish prejudice and nationalism from openness and patriotism, and contemporary religious leadership increasingly recognizes the worthiness of other faiths. We can foster local, national, and religious community without emphasizing group differences.

        A just and peaceful global community would have to acknowledge and respect the identities of different ethnicities, nations and faiths. The literature on social cohesion clearly shows the danger of ignoring the identities of smaller entities (Volhardt, Migacheva, & Tropp, 2009). Hence, any rituals used to promote global identity would have to be inclusive, open, and welcoming—celebrations of generosity and compassion—that present identity and freedom in terms of interdependence and encourage the emotional readiness to care for any person with whom one is brought into relation. Yet, paradoxically,

the celebration of global community will need to reflect themes and values that can transcend cultural differences. As Moghaddam (2012) has argued, it may be important to locate cultural diversity against a background that highlights human communalities. Might it be possible to articulate themes that are common enough to be used in world-wide celebrations of global community?        

        Rather than focusing on the needs of individuals as enumerated, for example, in Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, let us consider how meeting these needs involves our dependence on others in community. It seems possible that reflection might lead many people to realize their dependence on four fundamental factors:

        Their family, friendship, and local community

        The goods produced by workers from around the world

        Ancestors who developed the seeds, medicines and technologies used today

        The goodness of sun, plants, animals, earth

        Our own dependence may remind people of the fact that others depend on them, and it may be argued that many people feel a degree of responsibility towards others. Thus, Lerner and Clayton (2011) present evidence that the desire for justice is as fundamental as self-interest, and there is an international acceptance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations, 1948). If a concern for others is genuine, than four important emotional dynamics seem involved in the maintenance of human community:

        The struggle to overcome oppression, inhumanity, and disaster

        The strength gained when the love for those from other lands is greater than our fear

        The courage to build justice for the children who will inherit this world

         Some basic Goodness in the universe that wants justice for all

        Of course, each of these themes is problematic. Celebrating the struggle to overcome oppression suggests a solidarity that may be regarded as more ideal than actual. The statement that strength is gained when love is stronger than fear may seem either confusing or platitudinous. It may be doubted that there is much real concern for justice for others. And the idea of wanting to celebrate some “basic Goodness” that wants justice would seem an anathema to those involved in contemporary secularism.

        In any case, the possibility of such common themes raises two important research questions: First, would the desire to celebrate the above themes really be common to the worlds’ peoples? Given the fact of national differences, if an international sample was offered the possibility of celebrating global community would any of the above themes be desired by a majority from all nations and with a national effect size so small that the theme could be used in international celebrations of global community? Second, if participants were presented with the idea of celebrating the sort of global community suggested by the themes, would people from different nations want to participate in the celebration?

        The possibility of different themes raises some other interesting questions: Are some themes preferred much more than others, and there any important national, age, or gender differences as to which themes are preferred, or in the willingness to participate in a celebration of global identity? However, we are unaware of any theoretical bases for prediction and view these questions about difference as less important than the central questions about commonality.

Method

        Potential participants were told that investigators in different countries (N = 25) were working to see what themes might be used in celebrations of global community and were conducting a short anonymous survey about what people might like to celebrate. Those who elected to take the survey were informed: “Along with our local communities and nations some persons are beginning to believe that we are a single people and can form a global community. Please imagine that you have chance to participate in a celebration of global identity. Below are a number of things that might be acknowledged and celebrated in some way. Please indicate whether you would like them to be part of such a celebration.” They were then presented with the eight themes used in preliminary surveys and asked to indicate: Don’t want, prefer not, would like, or definitely want, on a 1-4 point Likert-Scale. After noting any other theme they would like to see celebrated, they were asked, “Would you like to participate in a celebration of global community?” and given the choice of Not at all, probably not, not sure, probably, and definitely, on a 1-5 point Likert-Scale. They were then asked to provide their age, gender, and nationality, and thanked for their participation.                                                                                        The survey, initiated in English, was translated into Arabic, Basque, Chinese, French, German, Greek, Hindi, Marathi, Malay, Malayalam, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, and Turkish. Translations were checked by back translations and adjusted to insure meanings that were as close to the original English as possible. Most surveys were administered on line by using Qualtics, but in some case it was easier to use an identical paper copy of the survey.

Participants                                                                                                

           To secure as wide participation as possible the author contacted colleagues who he knew were conducting research in different nations. When a nation was not represented he contacted persons who were on lists of those interested in international peace research. An attempt was made to find at least one collaborator in all regions of the world. All were informed that some preliminary research suggested some themes that could be used in celebrations of global community and that it seemed useful to see if people around the world like these themes. They were asked if they would participate in an international research project on developing global community that could begin with a collaborative effort to collect data with a simple one page survey whose responses could be entered into a central base that all could share. The author agreed to write a preliminary article with the hope that individuals would write pieces that focused on the issue in their own country or locale. Over 60 persons in different nation were contacted, 40 agreed to participate and 37 were able to collect data from 25 different nations, and sometimes from different regions of a nation.

        An attempt was made to secure at least 30 respondents from each nation and to secure as broad a range of participants as possible. Some investigators collected data from university students; others targeted specific groups or used Facebook posts. Although this method constrains the making of comparison between nations it allows for some broad international generalizations. There were a total of 2,424 participants, with 64% indicating a female identity. They ranged in age from 11 to 83 with a mean of 27.4 and a median of 22 years. There were 25 nations who were represented by at least 20 respondents and could be included in national comparisons. An additional 28 participants lived in 20 other nations. To explore differences within nations, samples were obtained from three different language groups in India (Hindi, Marathi, and Malayalam), two different groups in Northwest Spain (those identifying as Basque and those identifying as Spanish), two different student groups in the United States (Southern and Northern), and two different universities in Colombia (affluent private and poorer public).

                                        Results

        We first ask whether, across the global sample, some themes seem more desirable. The results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Percentage Response to Theme Inclusion in Celebrations of Global Identity

Theme

N

Don’t want %

Prefer not %

Would like %

Definitely want %

1. Our family, friends, and community

2394

2.0

6.1

39.8

52.1

2. The workers who produce what we need from the earth and in factories, here and around the world

2393

2.8

10.6

49.6

36.9

3. Our ancestors who developed the seeds, medicines, and technologies we use today

2386

3.8

11.5

45.4

39.3

4. The Goodness of our sun, plants, animals and earth

2400

4.0

11.8

36.4

47.8

5. Our struggle to overcome the injustice of oppression, inhumanity and disaster

2400

3.5

7.5

33.8

55.1

6. The strength we gain when our love of people of other lands or faiths is greater than our fear

2393

3.9

11.2

38.3

46.7

7. The courage to build justice for the children who will inherit this world  

2392

1.7

5.8

33.6

59.1

8. Some basic Goodness in the universe  that wants justice for all

2387

4.5

8.9

33.3

53.3

        Although all eight themes are liked by the vast majority of respondents some appear more liked than others and when the frequencies for each theme are submitted to a Friedman’s two- way ANOVA (by ranks for related samples) some differences prove to be highly significant statistically (p.< .001).  A Wilcoxon signed rank tests showed that the 7th theme was significantly preferred to all others. Wilcoxon tests also show that the 1st and 5th were preferred to the 8th, and that the 8th was preferred to the 4th and 6th, which were, in turn significantly preferred to the 2nd and 3rd (all at p. <.005).

        Although, these preferences hold for the sample as a whole they are not necessarily true for individual nations. For example, in the United States there is a significantly preferred preference for the 1st theme and in India for the 8th theme. For those interested in national differences, a table showing the percentages of respondents from each nation who either like or definitely want each of the themes may be found in Appendix A.

        To examine the importance of national differences each theme was scored from 1 to 4. Unilateral ANOVAs and partial eta squared scores were used to evaluate the extent and effect size of national differences. Scheffe tests were used to examine homogeneous sub sets. Table 2 shows the F values for each theme along with the means, standard errors, effect sizes, and homogenous sub-sets.  

Table 2

National Differences for Theme Preference

Theme

F(24, 2340)

Mean (S.E.)

Effect

Size

Homogenous Set 1

Homogenous Set 2

Homogenous Set 3

1

8.16

3.43

(.014)

.077

All but U.S. and India (high values)

All but France (low value)

2

4.47

3.21 (.015)

.044

All homogenous

3

2.14

3.21 (.016)

.022

All homogenous

4

3.85

3.29 (.017)

.038

All homogenous

5

4.03

3.41 (.016)

.040

All homogenous

6

5.18

3.28 (.017)

.050

All homogenous

7

4.32

3.50 (.014)

.043

All homogenous

8

12.28

3.36 (.017)

.112

Serbia, Poland, France, Colombia, and Lebanon (low values)

All but Serbia (low) and Portugal, Turkey and India (high values)

All but Serbia and Poland (low values)

        Although nationality was a significant factor the data proved to be remarkably homogenous with quite small effect sizes except for the eighth theme.  There were no correlations with age except for a small but statistically significant correlation between age and the 7th theme (r = .09, p. <.001). There were small but significant differences between genders. These are shown in Table 3.

Table 3

Gender Differences in Theme Preference

Theme

Male Mean (S.E.)

Female Mean (S.E.)

Statistic

Probability

1

3.37  (.026)

3.45  (.017)

t (1499) = 2.56

<.01

2

3.18  (.027)

3.22  (.018)

t (2328) = 1.42.

N.S.

3

3.17  (.029)

3.22  (.019)

t (2321) = 1.32.

N.S.

4

3.21  (.030)

3.33  (.020)

t (1539) = 3.46

<.001

5

3.32  (.020)

3.46  (.018)

t (1463) = 3.87

.000

6

3.20  (.030)

3.32  (.020)

t (2305) = 3.22

<.001

7

3.43  (.025)

3.55  (.021)

t (1520) = 4.08  

.000

8

3.30  (.030)

3.38  (.026)

t (2329) = 2.34

<.02

 

        It may be noted that, although the themes were heavily supported by both genders, the largest gender differences occurred with regard to the justice themes of 5 and 7.

        Asked to note any other theme they would like to see celebrate many participants wrote additional themes. Suggestions that were made by more than one person are listed in the appendix. Although many involved common humanity, perhaps the most notable suggestions involved the idea of celebrating differences among peoples and individuals.

        Regardless of the desirability of themes, person may or may not wish to participate in an actual celebration of global community. Table 4 shows the extent to which persons indicated a desire to participate.

Table 4

Desire to Participate in a Global Celebration

Desirability

Frequency Chosen

Percent

Not at all

49

2.0

Probably not

113

4.7

Not sure

364

15.2

Probably

1035

43.2

Definitely

834

34.8

Total

2395

100

        The desirability of each of the individual themes was significantly correlated with wanting to participate and the sum of the desirability for the eight themes correlated +.43 (p<.001) with wanting to participate. There was no significant correlation between age and desire to participate. Females showed a slightly higher desire to participate (Mean = 4.07) than males (Mean = 3.98),  t (1514) = 2.22, p. <.03).

        The effect of nationality was examined by scoring wanting to participate on a five point scale and using a unilateral ANOVA. F (22, 2342) = 15.74 MSE = 11.896, p <. 001. National means, standard deviations, and SEs are presented in Table 5. Although there was a considerable range of values, the effect size, as measured by partial eta squared was only .139 and a Scheffe test distinguished only two homogenous subsets. One of these included all nations except for Poland and Serbia (whose values were low). The other included all nations except India, Brazil, Malaysia, Ecuador, Chile, Peru, South Africa, and Romania (whose values were high).  

Table 5

Extent of National Desire to Participate in a Celebration of Global Community

Nation

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Std. Error

Argentina

380

3.73

1.007

.052

Australia

26

4.15

.732

.143

Austria

26

3.85

.784

.154

Brazil

34

4.47

.563

.097

Chile

63

4.41

.754

.095

China

105

3.82

.769

.075

Colombia

205

4.07

.947

.066

Ecuador

29

4.41

.682

.127

France

20

3.95

1.234

.276

Germany

40

3.98

.862

.136

Greece

34

4.09

.753

.129

India

276

4.62

.641

.039

Lebanon

31

3.97

.983

.176

Malaysia

99

4.45

.732

.074

New Zealand

40

4.08

1.023

.162

Peru

73

4.34

.731

.086

Poland

32

3.09

1.146

.203

Portugal

81

3.73

.895

.099

Romania

115

4.25

.836

.078

Russia

42

3.86

1.072

.165

Serbia

63

3.11

1.018

.128

South Africa

70

4.27

.833

.100

Spain

263

3.94

.794

..049

Turkey

30

4.07

.828

.151

USA

190

3.92

.959

.070

Other

28

4.00

1.089

.206

Total

2395

4.04

.932

.019

        The percentage of persons in each nation who either probably or defiantly wanted to participate was over 65% in all nations save for Poland (where only 38% wanted to participate and 28% were not sure) and Serbia (where only 38% wanted to participate and 40% were not sure). The highest percentages were in Malaysia (92%) and India (93%). All percentages are shown in appendix A.

        To probe for possible exceptions to an acceptance of global celebrations, we explored groups that might be less accepting of global community. Within the United States, students from a small private Southern college were slightly less desirous of wanting to participate in a celebration of global community (Mean = 3.84; 73% want), than those from a public university in the North to (Mean = 4.24; 83% want), t (188) =2.30, p. < .03). Within Colombia, students from a private middle and high status university were slightly less desirous Mean = 4.10) than those from a public low and middle status university (Mean = 4.49), t (188) = 2.17, p < .03) Within Spain the mean of those who identified their nationality as Basque (Mean = 3.99) was not significantly different from those who identified as Spanish (Mean = 3.89).  Within India, those who took the questionnaire in Malayalam in Southern India had virtually the same desire to participate (Mean =4.62) as those using Marathi in the West (Mean = 4.64). Both had slightly greater scores than Indians who took the questionnaire in English (Mean = 4.39) but these differences did not quite reach the .05 level of significance. Although there were differences in the preference for themes, there were no significant differences in the desire to participate among political groups in Kerala nor between Dalits and Hindu nationalists in Maharashtra.

Discussion

                        

        Although all the themes were back translated to insure equivalence with their meaning in English, it seems likely that there are important cultural nuances. These may explain national differences in theme preference and are worthy of careful exploration. However, the overall homogeneity of the data and the small effect sizes for nationality suggests that all the themes that were explored could be used in celebrations of global community. All were liked by over 80% of participants. And even the most controversial theme–Some basic Goodness in the universe that wants justice for all—was desired by over 75% in all but two nations. The theme of courage to build justice for the children who will inherit this world was wanted by over 85% in all nations and was completely rejected by less than 2 % of participants. It might be objected that the manner in which the themes were presented made it difficult for respondents to reject them. Certainly the suggestion of “celebrating” global community presents the idea in an appealing way that contrasts with the sort of political-economic globalization that is threatening local communities and national identities. However, there were clear choices to “not want” or “prefer not” each theme and these choices were used by many participants and resulted in clear theme preferences. Further, since responses were anonymous there was no need for respondents to express a desire to participate in a celebration and the fact that many did so suggests that the themes were genuinely appealing. It would seem that the results do not appear to reflect social desirability in any narrow sense. Rather, they appear to reflect social desirability in the sense of an emerging global social norm.

        Of course, our ability to generalize from this set of data is limited by the sample. Although the sample is quite broad in terms of language, nationality, and religion it cannot be considered to be random. The invitation to participate was couched in terms of evaluating themes that might be used in celebrations of global community and those for whom global community was an anathema may not have chosen to participate. Further, the sample came from the classes or Facebook posts of investigators who must have been sympathetic to the idea of global community, and one presumes that the students and acquaintances who were involved would also tend to be sympathetic. To some extent we were able to overcome this limitation by acquiring samples from groups or regions which might be supposed to be less favorable to the idea of global community. Although there were some statistically significant differences the majority of people in all the groups indicated a desire to participate. We were unable to secure samples from religious fundamentalists, extreme nationalists, or from groups representing extreme poverty or wealth. However, we believe that any random sample of persons would confirm our findings. Some support for this belief is provided by a recent survey of six hundred U.S. citizens that asked respondents if they were willing to be part of a global community based on the UN Declaration of Human Rights. The results show that 70% were willing to be part of such a community and over half were willing to commit to being active members (Marcus, Deutsch, & Liu, 2016)

        It is important to note that in spite of strong preferences for most of the possible themes, there were two nations (Serbia and Poland) where only 38% of the sample indicated a clear desire to participate in a celebration of global community. The indication of a desire to participate is a personal endorsement of the idea of global community and the idea was clearly less attractive in these nations. It seems possible that events in Serbia and Poland have led some participants to experience a sense of marginalization and hopelessness about achieving the sort of global community suggested by the themes. Some support for this idea is suggested by the fact that the average national scores for the theme of a basic Goodness in the universe that wants justice for all were significantly lower than those in all the other nations. Of course, such a conjecture needs to be thoroughly tested.

        Those who want to create a global community must translate common themes into rituals that can unify all who wish to participate. To some extent this is already beginning to occur, particularly around the theme of the Goodness of our sun, plants, animals and earth. Thus, Earth Day is now celebrated by events in 190 nations and Earth Hour, when lights are simultaneous turned off for an hour occurred in 178 countries. In the latter case, the World Wildlife Fund (2017) reports that over two million actions occurred during the 2016 earth hour and that there were over 2.5 billion preparatory hashtags on twitter. However, this sort of ritual lacks the emotional involvement required to be fully unifying.

        How might common themes be celebrated in a way that involves emotion yet includes both communalities and differences? It would seem possible to use local music, dance and dress as an emotional background for a simple call and response ritual. In call and response, a form of democratic participation that originated in Sub-Saharan cultures, a leader calls out a theme to which participants respond with a common refrain. Such a ritual may be used in any public gathering and a pilot study using the themes as the call with the response “we are one people” showed that this increased a sense of global identity (de Rivera & Carson, 2015). A celebration of global identity could begin with a statement about the need for global community and how celebrations of this community could be held all over the world. And it could close with the singing of any of the many local songs that suggest unity. The promotion of a sense of global community might be further enhanced by posting videos of such ceremonies on U tube, particularly if these involved videos of children.

        What people say they like and will do is not the same as what they will do. The only way to test whether people will actually participate in celebrations of global community is to hold celebrations and see if they come and are affected in a positive way.

Acknowledgments

        This research would not have been possible without the collaboration of numerous investigators who care about the development of our global community. Their names and contributions to this international project on developing global community are listed below:

Alberto Amutio Careaga         Translation into Basque

Ania Wlodarczyk        Translation and data collection in Poland, Chile, and Ecuador

Augustin Espinosa        Data collection in Peru

Bangchun Liu                Translation and data collection in China

Bernard Rimé                Translation into French

Caitlin Mahoney        Data collection in United States

Camille Souhard        Data collection in France

Charikleia Tstatsaruni        Translation and data collection in Greece

Darío Páez                Translation and data collection in Spain

Fouad Bou Zeineddine   Translation into Arabic and data collection in South Africa

Gerhard Reese                Translation and data collection in Germany

Gerhard Stemberger        Data collection in Austria

Gulcimen Yurtsever        Translation and data collection in Turkey

Harry Carson                Review of the philosophy of community

Isabel Pinto                Translation and data collection in Portugal

James Liu                Data collection in New Zealand

James Page                Data collection in Australia

Jas Laile Suzana Binti Jaafar        Translation and data collection in Malaysia

Jelena Zivkovic        Translation and data collection in Russia

José Ignacio Ruiz         Data collection in Colombia

José Joaquin Pizarro   Translation and data collection in Basque

Julia Marianne Smith        Data collection in United States

Laura Girgiu                   Translation and data collection in Romania

Lisa Gaudette                Manuscript preparation

Lijo Kochakadan Joy        Translation into Malayalam and data collection in India

Marcela Muratori        Data collection in Argentina and assistance with data file

Michael J. Stevens        Data collection in Romania

Nebojša Petrović        Translation and data collection in Serbia

Nekane Basabe Barañano        Translation and data collection in Basque  

Rheem Saab                Data collection in Lebanon

Sonia Gondim             Translation and data collection in Brazil

Suad Awab                 Translation and data collection in Malaysia

Waheeda Khan           Translation into Hindi and data collection in India

Yashpal Jagdand        Translation into Marathi and data collection in India

References

Anderson, R. (1991). Imagined Communities. London, United Kingdom: Verso.

Bellah, R. (2006). Durkheim and ritual. In R. Bellah, & S. M. Tipton (Eds.), The Robert    

Bellah Reader (pp. 150-180). Durham, NC, U.S.A.:  Duke University Press.

Buchan, N. R., Brewer, M. B., Grimalda, G., Wilson, R. K., Fatas, E., & Foddy, M. (2011). Global social identity and global cooperation. Psychological Science, 22, 821-828.

Collins, R. (2004). Interaction ritual chains. Princeton, NJ, U.S.A.: Princeton University Press.

de Rivera, J. (2014). Emotion and the formation of social identities. In C. von Scheve, & M. Salmela (Eds.) Collective emotions (pp. 217-231). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

de Rivera, J., & Carson, H. A. (2016). Cultivating a global identity. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2195-3325.

Der-Karabetian, A., Cao, Y., & Alfaro, M. (2014). Sustainable behavior, perceived globalization impact, world mindedness, identity, and perceived risk in college samples from the United States, China, and Taiwan. Ecopsychology, 6, 218-233.

Deutsch, M., Marcus, E.C., & Brazaitis, S. J(2015). Developing a global community:

A social psychological perspective. In M. Galluccio (Ed.), The psychology of international negotiation: Interpersonal, intercultural and diplomatic perspectives (pp. 329-351). New York, NY, U.S.A.: Springer.  

Durkheim, E. (1898/1975). Individualism and the intellectuals. In W. S. F. Pickering (Ed.), Durkheim on Religion (pp. 59-73). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Durkheim, E. (1912/2008). The elementary forms of religious life. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

FishmanJ. A. (1968). Nationality-nationalism and nation-nationism. In J. A. FishmanC.  

A. Ferguson, & J. Das Gupta (Eds.), Language problems in developing nations (pp. 39-

51). New York, NY, U.S.A.: Wiley.

Hackett, J. D., Omoto, A. M., & Matthews, M. (2015). Human rights: The role of psychological sense of global community. Peace and Conflict, 21, 47-67.

Joas, H. (2013). The sacredness of the person: A new genealogy of human rights. Washington, DC, U.S.A.: Georgetown University Press.

Kirkpatrick, F.G (1986). Community: A trinity of models. Washington D.C., U.S.A.: Georgetown University Press.

Lerner, M. J., & Clayton, S. (2011). Justice and self-interest: Two fundamental motives. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Liu, J. H., & Macdonald, M. (2016). Towards a psychology of global consciousness

through an ethical conception of self in society. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour46, 310-334.

Macmurray, J. (1961 a). Persons in relation. Atlantic Highlands, NJ, USA: Humanities Press.

Macmurray, J. (1961 b). Religion, art, and science: A study of the reflective activities in man. Liverpool, United Kingdom: Liverpool University Press.

Marcus, E. C., Deutsch, M., & Liu, Y. (2016). A study of willingness to participate in the development of a global community. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology23, 89-92.

Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review. 50, 370–96.

McFarland, S. G. (2016). Identification with all humanity: The antithesis of prejudice, and more. In S. G. Sibley & F. K. Barlow (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook on the Psychology of Prejudice (pp. 632-654). New York, NY, U.S.A.: Cambridge University Press.

Moghaddam, f. M. (2012). The omnicultural imperative. Culture & Psychology, 18, 304-330.

Páez, D., & Rimé, B. (in press). Collective emotional gatherings: Their impact on identity fusion, shared beliefs, and social integration.

Reese, G., & Kohlmann, F. (2015). Feeling global, acting ethically: Global identification and fairtrade consumption. The Journal of Social Psychology, 155, 98-106.

        Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and outcomes. International Journal of Psychology48, 858–870.

        United Nations (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights.

Volhardt, J. K., Migacheva, K., & Tropp, L. R. (2009). Social cohesion and tolerance for

 group differences. In J. de Rivera (Ed.), Handbook on Building Cultures of Peace (pp. 139-152). New York, NY, U.S.A.: Springer.

Whitehouse, H., & Lanman, J. A. (2014). The ties that bind us: Ritual, fusion, and identification. Current Anthropology, 55, 674-695.

World Wildlife Fund (2017). Earth hour 2016 report. Retrieved from  

https://www.earthhour.org/EarthHourReports.

Appendix A

Percent Respondents Who Would Like or Definitely Want Each Theme and Who would Probably or Definitely want to Participate

Nation

N

Th 1

Th 2

Th 3

Th 4

Th 5

Th 6

Th 7

Th 8

Want participate

Argentina

380

89

87

85

81

91

72

92

87

65

Australia

26

88

92

77

96

96

100

100

85

81

Austria

26

88

75

72

68

92

88

96

76

69

Brazil

34

97

91

82

88

91

88

94

91

97

Chile

60

93

90

87

92

93

78

95

88

94

China

105

90

84

92

87

92

86

91

92

78

Colombia

205

85

87

83

78

84

67

85

77

77

Ecuador

30

100

80

73

77

90

80

93

80

90

France

21

62

75

80

80

85

65

90

84

75

Germany

40

92

66

74

88

88

98

98

78

78

Greece

34

88

82

74

76

97

91

97

94

85

India

276

98

92

86

87

82

85

94

99

93

Lebanon

31

81

94

81

71

84

87

84

84

81

Malaysia

101

97

95

87

81

96

85

94

99

92

New Zealand

40

98

78

90

95

90

85

88

82

78

Peru

73

87

86

85

91

89

92

99

89

88

Poland

33

82

88

85

73

82

77

94

58

38

Portugal

80

95

90

86

84

98

85

96

92

68

Romania

115

96

96

88

89

92

90

96

91

89

Russia

42

86

79

81

91

86

88

95

88

69

Serbia

63

98

83

88

63

91

81

89

32

38

South Africa

70

96

90

72

91

86

89

97

81

86

Spain

263

93

80

86

88

94

90

95

88

76

Turkey

30

93

86

93

93

93

83

96

97

77

USA

190

97

88

86

85

83

90

89

86

75

Other

28

64

59

57

63

70

64

75

71

82

Average

92

86

85

84

89

85

93

89

78

Appendix B

         

Other Themes for Celebration

The knowledge and appreciation of the diversity in cultures, peoples, skin colors, and religions around the world

The acceptance and respect for others as individuals

Our essential similarities as humans: The common human need for relatedness; the fact that we can communicate and want to; that we are all vulnerable human beings starting from the same place and going to the same place

Love among people; human kindness and generosity; friendship; partnerships between generations and genders

Earth Day and the promotion of sustainability; coming together to protect and cherish the natural world; water; the animals of our world

Our human creativity and inventiveness

Music and the arts

The joy of sports

An undying desire to question, discover, cast light over the shadows of superstation

Achieving world peace; the eradication of armed conflict as a way of resolving disputes

Recovering the sources of work that are being lost

Revolutionary ventures that have changed the world for the better

The elimination of caste

Local Festivals

Those who contribute to our human welfare: Farmers; Teachers who give proper education to children; Grand contributors to human endeavors such as Gandhi and Einstein

Social Equality; the just distribution of wealth

The reduction of poverty; the ending of sickness

Democracy; Freedom; Human rights; Freedom of speech

Those who were slaves; the victims of the paste

Fairness

Disabled persons

The aiding of children who need help

The undying love for all the children of the world

 

 

RESEARCH TEAM

Investigator Nation address
Alberto Amutio Careaga Pais Basque alberto.amutio@ehu.eus
Ania Wlodarczyk Poland anna.wlodarczyk@ehu.eus
Augustin Espinosa Peru agustin.espinosa@pucp.pe
Bernard Rimé Belgium/ French bernard.rime@uclouvain.be
Caitlin Mahoney United States-North caitlin.mahoney@metrostate.edu
Camille Souhard France camille.souhard@progective.com
Chari Tsatsaruni Greece chtsa@bu.edu
Chunchun China psyliu@yahoo.com.cn
Dario Paez Chile darioalexpaez@gmail.com
Fabienne Goux-Baudiment France progective@gmail.com
Fouad Bouzeineddine Arabic/ Lebanon zeineddine87@gmail.com
Gerhard Reese Germany gerhard.reese@posteo.de University of Koblenz-Landau
Gerhard Stemberger Austria g.stemberger@aon.at
Gulcimen Yurtsever Turkey gulcimenyurtsever@gmail.com
Isabel Pinto Portugal ipinto@fpce.up.pt
James Liu New Zealand J.H.Liu@massey.ac.nz
James Page Australia jamessmithpage@hotmail.com University of New England, Armidale
Jas Laile Suzana Binti Jaafar Malaysia laile@um.edu.my University of Malaya
Jelena Zivkovic Russsia jelenagent@gmail.com
Jose Ignacio Ruiz Colombia jose_ignacioru@hotmail.com
Jota –José Pizarro Spain Pais Basque jose.joaquin.pizarro@gmail.com
Julia Marianne Smith United States-South smithjm1@email.wofford.edu
Laura Girgiu Romanian lauragiurgiu31@yahoo.com
Lijo Kochakadan Joy India; Malayalam lijojoy@rajagiri.edu Rajagiri College of Social Sciences, 
Marcela Muratori Argentina marcelamuratori@hotmail.com
Michael J. Stevens Romania mjsteven@ilstu.edu Ovidius University in Romania (Dr. Laura Giurgiu)
Nebojša Petrović Serbia npetrovi@f.bg.ac.rs
Nekane Basabe Barañano Spain nekane.basabe@ehu.eus
Reem Saab Lebanon rim.saab@gmail.com Amer. Univ. of Beirut
Sonia Gondim Brazil sggondim@gmail.com Federal University of Bahia
Sramana
Suad Awab
India; Bengali, Bangladesh
Malaysia
sramana06@gmail.com
suad@um.edu.my
University of Malaya
Waheeda Khan India; Hindi profwkhan@gmail.com
Yashpal jagdand India; Marathi yashjogdand@gmail.com Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
 

Research:
Themes for Celebration of Global Community
Research Team
Data on Themes
Promoting a Sense of Global Community