Description

Martin Buber (1878-1965) was one of one of the founders what is often called dialogical philosophy. Next to Ferdinand Ebner, Franz Rosenzweig and Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, he developed a notion of dialogue and speech thinking that saw the interpersonal relation as central to our philosophical theorizing. Buber’s most famous work I and Thou (Ich und Du) was published in 1923 and lays out a distinction which is at the heart of much of Buber’s philosophical work.

According to Buber, human beings can take on two different attitudes with respect to the world. These two attitudes are associated with two different primary words, or better, word-pairs: I-You^[1] and I-It. For Buber, the I is twofold, it only exists in one of these two attitudes. We can see these two attitudes as two different kinds of relation in which we can stand with the world.

In the I-It mode, I experience the world as a world of objects. I may see a tree as an example of a particular type of tree (say a birch tree), as having certain properties of shape and color, and as being associated with certain chemical processes such as photosynthesis. I see the tree as an object (Gegenstand) separate from other objects. The world for me is ordered in a way that has been conceived of in the past, through my past experiences and knowledge.

In the I-You mode, I am entering into a relationship with the world around me. This relationship is one between persons or subjects, not between a subject and an object. I am present (Gegewart) to the encounter with the other who manisfests himself in the here and now, without me imposing myself or my categories on the other. I am revealing myself to the other as the other reveals himself to me.

Buber sees both attitudes as important for human beings. The I-It attitude is important for our survival, whereas the I-You attitude is something without which we would not be fully human. At the same time, Buber sees the I-It attitude as having more weight than the I-You attitude. On the one hand, historically, Buber sees in increase of what he calls the It-world: Rationalization, objectification, the advancement of science and economy lead to a world where we are pushed more and more into the I-It mode in all areas of our lives. On the other hand, it is in the nature of the I-You relation that with time it will always revert back to an I-It. Whereas the I-It mode can be actively chosen or passively undergone, the I-You mode cannot be made or produced; it is both active and passive, a matter of both will and grace.

The distinction between the two modes or attitudes is one which Buber applies to three different spheres: the sphere of human beings, the sphere of nature, and the sphere of intelligible forms. Hence, in each of these three spheres, I can operate in I-You or in I-It mode. Buber mentions Socrates as a person who was particularly good at cultivating an I-You attitude to his fellow human beings, and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe as an example of a person who cultivated an I-You attitude towards nature.

Buber also generalizes or pluralizes the distinction between I-You and I-It to groups. A group interacting in I-It mode is what he refers to as a society (Gesellschaft) where people primarily interact with each other based on specific interests and goals. Buber also considers the notion of a mass (Menge) where the otherness of the individual other, the person, has disappeared. A group interacting in I-You mode is what Buber refers to as a community (Gemeinschaft), where all members are in living relationships with each other.

Application

Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the Netherlands

According to information from UNHCR, the refugee agency of the United Nations, at the end of 2022, there are roughly 108 million forcibly displaced people worldwide of which 5,4 million are asylum seekers and 35 million are refugees. Over half of these refugees come from Syria, Ukraine or Afghanistan. As for the host countries, Turkey and Iran host most refugees (about 3,5 million each), while the European country hosting most refugees is Germany with 2,1 million. As the number of refugees and asylum seekers has been rising over the last two decades, the question of how to deal with these increasing numbers has been on the political agenda in many European countries and even led to the fall of the Dutch government coalition in July of 2023.

For the Netherlands, UNHCR has counted 218.457 refugees and 31.594 asylum seekers for 2022, numbers that are significantly higher than in previous years. This increase has also had its effects on the housing conditions for asylum seekers in the Netherlands. After registering as an asylum seeker in the Dutch village of Ter Apel and submitting their request for asylum, asylum seekers usually spend the time waiting for a decision on their asylum application in an asylum seeker center (azielzoekerscentrum, azc). Asylum seekers are supposed to hear whether asylum has been granted or not at most six months after their application. However, due to the relatively large number of asylum seekers (or: the relatively small number of officials dealing with the applications), in June 2023, there were 36.870 open applications (compared to 22.300 a year earlier), more than 20.000 of which had been open for more than six months (compared to just about 10.000 a year earlier).^[2] For this reason, in September of 2022, the Dutch government decided to increase the time allowed to decide an asylum application from six to fifteen months.

If the asylum application is accepted and asylum is granted, asylum seekers are then assigned to a specific Dutch municipality where they are eligible for social housing. Due to the limited number of social housing, it usually takes another few months between the acceptance of an application for asylum and the point in time where the asylum seeker obtains his new house or apartment in the municipality to which he has been allocated. During that time, accepted asylum seekers usually remain in the azc.

The growing number of asylum seekers and the limited capacity of the azcs has created problems in some of the locations where azcs are located as well as in some of the locations where an azc is planned, as reported by RTV Oost, Omroep Brabant and NOS. Also, conditions in some of the azcs have come under critical scrutiny as they are overcrowded and people do not get the care they should receive (see RTL Nieuws and NRC).

The national refugee organization Vluchtelingenwerk has published a critical report concerning the way refugees are treated in the official system. The report notes the increasingly long time asylum seekers need to wait for a decision on their application and the problem that the azcs are not equipped for hosting people for such long periods of time. Vluchtelingewerk also documented many situations of inadequate examination of individual cases. A further problem is the infexibility of the system: The report (p.9) mentions an example of an asylum seeker who was able to live at a friend’s place but was required to travel 9 hours every week to an azc just to prove that he was physically still present in the Netherlands, costing him all of his weekly allowance. A request to do this trip just once a month or to register his presence at a location closer to where he was staying was denied.

Buberian Analysis

Returning to Buber’s dichotomy, the previous analysis presented an I-It attitude towards refugees and asylum seekers. Refugees were presented as an abstract mass, the individual asylum seeker was categorized in terms of their country of origin or host country. The way the asylum procedure looks at the refugee is also from an I-It attitude: what kind of asylum seeker is it, is it an economic migrant, does he have a right to asylum or not, etc. Furthermore, being located within an azc, Dutch people outside of the azc also see asylum seekers as an abstract mass and do not usually enter into relationships with them. If there is contact with asylum seekers, it is usually via limited forms of interaction, e.g. as a customer of the supermarket of the village in which the azc is located, or as somebody who causes a nuisance on a train.

What would be needed for Dutch people to develop I-You relationships with an asylum seeker? How could we create relationships that go beyond these limited interactions and categorizations, in which the whole human being is present in non-objectifiying interactions of presence, where community might arise?

Takecarebnb is an organization that offers asylum seekers whose application for asylum has been accepted the opportunity to stay in the home of Dutch people until they have found their own permament accomodation. Since the Dutch family hosting the refugee is usually in the municipality the refugee has been assigned to, the refugee can also already start to settle geographically. So instead of continuing to wait in an overcrowded azc until they have their own house or flat, refugees will be a Bed & Breakfast guest at a Dutch home. Not Airbnb but Takecarebnb.

The organization lists four reasons for the work they do: (1) creating mutual understanding and removing fears; (2) helping with the process of integration of refugees; (3) an enriching experience for the host families; (4) opportunity to develop long-lasting friendships.^[3] We can see the Takecarebnb approach to housing refugees as exemplifying different features of Buber’s I-Thou relationship: Guest and host family live together for a longer period of time, usually a few months. During that time, they share a life. Depending on the individuals involved, interactions can be more or less frequent and more or less superficial. Still, guest and host see each other in their daily lives, as they really are: the way they eat, how they wash dishes, how they react to different situations, maybe what pyjamas they wear. Interaction is not based on preconceived notions of who or what a refugee or a Dutch person is, but is happening anew in every present moment. Appearances are replaced by self-revelation, and opportunities for true dialogue arise. The result can be a community made up of host(s) and guest(s), a community whose members are in living relationship with each other. This can also result in an interchange of roles, where the host is invited for dinner by the guest at the host’s dinner table. Roles and categories become fluid and can change depending on the situation.

Conclusion

What is the added value of applying Buber’s dichotomy between I-It and I-You to the problem of refugee housing in the Netherlands or migration more generally? First, it allows us to interpret the existing problem in a new way. We sketched the problem of growing refugee numbers and their housing situation. At a policy level, this suggests that the problem is one of numbers: We need to either reduce the number of refugees or increase the quantity and the quality of refugee housing. Looking at the problem through Buber’s dichotomy, however, suggests that the deeper problem may be that the current way of dealing with refugees is fundamentally based on an I-It attitude. While this attitude may be partially caused or exacerbated by the growing numbers, it is a different problem diagnosis. For even if the numbers were different, the I-It attitude could remain.

Second, given the altered problem diagnosis, the suggested problem solution is also different. While something may need to be done to better deal with the numbers of asylum seekers, something also needs to be done to move from an I-It to an I-You attitude. Takecarebnb is an example of an organization implementing an approach that fits with this I-You attitude. At the same time, the organization also helps with the number problem: By having more refugees stay with Dutch host families, more room is created in the azcs. This demonstrates that taking an approach to refugees based on Buberian I-Thou relationships also has positive effects on what Buber calls the It-world.

Philosophical Exercises

1. Reflect back on the interactions you have had with people over the past couple of days. In which situations did you experience an I-It attitude? Were there any I-You relationships that occurred? What factors in you, the other, or the situation led to interactions being I-It or I-You?
2. Sign up as a host for Takecarebnb or volunteer in some other way with an organization dealing with migrants. What kinds of situations, actions or interactions lead to I-You relations? When do you experience an I-It attitude?

References & Further Reading

Buber, Martin, 2013. I and Thou. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Pauly, Marc, 2022. “Beyond the political principle: Applying Martin Buber’s philosophy to societal polarization”, Philosophy & Social Criticism, vol. 48(3), p.437-456.