  We review a general class of models for self-organized dynamics based on
alignment. The dynamics of such systems is governed solely by interactions
among individuals or "agents," with the tendency to adjust to their
`environmental averages'. This, in turn, leads to the formation of clusters,
e.g., colonies of ants, flocks of birds, parties of people, etc. A natural
question which arises in this context is to understand when and how clusters
emerge through the self-alignment of agents, and what type of "rules of
engagement" influence the formation of such clusters. Of particular interest to
us are cases in which the self-organized behavior tends to concentrate into one
cluster, reflecting a consensus of opinions, flocking or concentration of other
positions intrinsic to the dynamics.
  Many standard models for self-organized dynamics in social, biological and
physical science assume that the intensity of alignment increases as agents get
closer, reflecting a common tendency to align with those who think or act
alike. Moreover, "Similarity breeds connection," reflects our intuition that
increasing the intensity of alignment as the difference of positions decreases,
is more likely to lead to a consensus. We argue here that the converse is true:
when the dynamics is driven by local interactions, it is more likely to
approach a consensus when the interactions among agents \emph{increase} as a
function of their difference in position. \emph{Heterophily} --- the tendency
to bond more with those who are different rather than with those who are
similar, plays a decisive r\^{o}le in the process of clustering. We point out
that the number of clusters in heterophilious dynamics \emph{decreases} as the
heterophily dependence among agents increases. In particular, sufficiently
strong heterophilious interactions enhance consensus.
