Abstract
Contemporary society confronts a series of crises; climate disasters, political upheavals, economic uncertainty, and social conflicts dominate the public discourse. The current generation has witnessed an unbroken chain of emergencies, characterized by escalating anxiety and ever-declining institutional trust. Such context has exposed concerning patterns in societal crisis responses: a systematic preference for psychological comfort based on an adversarial framework, over collaborative problem-solving approaches.
This paper analyzes different reactions throughout global crises, examining how individuals construct "us versus them" boundaries to manage anxiety. Through comparative analysis of diverse global crises—from social movements and political disruptions to natural disasters and pandemics—this research demonstrates how both individuals and groups consistently choose extreme reactions and group polarization as anxiety management strategies. These responses represent maladaptive forms of resilience that generate conflict and division rather than fostering long-term stability through institutional transformation.
Keywords: Global crises, Psychological responses, False resilience, Social trust, Collective identity
Copyright © 2024 Scholar of Tomorrow. All SoT articles are distributed under the attribution non-commercial, with no derivative license. This means that anyone is free to share, copy, and distribute an unaltered article for non-commercial purposes provided the original author and source are credited.