"The Party is not interested in the overt act:
the thought is all we care about"
- George Orwell, 1984

Please take a few minutes to read through the section below.  It is an analysis of behaviors found in a common thought-control tactic known as Groupthink.  As you read the description below, think about where you have seen similar behavior.

In his seminal work, Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascos (1972), Irving Janis (research psychologist at Yale University and professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley) describes the eight "symptoms" of groupthink that help propel groups into failed policy and "irrational and dehumanizing actions directed at out-groups."  These symptoms are:

1. The illusion of invulnerability. People act differently in a group; you see it all the time.  At it’s worst it becomes mob action; but even in more benign settings, you know that when you get together with your buddies to watch a football game or are in the middle of a gang celebrating a major sports victory, there is a sense of strength in numbers that makes the group feel invulnerable.  Think about it: Who on his or her own goes out and sets fire to a police car?  Now apply that to any close-knit activist group.  Get the picture?

2. Belief in the inherent morality of the group. “If all these people feel the same way, it must be right.”  This is how the sense of “the good guys against the bad guys” develops, as well as the myth that “our decisions are in everyone’s best interests.”

3. Collective Rationalization. Groups are seduced by the false impression that they are right no matter what the evidence may actually say.  Members of the group then reassure each other, using the morality of the group to reinforce their “rightness.”

4. Out-group stereotypes. “Racist!”  “Sexist!”  “Homophobe!”  “Religious radical!”  “Right-wing nut!”  Need I go on?  Outsiders, or “the enemy,” are stereotyped as either weak or stupid or both and unable to counter the decisions made by the group.  Members of the group can be stereotyped, too, particularly those who are considered renegades, or even just those who “slow down” the decision-making process by asking questions and making objections.

[I would have added "McCarthyism!" and "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy!"]

5. Self-censorship. We all know that it can be incredibly uncomfortable to be the only person making an objection in what seems to be a unanimous group.  If belonging to the group is important, we are inclined to remain silent on issues where there is a perceived consensus (perceived being the operative word here), rather than risk humiliation and rejection.

6. The illusion of unanimity. Self-censorship relies on the perception of consensus.  When it appears that a majority opinion is taking shape, or as leaders make their own position clear, there is a tendency to overlook quiet dissent and to presume that everyone supports the position.

7. Direct pressure on dissenters. A group member who disagrees with the direction or policy of a group will be pressured to conform.  If that doesn’t work, there may even be efforts to discredit the dissenting member.  This eliminated dissent by the targeted member and also sends a message to other members that challenging the “consensus” will be punished.

8. Self-appointed mindguards. Janis suggests that certain members of the group will work to keep dissenting opinions away from the leaders.  Then, as word gets passed along to other members that the leadership is unwilling to hear criticism, those other members apply self-censorship, which strengthens the illusion of unanimity. Mindguards also work to shield the group from adverse information that might crack their shared complacency.

(Taken from The New Thought Police : Inside The Left’s Assault On Free Speech And Free Minds by Tammy Bruce, Three Rivers Press, 2001. I highly recommend this book!)

In the most horrific applications, enforcement of Groupthink is brutal.  A person that challenged the Groupthink of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Kim Jong-Il, or Saddam Hussein was lucky if they were quickly and painlessly murdered.  But the enforcement of Groupthink isn't always so obvious.  A dissenter may be marginalized within the group or ostracized from the group.  Stereotypes and ad hominem attacks are common methods used to attempt to silence those outside the group.  The response to dissent, real or imagined, can range from a dirty look all the way to a bullet to the back of the head but the goal is the same: enforce Groupthink.

It would be inaccurate to claim that the Left has a patent on Groupthink.  Right-wing extremist groups depend on it as well.  Religious cults and extremist groups of every variation use it.  But the political far-Left's Groupthink, in and outside of the United States, is pervasive and has infected the news media and all levels of government.

Think I'm just a paranoid alarmist?  Two words: Political Correctness.

Although ridiculed shortly after the concept was first described in the 1980's, Political Correctness (PC) is not a joke.  It is real and it affects every one of us.  Even someone that isn't a news junkie should easily be able to recall cases in which a careless slip of the tongue ruined someone's life.  Even a perceived violation of PC can ruin your life.  Here is an infamous example.

In January 1999, David Howard was forced to resign his job in the D.C. mayor's office.  His offence?  He used the word "niggardly" in a private conversation regarding funding.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines niggardly as "grudgingly mean about spending or granting."  The Barnhard Dictionary of Etymology traces the origins of 'niggardly' to the 1300's, and to the words 'nig' and 'ignon', meaning "miser" in Middle English.  No racial connotations associated with the word.  The well known racial slur doesn't enter the lexicon until the 1500's, from the same root as the French negre and Spanish negro, words for the color black.

Even though entirely unrelated, "niggardly" resembles the "n-word" whose very utterance is verboten (unless one happens to be a member of the group).  But David Howard is white so he was granted no quarter.  Mr. Howard learned that the consequences of using a word that even sounds like a racial slur can be severe.  Fortunately for Mr. Howard there was a public uproar over the event and he was eventually reinstated.

By the way, David Howard was described as "active in the gay community."  It helps to have politically influential friends that know how to get the media involved.  The "controversy" was absurd and Howard's friends were right to alert the media.  But how many others tagged with the "Scarlet R" have associates that wield such influence?  David Howard got his job back but others lack the resources to fight back.

Am I just a member of the VRWC picking on well-intentioned "progressives"?  Here's a test: cite an example of Right-wing Political Correctness.  Got one?  Didn't think so.  The  Rosemary's Baby known as Political Correctness was born of the Left alone.  PC is thought control on an Orwellian scale.  It's not something that could happen here; it has already happened here and grows day by day.

Political Correctness is Thought Control

Groupthink is, plain and simple, Socialism.  The rights of the group outweigh the rights of the individual.  This includes the right to disagree with the group, even in thought.  Opinions that do not conform with Groupthink must be obliterated.  Those who dissent must be re-educated or ostracized or silenced.  Groupthink has zero tolerance for dissent.

Does it bother anyone else that the people that scream loudest about "free speech" are the often same people that advocate speech codes?  The same people that routinely shout down opponents?  (James Carville shouting down John O'Neill on CNN's Crossfire comes to mind.)  The same people that will sometimes stoop to intimidation or even violence to silence opponents?  The people that label George Bush a fascist.  Does that sound like an "out-group stereotype" to you?

Think I'm exaggerating?  Search Google with the string +"George Bush" +fascist and you'll see what I mean.  I just love how the crowd that worships "diversity" is so intolerant of diverse opinions.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." (George Orwell, Animal Farm)

The Thought Police aren't coming.  They are already here.  But Big Brother isn't who you thought we would be...

Cognite Tute

I borrow this phrase from Michael Shermer.  It means "Think For Yourself."  (I believe it is pronounced "cohg-nee-teh too-teh".)  I encourage everyone to live by it.  Here's how:

Educate Yourself - Even though it is more essential now than ever, Critical Thinking is not widely taught in schools.  Too often students are taught what to think instead of how to thing.  This is particularly true in grades K - 12 but also in most colleges.  Critical Thinking isn't difficult to learn and it can be applied to many aspects of your life.  There are many good books on critical thinking and I encourage everyone to read one.  Two of my favorites are:

• Why People Believe Weird Things : Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time by Michael Shermer
• The Art of Deception: An Introduction to Critical Thinking : How to : Win an Argument, Defend a Case, Recognize a Fallacy, See Through a Deception, by Nicholas Capaldi

Practice Critical Thinking - Some people seem to apply critical thinking naturally.  A friend of mine tells how her pre-teen daughter once objected to an advertisement.  The ad described the product as "New & Improved" but my friend's daughter observed, correctly, that something cannot be simultaneously "new" and "improved."    That is a delightful example of critical thinking in practice.  If you make critical thinking a habit, you are much less likely to be misled or deceived.  And not just politically.

Don't Drink the Ideological Kool-Aid! - Ideology per se isn't dangerous.  Merriam-Webster defines it as "a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture."  The danger lies in ideological blindness.  Let's face it: even the most positive ideology may be wrong on some issues.  It is healthy to constantly challenge one's ideology and make changes when appropriate.  Ideological blindness is the notion that "We're right; Everyone else is wrong; That settles it."  Groupthink is an essential preservative of ideological blindness.

Whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent, or belong to any other party or group, I challenge you to have the courage to apply critical thinking to what you hear from your group or from those outside your group.  Validate what you told and question everything that doesn't add up.

Most importantly, read and re-read the 8 Symptoms of Groupthink outlined above.  Commit them to memory.  Tattoo them on your forearm if you must.  Then watch for them.  You will start to notice them being used.  That should tell you all you need to know about the person or group that is using them.  COGNITE TUTE - Think for Yourself!

Tammy Bruce

Two books by Tammy Bruce that I recommend:

• The New Thought Police : Inside the Left's Assault on Free Speech and Free Minds (2001)
• The Death of Right and Wrong : Exposing the Left's Assault on Our Culture and Values (2003)

Lest anyone labor under the misconception that Ms. Bruce is yet another Right-wing nut bar, here is how she describes herself:

"I am an openly gay, pro-choice, gun-owning, pro-death penalty, liberal, voted-for-Reagan feminist.  Certainly a contradiction in terms.  And yet, in 1990, I became the present of the Los Angeles chapter of the premier feminist organization in the United States - the National Organization for Women (NOW)."

Those are the first three sentences in the Introduction of "The New Thought Police" so it's not as if Ms. Bruce makes any attempt to obfuscate or misrepresent her background.  She is a liberal in the "classic-liberal" sense: she strongly believes in individual liberty and a limited government that serves the people rather than serves as the people's master.  Both books are brilliant and thoroughly researched.  (In the bookstore I always check for footnotes and source references.  The more, the better.  Be skeptical of non-fiction that does not cite sources.  For example, compare any of Michael Moore's books to any book by Ann Coulter, Tammy Bruce, Dick Morris, etc.  See what I mean?  Citations alone don't mean the author's premises are correct but it makes it much easier for you to research and validate the underlying facts if you know where the author got the information.)

I highly recommend both books.  And, no, you may not borrow my copies!  I use them frequently as reference material.  You should too.

Disclaimer: The opinions in this section are mine alone and are not necessarily subject to rigorous research or even rational thought.  That being said, my mind can be changed (and often is).  If you have another perspective and can cite contradictory evidence please PLEASE NOTE that I ask that you cite contradictory evidence.  I will endeavor, where possible, to cite my sources and ask you to do the same.  If you don't (or can't) my inclination is to regard a retort as the raving of an ideological Kool-aid drinker and deploy the finger I use to press the delete key.