The Other and the Self

      It is an aspect of human nature to seek out the differences and similarities between yourself and the people around you. This establishes distinctions between the citizens of the world; creating cultures, societies and social classes that make up the category of the “other.” Without the other, there is no way to define the self, because the other is defined as something different from the self. Therefore, the other and the self are counterparts; equal because they help define each other. Because it is impossible to eliminate the self, it is impossible to eliminate the other as well. Although history proves that many consider the elimination of the other to be a worldwide ambition, there is no way for “the other” to cease to exist while “the self” continues.

            The human identity is what embodies the self. Humans look at their own societies and cultures as root of the self. However, the sphere of the self can be defined in many ways. One way to analyze the self is as a society. When looking at differences in a society, the largest among the people is often class. Frequently, a society will set a goal to eliminate the other within them; a prime example of such an attempt of elimination is the formation of the Soviet Union. This state was formed under the principle of communism. Communism is a principle created to generate a classless society; in other words, to eliminate the other. However, this state eventually fell apart along with their communist society, reviving a society with classes. Among other reasons, this communist society did not function well because it eliminated the other. When there is no one for citizens to compete and compare to, not only is there no other, but there is no self as well. A society will not function without a definition of who a person is and what they are working for, which is essentially what happens with the absence of both a self and other.

            In the sphere of the world, the other is defined more broadly; class still differentiates the two bodies, however, the distinction between them is much greater. If we now define the self as an industrial state, the other is defined as developing states. Many organizations intend to eliminate the other by helping them become industrialized and providing them with the means to heighten their standing among states. However, these organizations may be successful in reducing the gap between the self and the other, they will never successfully eliminate it because the worldwide society will not be able to function. Without the other, or the developing states, there would be no definition of the self, or the industrial states. Thus, society would not be able to function as it does now.

            Although a fair society without class and other differences seems appealing, it is inevitably impossible to achieve and sustain. As history demonstrates, eliminating the other is impossible. No matter the sphere it is defined in, whether it is a person or the world, the self cannot function without the other and a society cannot function without a self. Therefore, society cannot function without “the other,” making it impossible to remove, as so many have set out to do. Because the other is impossible to eliminate, those focusing on doing so should instead attempt to lessen the gap between the self and the other, leaving more bearable differences and a functioning society and world.