Questions about this Wednesday's Ideas Cafe meeting on social groups

I usually put out an email to people who may be joining me for our Ideas Cafe discussion on Wednesdays.  I try to introduce the topic and point out the possible interesting questions that are begging for answers on the topic so that we can come prepared for the discussion.

People have been positive about these emails and I thought I would start putting them on the blog here as well.

For this Wednesday,  we will be discussing the nature of social groups, or what we like to refer to as communities.  What do we include in these groups that we consider as part of "us" and what do we exclude as those who are outside of our community or social group and therefore consider as "others"?

We generally think positively about the term "community".  The definition of community is such that those who do not share the common value, experience, or cause of the community is therefore not in the community.  Therefore by definition, a community excludes people.

Some may ask,  why can we not have an "inclusive" community that includes "everyone"?

If we have a community of New Westminster residents,  there is nothing stopping us from being friendly to Burnaby residents and be inclusive of them.

What about Vancouver?, BC? Canada? the world?

At what point does it stop being a community of New Westminster?

On a more problematic scale,  what happens when the interests of New Westminster residents are in conflict with the interests of Burnaby residents?

We all know that there are terrible living conditions in other parts of the world.  Should we not divert our resources to improve these terrible conditions at the detriment of our health care and education needs here?  If we are serious of being in the world community,  we should not be spending money on "discretionary" things like knee surgery or university education for our younger generation while people are starving elsewhere.

Since most of us would object to this, we have to come to the recognition that we consider being able to walk and educate our next generation as more important than people dying of hunger only because we draw a line differentiating us from them.

The line is everywhere dividing all kinds of social groups.  Historically it justifies war and violence to those on the other side of the line.

Is it good to have these divisions?  

Can and should we get rid of these divisions?

Are communities good?  Does it exists at the expense of those it excludes?

How do we empathize with those we disagree?  Is it even possible?

How do we balance the protection of "our own" against the interest of "others" ?  

Can we be patriotic about our country while being a good citizen of the world ?

How can we be compassionate knowing that there are "others" on the other side of the line?

Where do we draw the line???

There are too many questions and not enough answers.  Let's hear your ideas next Wednesday at Waves Coffee House at Columbia and Begbie!