This is an old dilemma that has endured through many historical vicissitudes, in which the excess of one of the two poles of the equation has generated problems of coexistence. Although digitalization generated a certain resurgence of the spirit and meaning of cooperation and sharing (as expressed in the case of Wikipedia), the truth is that the hegemony of competitive logic, the essence of the capitalist economy, is very evident, and with the arrival of Trump and his followers, it has become overwhelming. In our country, in recent months, and as a result of the debate unleashed by BBVA's attempts to take over Banc Sabadell, the word and the concept competence They have reached levels of a totalizing paradigm. It's not normal for banks to talk to each other through all kinds of media, and for the debate/dialogue about their future to fill, through advertisements, newspaper pages or many minutes of television time. The issue, obviously, doesn't only affect the shareholders of both banking entities, but I don't know if the scope it has ended up having was imaginable.
I don't intend to go into the heart of the matter, which has to do with the limits of banking regulation and the impacts all this will ultimately have on citizens and the real economy. But I do think it's important to point out that it all stems from the hypothesis that success is only based on competition and that excellence is only achieved by outperforming others, seen as adversaries. And in this game, emotions are heavily used, centered on winning. Like in that ad where the fishmongers at a market compete with each other to take customers from the other stall, when in fact all the stalls should play together and cooperate to defend the institution of the municipal market against the growing hegemony of large commercial surfaces.
The competitive dynamic has also entered personal relationships and the spaces we share through the logic of likes and the scores we're constantly asked to give when we go to any service or institution. An OECD report from last year noted that indicators of interpersonal trust have significantly declined, and the number of people who tend to suspect those they don't know is increasing. Ultimately, it's not surprising that in this economic and social context, we speak of an "anxious class," more concerned with defending their own social positions and identifying enemies who might endanger them than with discovering the ties that unite them with other members of the broader communities of which they are a part. And it is precisely this tendency toward every man for himself or blaming the newcomer that increases the difficulties in mobilizing the energies necessary to respond collectively to common problems.
It seems clear that when we talk about quality of life, well-being, or social transformation, we are referring to situations in which people fully live their autonomy, and at the same time coexist, relate, and interact with others, and concern themselves with collective issues. Spaces where the community fabric is stronger recover better and more quickly than those where individualism predominates. The political challenge is to rescue contemporary ideas of personalization and singularity and place them in a social perspective that combines them with reciprocity and community. And this is a significant objective of democracy, of shared values. The capacity to build a world that respects singularity and autonomy, while at the same time being based on what unites us.
Compete or share? What should be increasingly clear is that we must move forward with a perspective of hybridizing what is unique and unique to each of us with what is shared and unites us. Sharing is necessary to compete better. And it is necessary to build individual and collective capacities to be able to share better with those with whom we must inevitably face a future full of uncertainties. We must value the great importance of individual autonomy, but at the same time recognize that we are deeply interdependent beings. And that only collectively shared processes are lasting and resilient. Only in this way will we prevent social Darwinism disguised as meritocracy from devouring the very foundation of human coexistence.
