Living together in harmony – Rejecting dehumanisation and toxic polarisation

Dietrich Werner, Globethics President
23 May 2025

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises that the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. However, with currently 56 active conflicts, involving 92 countries, the 2024 Global Peace Index notes that “many of the conditions that precede major conflicts are higher than they have been since the end of the Second World War.”¹

In this increasingly alarming context, States tend to spend more on their defence budget rather than on efforts for international peace, social justice, and harmony. The Global Militarisation Index reports that, already in 2023, the global defence spending has increased overall. Western and Central Europe, for instance, witnessed a 13% rise in military spending, the largest since the Cold War.²

This tendency is even more acute in 2024 and 2025. This is happening at a moment where the multilateral system is being weakened and losing its capacity in preventing and resolving conflicts. The deterioration of peace both exacerbates and is nurtured by polarised narratives, which leads to the spread of hatred and even dehumanisation of ‘the other’, amplified by social media.

The world has recently witnessed how much the political discourse has, in some cases, legitimised civilian casualties and normalised terror, mass destruction, and different types of atrocities. In other cases, double standards regarding the respect of human rights and international humanitarian law, on the one hand, and shortsighted transactional politics, on the other, have contributed to the loss of political credibility and widened the gap between world regions and cultures.

Since humanity cannot afford to normalise polarisation, violence and wars, there is an urgency to revitalise the narrative of shared humanity and equal dignity and rights for all, ensuring that political divergences and conflicts do not lead to exacerbated polarisation and dehumanisation of the other. Societal and religious actors play a major role in this battle against the spread of hatred and dehumanisation of the other. Peace cannot be considered merely an option, but rather is the condition of a safe and flourishing future for all.

The meeting was seen as part of a “Trajectory of hope” in a series of recent events dedicated to building unity and fighting polarisations, such as the IPU (Inter-Parliamentary Union) Conference on Interfaith dialogue (Marrakesh, June 2023), the “Faith for Rights” commUNity of practices (Geneva, November 2023 and November 2024), the Global Ethics Forum on “Ethical Leadership for a Re-envisioned Future” (Geneva, September 2024), and the Wilton Park dialogue on “The role and responsibility of religious leaders in times of war, atrocities and polarisation” (February 2025). It will be continued by further meetings in 2025 (IPU conference in Rome, June 2025; Global Ethics Forum in Geneva, October 2025).

The meeting on 16 May reflected on recent shockwaves, which were – and are – experienced by many CSOs and UN organisations due to major and sudden cuts of funds, as assaults on the rule of law. It also analysed increased use of languages of dehumanisation, annexation and aggressive attitudes against migrants and other people, causing major disruptions and destabilisation of the international humanitarian and multilateral cooperation system.

The dialogue articulated a new sense of hope for more close collaboration amongst the civil society and faith actors, not only in the Geneva region but far beyond. It was part of an effort to bring together the largest possible forum of specialised ministries and non-state actors to defend an international order of peace and justice in this crucial moment. In a situation in which autocratic regimes, extremist political actors, tech companies, and powerful economic players put into question core convictions about the validity of rights-based and responsible governance, new and stronger alliances and common platforms are needed for those actors which stand up against any rhetoric of dehumanisation, annexation, annihilation, or destruction of peoples and the earth.

While the world did not encounter a global clash of civilisations as was predicted for the 1990s, the manifold nationalist, regional, and group conflicts of today are much more dangerous, confusing in their complexity and rapidly spread, as they use social media, chatbots, algorithms and the fastest IT communication tools.

The dominant narrative according to which increased militarisation will solve the crisis and can reconstruct the post-WWII peace architecture may be misleading. Instead, we need serious counter narratives, bridging and peace concepts, and efforts to bring people from opposing blocs together and to reconcile divergent interests.

Over and against a new trend towards fatalism and privatisation in our limited bubbles, we should not remain silent but be outspoken on our own ethical convictions. We also should recall the visionaries who founded and directed the United Nations system against many odds in former decades and their visions (like Dag Hammerskjöld, Bhutros-Ghali, Kofi Annan).

The growing normalisation and unchallenged acceptance of widespread violence in public discourse, social media, and some national policies is deeply concerning. To counter this, we must collectively return to shared ethical values and moral standards that uphold human dignity and the integrity of the earth. These principles are clearly outlined in frameworks such as the Toledo Principles, the Rabat Plan of Action, the Faith for Rights initiative, and the OSCE’s common security concepts.

Common convictions noted during the dialogue include:

• The responsibility of politicians to engage in conflict prevention and peaceful solution, which was the original key mandate of the United Nations;
• The crucial role of religious leaders in speaking out firmly and promptly against intolerance, discriminatory stereotyping and instances of hate speech;
• The need to reinvest public funds to support peaceful conflict solution, non-violent means of defusing tensions and non-military means of resistance;
• A priority for strengthening strategic coalitions between faith traditions, ethical orientations, concerned political actors, academics and institutions of research for an ethically responsible politics;
• The recommendation to create more space for civil society organisations to articulate their voices for discerning and strengthening common public interests, the common good, and peace between people and the natural environment;
• The need to encourage networks of concerned religious leaders and faith-based actors to regularly articulate their core values of a sustainable, just and peaceful world in contextualised manners.

As an outcome of the dialogue, a white paper is in development, outlining key recommendations and identifying strategic alliances to be formed for collaborative action towards ethical leadership, peacebuilding, and inclusive governance.

[1] Institute for Economics and Peace. 2024. Global Peace Index. p.2.
[2] Bonn International Centre for Conflict Studies. The Global Militarisation Index. Seen on 03.03.2025