Deindividuation – Dropplet Post #2

A concise yet meaningful post in the shape of an inverted Twitter feed about deindividuation in crowds, class divide, the social moral code, the middle class as the solution, economic stability & a prediction of things to come.

I have not read extensively into this topic and have mostly been able to draw the following thoughts and conclusions from recent mainstream programs. The topic in question is violent crowd behaviour or individuals “behaving badly” in groups. What I understand from these programs (and the odd discussion) is that this behaviour can 1) be induced, 2) be easily awoken within an individual if he/she can hardly be made accountable for his/her actions.

I will not deny that we don’t all have a violent/curious side that requires some taming in given circumstances yet I also know that as a middle-class citizen I would find it awfully hard to harm anyone or better still: I would find it too hard to do something onto another person that I would not like done onto myself or my loved ones.

The following are some brief thoughts on this topic asking for feedback from topic-versed, or also-clueless, visitors and bloggers.

Here we go:
1. Is it correct to say that a person is more likely to misbehave when in a crowd ONLY IF he/she has nothing to loose or protect?

2. (Cnt.) Seems sensible to postulate that people become #*%/@ {*violent/unguarded/dangerous*} in crowds ONLY IF they have nothing left to loose, no one under their care or too much protection from powerful bodies.

3. (Cnt.) Further: the bigger the gap between the social classes the more likely both the poor & rich are to mistreat others or ignore Human Rights & the moral code.

4. (Cnt.) A solution? Either money’s re-distributed & population increase stopped or we should prepare ourselves for medieval-type atrocities.

5. The return of the middle class seems to be both the solution and the proof that would evidence socio-economic stability, globally.

If there is anything I didn’t grasp about deindividuation (aside from its spelling), please, I’d be grateful if you could let me know. If the post fails to make sense pretty-please do also let me know. I think I might have compressed a lot of info in here…

As ever thanks for reading this far (^-^’)!
* Image: Cartoon by Kipper Williams.


3 thoughts on “Deindividuation – Dropplet Post #2

  1. This has always been a fascinating topic for me! Thank you for posting. Have you read M. Scott Peck’s “People of the Lie”? It was an amazing (and disturbing) look into ‘group-think’. One case study was of the massacre of MyLai in Vietnam. The study suggested that morality was deferred to the leaders alleviating psychological responsibility from the American soldiers. That being said, my thoughts are that something else was going on with these men. Even with motivators such as fear, loyalty to one’s country, and simply wanting to please their superiors, what other reason would someone kill women and children unless they regarded them as less than human or became addicted to the power of taking another life.

    Regarding your aversion to harming others…many blessings to you for your restraint. Clearly, you learned from an early age the critical life skill of empathy. Those raised in homes where parents/guardians were driven by carnal desires and self-soothing addictions, skills like empathy and compassion are simply not nurtured. The good news is that it is never too late to learn, in my experience.

    In answer to your inquiries (but I will replace the word “crowds” with “groups”)
    1) I would agree with this statement.True.
    2) True as well. But it is also true that people can behave well at the prompting of positive groups. This is essential for those coming out of dysfunctional environments to be reprogrammed. We call it a “support system”.
    3) True, in the context of inequality. When people realize that we are really not so different from one another, we have the ability to relate more harmoniously.
    4) Socialism sounds good, but in the end, it doesn’t allow people to live out their choices. I think fairness has its place, to be sure, but I think there is a certain poetry in choice. Today for example, I met a homeless person. She was 30 years old and believed this was her lot in life. I think she was right because she absolutely choses to live in scarcity. I don’t believe re-distribution of money follows logically from your previous questions entirely. It is a progression of your ideas, but people are complicated. Perhaps a more effective ‘redistribution’ of anything would be knowledge, mutual respect, an ‘equality’ mindset, and the like. I say this because I see people find abundance in their lives once they believe they are ‘worth it’ (fundamentally). There is a philosophy that I ascribe to that believes there is enough for everyone on the planet. It is in fact a distribution problem and governmental corruption can facilitate segregation. But people often allow their own oppression.
    5) Socio-economic equality may be a latent effect if the above were to manifest. Realistically, we can’t force utopia. (not that I believe you were implying it).

    • Hi Lynn, done. When you read this post yesterday it was indeed shorter and as you mentioned had a censored word with symbols that wasn’t of much help.

      I’ve now elaborated the post a bit more and expanded the “computer stuff” with a bracket containing more detailed words which hopefully will now make more sense. Thanks for stopping by!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s