Our natural desire to be desired in the face of today's hyper-individualism

A viral track from Ethiopian artist Abdu Kiar’s latest album features a verse that says, “እንደነ እንትና አልኖርም እንደነ እገሌ፥ በራሴ ነው ምኖረው ልክ እንዳመሌ።”. The rough translation is: “I live my life on my own terms, guided by my own temperament, but not like others.” This verse captures a spirit emerging in contemporary Ethiopian culture that might be referred to as hyper-individualism. 

Common expressions that reflect this same hyper-individualistic sentiment include: “don’t give a damn about others’ opinions”, “compete against your own past self, not other people”, and the now ubiquitous Foucauldian remark, “live your own truth.” 

While there may be contexts where these expressions are valid, I contend that they predominantly represent a flawed, hyper-individualistic attitude developing in our society. This attitude can be roughly encapsulated as: "Others’ opinions and perceptions of me do not matter. Ultimately, it’s all about me, and I can find happiness and fulfillment by living in such a way." This perspective overlooks the crucial role that others’ attention and recognition play in an individual’s life.

Imagine a young man sitting in a cafeteria with friends who are engrossed in their own conversations, laughing and talking amongst themselves, barely acknowledging his presence. They haven’t touched him physically or insulted him; they are simply minding their own business. Yet, how offensive their mere indifference to his existence can be! It can wound him far more than an insult or a slap in the face.

Even without going into detail, this scenario highlights the problem in a view that overlooks our natural need for attention or recognition. Most of us would agree that his friends wronged the young man by ignoring him and denying him their attention. If I were one of his friends and realised afterwards what we had done to him, I would certainly feel deep regret. We can make such mistakes when we’re nervous or preoccupied, but regret always follows when we reflect on our actions. This shows that we believe it is wrong to deny people attention in certain cases. If I genuinely believed that the young man was wrong for seeking our attention, I wouldn't feel regret for ignoring him; I would rather pity his perceived weakness and low self-esteem. But that’s not often the case.

This is not to suggest that insecurity and an excessive need for attention or recognition are normal behaviours. Some people require an inordinate amount of attention, needing continuous approval and praise from others just to function daily. My point is not to justify or criticise this behaviour but to challenge the extremist view that condemns the human desire for attention or recognition as entirely abnormal or unhealthy.

You might be wondering what balanced behaviour lies between abnormal attention-seeking and the complete dismissal of the human desire for attention. Fair point. However, my focus here is solely on demonstrating why the total dismissal of the human desire for attention, or what I have referred to as hyper-individualism, is erroneous.

There is a desire for recognition in humans that is natural and healthy. However, hyper-individualism denies this and regards the desire for recognition as entirely unnecessary. The example above roughly shows the issue with hyper-individualism. To substantiate my argument, I will reference Hegel’s ideas as presented in the first section of “Introduction to the Reading of Hegel: Lectures on the Phenomenology of Spirit” by the esteemed Hegelian philosopher, Alexandre Kojève. 

According to the book, Hegel believed that a conscious being attains self-consciousness only through encounters with other conscious beings. This self-consciousness is not merely an awareness of oneself but represents what sets humans apart from animals: an awareness of their human condition, freedom, autonomy, and dignity. For Hegel, the mutual desire for recognition between subjects accounts for the development of self-consciousness, a unique feature of humans.

Unlike inanimate objects, animals are aware of themselves. However, there is a crucial distinction between the self-awareness of animals and humans. Animals are driven solely by biological desires, such as hunger and sexual drives. In contrast, humans care about dignity and prestige, unlike animals that know no shame and are indifferent to the opinions of others. For Hegel, this crucial distinction marks the boundary between mere self-awareness, as seen in animals, and true self-consciousness, unique to humans.

Humans can develop self-consciousness because “desire” holds inherent value for them rather than it being an instinct which assists survival, like the desire for food and sex. Unlike animals, which only desire tangible things, humans desire to be desired by others. When we fall in love, we desire to be desired by our beloved. Our desire for admiration from others is essentially a desire to be desired by them, to be someone they value or even wish to emulate. In essence, desiring to be the object of others’ desires is desiring “desire itself.” This unique ability is exclusive to humans, distinguishing them from animals and accounting for human self-consciousness.

This desire for recognition in all human beings has resulted in a struggle for respect and recognition among people, giving rise to social standards for assessing whether behaviours and actions are worthy of respect or contempt, similar to how the need for trade led to the creation of money as a standard of value. Animals do not have this desire and thus lack social frameworks for evaluating behaviour, leading to an absence of concepts like shame and dignity and a lack of self-consciousness. This is a simplified summary of the book’s discussion on the origins of dignity and self-consciousness.

Thus, what hyper-individualism views as unhealthy—the human desire for recognition—is actually essential to our identity as a self-conscious species.

How can we renounce what fundamentally defines us and still attain a good and happy life? We cannot. Disregarding the human need for recognition is not as easy as it might seem. Our desire for recognition is deeply rooted in us, both as individuals and as social beings.

What would happen if we truly succeeded in renouncing our natural desire for others' recognition and attention? We would regress to an animal-like state of self-awareness, where dignity and shame are meaningless. We would engage in behaviours now considered shameful and disgraceful, such as public nudity, public sex, open defecation, and lack of hygiene—much like animals do.

Fortunately, we care about what others think of us, and we desire to be loved and respected by others. That is why we have not degenerated into an animal form of life. Caring about what others think of us has saved us.

But where has this hyper-individualist current originated from? 

Francis Fukuyama traces the roots of modern individualism back to the Protestant Reformation led by Martin Luther. Luther opposed the Christianity of his time, which was under the authority of the Catholic Church, favouring instead a focus on personal freedom in one’s relationship with God, cutting out intermediaries like the pope. Liberalism, which emerged much later, wasn’t a “doctrinal or direct political child of the Reformation” contends Fukuyama, but was an adaptation which emerged following its decline. Predicated on the autonomy of the individual from state and clerical authority, it is the precursor to what I refer to as hyper-individualism today. 

Turning specifically to Ethiopia, where the music track mentioned earlier in this article—one that I claimed captures today’s hyper-individualism—went viral, the scenario is somewhat different. Ethiopia has largely remained a non-individualistic society until now. Yet, some signs of hyper-individualism are beginning to emerge within its urban culture. Tracing the roots of hyper-individualism in Ethiopia might require a thorough historical and cultural analysis. Nevertheless, a few key factors can be roughly outlined and discussed. 

Similar to Europe, the emergence of individualism in Ethiopia can be traced to Protestantism. Protestants make up approximately 19 percent, or 21 million, of the Ethiopian population. This is a notable accomplishment considering that Protestantism began spreading in the early 20th century. It started in southern Ethiopia and has since attracted a substantial urban following. The individualistic nature of Protestantism, as seen in Europe, has posed a considerable challenge for Ethiopia's communal culture, which has traditionally been under the influence of the Orthodox Church.

During the imperial era, there was a strong connection between Ethiopian orthodox Church and the state. The communist regime that followed severed this link and was hostile to all religions. The subsequent EPRDF regime, while more secular and promoting religious equality, fostered a better environment for the growth of Protestantism. Although Protestantism, with its individualistic ethos, expanded during the EPRDF era, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church maintained its cultural dominance due to its privileged position and institutional strength. With mainstream culture influenced by the Orthodox Church, the spread of Protestantism, primarily among the lower strata, contributed to creating a fertile environment for the emergence of the individualist culture we see today, albeit to a minimal degree.

The situation is somewhat different under the current Prosperity Party regime led by Abiy Ahmed. Abiy Ahmed, a Protestant Christian, belongs to the Oromo ethnic group, whose political elites feel that their group has been historically sidelined and oppressed by the northern Orthodox Christian kingdoms. They further claim that the Church was complicit in this oppression and now perpetuates a northern Orthodox-centred culture that excludes their own. As a result, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has faced unprecedented attacks under Abiy Ahmed’s administration, with attempts to disintegrate the Church as a nationally unified institution.

Thus, it would not be far from reality to suggest that these attacks, along with the resulting decline in the Church’s influence over mainstream culture, could create a fertile environment for a cultural shift and the emergence of alternative worldviews and lifestyles, such as atheism and individualism.

However, while this fertile environment and Protestantism play a role, they do not by themselves fully account for the rise of hyper-individualism, which is our main concern here. Globalisation, in my view, is a major factor. The introduction of western individualistic and hyper-individualistic culture via global communication media into Ethiopia’s conductive environment offers the best explanation for the emerging signs of hyper-individualism in urban areas where people have access to these external influences.