Groupthink, Groupthink, and the War on All Men

Sheep brain woman

The Emperor Wears No Clothes

The Emperor neglects matters of state and spends his money on clothing to increase his personal prestige. The leader becomes susceptible to charlatans who convince everyone around him that only smart people can see the thread they are weaving into cloth.

When a peasant boy points out the emperor is naked, the boy loses his job, gets blocked from twitter, and there’s an FBI investigation, his GoFundMe canceled and a Congressional inquiry into his previous financial dealings.

He’s then jailed for sedition, but not before everyone can see that the Emperor actually isn’t wearing any clothes.

Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign Policy Decisions and Fiascoes

In the November 1970 issue of Psychology Today, Irving Janis writes about groups of right-leaning military men who become trapped in echo chambers, group assumptions, and prestige traps.  

Quotes from Psychology Today 

“Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of well-intentioned people makes irrational or non-optimal decisions spurred by the urge to conform or the belief that dissent is impossible. The problematic or premature consensus that is characteristic of groupthink may be fueled by a particular agenda—or it may be due to group members valuing harmony and coherence above critical thought.”

“Individuals tend to refrain from expressing doubts and judgments or disagreeing with the consensus. In the interest of making a decision that furthers their group cause, members may also ignore ethical or moral consequences. While it is often invoked at the level of geopolitics or within business organizations, groupthink can also refer to subtler processes of social or ideological conformity, such as participating in bullying or rationalizing a poor decision being made by one’s friends.”

Some casual readers of the original article, or even sophisticated Gender Theorists, might believe that Groupthink only affects decision making among men or right-leaning, religious, or military groups.

Groupthink: A Study in Self Delusion

Christopher Booker’s book Groupthink: A Study in Self Delusion makes the outrageous claim that Groupthink might affect larger groups. Booker defines the, “three rules of groupthink: the adoption of a common view or belief not based on objective reality; the establishment of a consensus of right-minded people, an ‘in group’; and the need to treat the views of anyone who questions the belief as wholly unacceptable.”

The writing of this book began in fall 2017, when Booker identified a new form of puritanism entering the mainstream.  Political correctness has spent it’s life dressed in sheep’s clothing. Voluntary limits on free expression have turned out to be a collective deal with the Devil.

Rather than fulfill the promise of a better, more inclusive world, we’ve developed an increasingly totalitarian society of wokescolds.  Limitations on words have turned into what we are allowed to think or criticize. 

Anything done in the name of Diversity, Inclusion, Equity, Climate Justice, or to end Patriarchy, Systemic Racism, Climate Change, or Covid 19 can be justified.

This includes choking a man to death in the street for not wearing a mask, burning down neighborhoods, or kicking a Black man off an elevator while yelling, “Black Lives Matter!”

Chants and slogans have replaced rational thought and problem solving.  Painting signs, activist crafting, and pressing the like button in your living room has replaced civic engagement or civic duty.

Activists past and/or present can only be thought of or discussed in terms of universal good.  It’s been 100 years since women received the right to vote without the responsibility of Selective Service, and still no one can question how that influenced the 20th century. 

Are we really planning a war with Russia?

No white male dare question whether the last 50 years of Affirmative Action have yet solved the inequality problem.  

We’ve created a society that can not think outside certain boundaries or tolerate having sacred values questioned without someone being removed from the public square.

We’ve seen this movie before and it does not end well.