The intensification of human relationships on a global scale feeds the speed, breadth and depth of this hybridization process, which involves every realm of nature and human life. And yet, contrary to its etymological roots, hybridity is not so much the manifestation of hybris (which for the Ancient Greeks implied the violation of rules and order in nature), and more the very essence of all that exists. In particular, human beings have a hybrid nature, which finds new ways of manifesting itself, with through crises of identity or changing relationships.
If, in general, it is the role of politics to transcend the present, with its networks of relationships and multiple identites, by highlighting the shared goals of particular communities, then globalisation seems to forge a new path, which is inherently hybrid, and is required to respond, in different places and times, to the new demands of citizenship, to new rights and duties, and new dangers for human life. Hybridity can be understood in terms of the relationship between the objective and subjective, between nature and culture, local and global, or human and inhuman, but it always produces new outcomes; politics can only take on the most important challenges with the aim of achieving an ordered coexistence.
It is, though, clear that this question, perhaps more than others, needs to be faced, both theoretically, by those who seek knowledge, and practically, by those who attempt to guide our future, in line with an interdisciplinary approach. In what new ways does the relationship between globalisation and hybridity manifest itself? What is a political hybrid in today’s world? Does hybridity imply development or decline? The comparison between contrasting views will provide for more complete answers to the questions posed by natural history and mankind.