I’m trying to work my way through the I in we and us. I know that may sound a bit esoteric. But, really, it’s not.
You see, as far as I can tell there can be no we or us unless there is first an I. And a well-defined I, at that. There is, however, an I in interdependent. And, perhaps, that’s where the lesson in all this can be found.
We and us are about together—being together—acting like one. It’s about depending on one another to achieve more than any one of us is capable of alone.
We and us are about trust and the kind of mutual respect that can only exist within the context of community, knowledge, and commitment. It’s about more than just me. And as confusing as that may seem at first, I’m not sure it can be any other way.
As far as I can tell, there can be no we or us without the contribution of a strong I and/or me. But by definition, we and us demand more than just you or me.
It’s complicated because we or us can only exist if we are willing to sacrifice a little bit of ourselves to make it work. If we are satisfied reducing a significant amount of I and me to make it work.
It Takes Two
It takes at least two of us working together to constitute we. To achieve a shared present or future. Just like it takes mutually agreed upon goals and objectives to reflect our vision of that future. Perhaps, most important of all, it takes a strong appreciation of we to define culture and community. But that is only possible when that sense of community reflects the energy and effort of every individual involved.
So, while it may seem complicated at first. It isn’t, really. Not if we are willing to sacrifice a little I in any discussion of we and us and recognize that we will almost always be better than just me.