Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Compulsion to Conform
Millions of words have been written about the current state of the country. Those of us who write (and those who follow our work) have been analyzing how we got to this vicious and primitive time. One key point that has been overlooked is that we have given up our commitment to the individual and free speech, and are now pandering to a New Tribe. I’d like to suggest one idea that came out of my own pondering of our circumstances and see what you think. By the way, this applies to the greater society as well as specifically Congress.
* * * * *
Human beings formed into tribes as far back as we can go into human history. The nature of the tribes may have varied, but the one thing they probably had in common were rules for acceptable behavior and actions. The importance of those rules in each tribe might have varied, but most tribes probably rated certain rules as extremely important to the survival and protection of the tribe. Children were taught them at the time of their birth. And everyone knew that if specific critical rules were broken, the punishment was to be expelled from the tribe. Due to the seriousness of the punishment, people understood the importance of complying. Otherwise, ejection meant not only isolation, but more than likely certain death due to other enemy tribes or to wild animals. As a result, conforming to tribal law was not only a high priority, but was a matter of survival.
We have no way of knowing the degree to which conforming is in our genes or only in our culture. It probably doesn’t matter, because every one of us knows there are penalties for not conforming. Only 70 years ago, people were judged for having sex outside of marriage (although there were those who had sexual relationships quietly). Having children out of wedlock was definitely a reason for being ostracized; pornography was not acceptable; sex with children was banned; wearing clothes that were immodest was disapproved. But all those demands for conformity have disappeared, replaced with a call for tolerance and compassion. “Anything goes” was the call. Anything less than acceptance of all these formerly rejected actions and behaviors was judged as hateful and ugly.
* * * * *
The rules of conformity from 70 or so years ago have been reversed. Although the compulsion to conform has been emphasized in the universities and general culture for many years, it seems like the transformation to a new culture has happened overnight. Freedom has been replaced by compliance. Democracy is being replaced by Marxism and socialism. Free speech is being crippled by new gatekeepers who will excoriate people who don’t follow the new rules. Violence has been called an acceptable method of protest. People, institutions, and political parties are being banned from social media that speak outside the boundaries of these new fascist-like regulations. In many cases there aren’t even regulations; people learn they have violated mores after the fact, by having their comments removed and their accounts suspended or locked. The media participates in this sick conversion of society by ignoring or discounting any facts that compromise their efforts.
The question is, why are so many people prepared to accept these new demands and limitations on their freedom?
The answer, to me, is obvious. The compulsion to conform pulls people in, and ties them down.
People have reverted to tribal behavior. For at least the last 70 years, the new cultural rules and norms have been taught. Anything and anyone outside those norms have been demonized. Anything American, anything related to American values, is now the “enemy tribe.” America threatens the existence of the tribe that demands power. So, everyone in the New Tribe is being reminded of, called to practice, the New Rules (which are socialism and Marxism in disguise). The people’s innate compulsion to conform has been activated in a way that the United States has never seen. If they don’t comply, they will be rejected from the New Tribe.
And what happens if you are rejected from the New Tribe? You will lose friends and relationships with family. You may lose your job. When it comes to Covid-19, you will be rejected if you don’t wear masks; you must participate in spreading fear and misinformation. At some point if you catch the virus, you may have difficulty in finding someone to treat you, or finding a hospital that will admit you. In other words, your very survival might be at stake.
You must conform to the new dogma. Or die.
* * * * *
I mentioned Congress at the beginning of this post and how this situation applies to them. It’s called the Swamp. It’s entirely possible that most people who run for the House or Senate initially want to serve the country. It doesn’t take long for them to realize that there are “rules” that go far beyond the rules of the House and Senate. They learn very quickly that obedience to leadership is required. If they don’t comply, they will be ostracized; they won’t get key assignments or committee positions. They won’t get funding from their parties. They will be shut out of the very opportunities they hoped to earn by being elected. So their compulsion to conform is activated in due course.
And nothing changes.
* * * * *
You may think this analysis is preposterous. That it can’t possibly happen in America. I have news for you. It’s been emerging for a long while. And what can we do?
I don’t have a clear answer for the general population; I suspect we will need to find people who will take the same steps that our leaders must take: we must find people, who reject the compulsion to conform. They may feel the tug to go along, but they refuse to give in. They must be prepared to tolerate ridicule, rejection, and defamation. They must have a clear vision of where they are headed, and have a love of this country.
They must be like Donald Trump.
Published in Culture
To minimize suffering and to maximize security were natural and proper ends of society and Caesar. But then they became the only ends, somehow, and the only basis of law—a perversion. Inevitably, then, in seeking only them, we found only their opposites: maximum suffering and minimum security.
–Walter Miller, A Canticle for Leibowitz
As I indicated, I was struggling to find the right word. I do think order is close to what I meant. That’s the noble impulse that, unchecked, has given way to control, and then to tyranny on the Left. Perhaps I could have made the point more clearly.
No confusion on my part. I didn’t use the term conservative. I said that Republicans tend toward freedom, which they do, relative to Democrats, who (historically, anyway) tend toward order (i.e. control). A la Thomas Sowell (A Conflict of Visions), I was laying out the pure extremities, while recognizing that most people fall somewhere along a spectrum.
That’s what I’m saying. There must be rules, or we have chaos. But there must be liberty or we have tyranny. It’s in the tension between the two that we (hopefully) find the “sweet spot” of ordered freedom.
This was also my point, that the Left has manged to pull the balance away from liberty and toward tyranny, and that their stated goal now is to eliminate all avenues of opposition and rule unchecked.
I’m glad you got my point, @susanquinn. Perhaps I could have made it better. There was a time when the Left were acting on noble impulses, and the tension between the two parties fostered a stable society in which we could co-exist (in the best sense of that abused phrase). Those days are long gone. The Left is no longer acting nobly. And the Right, having failed in their efforts to hold them in check, has been severely compromised (as @arizonapatriot noted). I don’t think a Trump win would be enough to right the ship, but I fear a Trump loss may well sink it.
This is precisely my concern, @freeven. Will his winning move us in the right direction? I think it might, if the Republicans step up and make some changes. A win by Joe? Bad news.
The examples I like best are Big Sugar and Big Ethanol. Price supports in the first case; mandated consumption in the second.