Dealing With Control and Conformance

Assertiveness is a natural trait which, in some, becomes an obsessive need for power. Following an assertive leader is another natural trait which, in some, becomes a willingness to commit atrocities at the leader's whim. Technical progress has increased understanding of obsession and how to deal with it and of team-building and how to avoid destructive commitment.

We need to strive for even better understanding of how to mitigate obsessive behaviour and prevent domination leading to destructive mass behaviour. That needs to be supported by an education process which transmits that understanding to as many people as possible.

One obvious need is educating people to recognise use of passionate confidence and charismatic presentation, allied with oratorical and debating tricks to manipulate large groups. Another is educating people to use techniques of relaxation and self-control to counter the personal effects of mass hysteria.

Dealing With Personal Experience

Watch out for use of greed, such as fiscal policy announcements to attract uncommitted voters in an election or promises of a share of power or influence on policies (devolution). Watch also for use of fear such as threat of future damage if rivals gain power. Look out too for threats of immediate physical damage used to scare those who openly support rivals.

If these tactics are observed, their users should be denied support. Sometimes the use is obvious and physical (threat of a holy war). In other cases it is more insidious, with use of words which can later be reinterpreted if the user looks like being caught out.

Dealing With Confidence and Grasp

Confident, charismatic presentation doesn't necessarily equate with correctness. A person who knows more that you on numerous things is not necessarily correct on the current argument. You can grant some credence to someone with a track record of success – more so if supported by others with good track records.  But beware when their opposition also have good track records. When that happens the problem is probably more complex than either side acknowledges.

Remember, quick witted people aren't infallible. For ages acclaimed scientists have claimed to understand how the universe works, only to be proved wrong when another aspect of its complexity forces a rethink. They regularly over estimate the power of their current analysis.

Beware of over-belief in the power of democracy. A majority preference among a largely ignorant electorate may merely ensure that they all share the blame for failure. For complex problems it is tempting to believe the better communicator – a dangerous assumption. If you have to decide between sides, each with able advocates, you should require that any measures implemented should be monitored and there should be a fall-back plan to deal with failure.

Dealing With Politics

Many activists have a burning desire to be in control. They believe that their motives justify what they do and say. The best communicators or the most ruthless operators get nearest to power.

Beware use of cherry-picked quotations or events to blame whole groups with malpractice or misfortune. Beware use of personal errors to justify incitement of hatred of rival cultures or religions. Most people are just like you – they don't get up each morning and think “What evil can I do today?”. Remember, innocent victims of oppression aren't just “unfortunate collateral damage”.

Beware of people who support regimes just because they share the same enemy – history demonstrates that arming or providing material support to a monster  just because s/he may damage a shared enemy often later sees that aid turned against the donor.

Dealing With Religion

Religion attracts activists who are desperate to impose their interpretation of right and wrong – and  of how wrong should be punished. Some are entirely sincere, but some are cynical manipulators of a religious community for political ends.

Even sincere activists are human and therefore fallible. A number of major religions share core definitions of right and wrong but each has its own special taboos – often about things like what is unfit to eat or what should or shouldn't be said. Consider how many of these special rules may be the result of entirely human prejudice distorting genuine revelation.

Cynical users of a religion try to create such prejudices, so you need to be very careful about unquestioning acceptance of incitement to punish a perceived infringement. If a religion allows  free will, ask yourself if a call to “punish” offenders is demanded by its deity (which can implement punishment for wrongs without your help) or by a human imposing his/her will via oppression.

Dealing With Culture

Beware of people, in the name of your culture, inciting indignation against visitors from another culture, using some unintentional or childish provocation by them, but with a motive of some undeclared political purpose – such as accessing or retaining possession of power or inciting hatred against the other culture or a nation where that culture is strongly supported.

Be aware that some inter-cultural conflict is incited by politicians for non-cultural reasons. Inter-cultural hostility often arises from wars triggered by competition over trade or resources or  territory. The route to war uses incitement to cultural hatred – a thing you should avoid. Members of the other culture only hate you when incited  by their politicians.

Another cause of inter-cultural conflict to watch out for is minority groups in each culture who are so consumed with bigotry against their rivals that they enter their own minority conflict, but use things like media coverage to whip up more general inter-communal hatred.

Dealing With Law and Order

The political establishment (those favoured by the current system of government) controls law making and enforcement. Basic principles of justice (prevention, punishment and rehabilitation of theft and murder) are manipulated and supplemented by the political establishment to cement their grip on power – and challenged by those seeking to overturn that grip.

You need to be aware that politicians, in or out of power, use enforcement or disobedience of the law as a tool for causing masses of people to support their cause. Civil disobedience (and in extreme, violence) are used to cause antagonistic reaction against politicians – and more importantly, their supporters.

Beware of quietly accepting that families or minority groups who establish a tradition of “serving” the administration of law and order are doing no wrong when they see themselves as arbiters of which laws or enforcement methods are right and wrong. There have been historical instances of such minorities protecting the continued existence of malpractices like slavery, racism and sectarianism.

Dealing With Media

The recent history of unlawful privacy invasion in the UK and xenophobic interpretation of events and official policy announcements relating to the EEC illustrate that the media – and the press in particular – can't be trusted to behave as anything other than propaganda engines for ideologies favoured by media owners and their editors.

Implementing censorship of controversial issues in media publishing would be too dangerous, but a licensing system for individuals and companies, which could result in withdrawal if repeated libel and illegal activity was proven in court would help – but only if the media are prevented from their current tactic of coming to out of court settlements.

Undisclosed damages and apologies buried where few are liable to see or read them are well proven to have no moderating effect on media malpractice. Legally recorded guilt and, for repeated offences, removal of the right to practice are the necessary measures – and the legal system must not deny costs to plaintiffs who pursue their case to a formal verdict.

Dealing With Commerce

It is critically important to constrain large multi-national organisations. They aren't just involved with simple trading relationships. They carve up major markets among themselves and manipulate individuals and governments using advertising, the media and political lobbying organisations.

Multi-national organisations can already dominate most nation states using promises and threats over local employment and manufacturing presence. Since these organisations are beyond the practical control of either shareholders or customers a vital requirement for nation states is that of controlling the scope of their trading and manufacturing presence and practices.

Regulation of all large companies is of critical importance. Many use morally dubious practices until prevented by legislation (that was how use of subliminal messages and sexual images in advertising had to be stopped). Misinformation and dubious associations are still used to manipulate public attitudes to products and practices.

Dealing With Research and Development

Patent and copyright laws need to be changed to grant the protections for which they were originally intended. In practice patent and copyright rights are bought by large companies and used for legalised anti-competitive practice.

The rights of individual innovators are what should be protected, but in practice they are often irrelevant because only large organisations have access to exploitation funds. In addition, large organisations hire innovators and use employment laws to claim control of patent or copyright on even their private research activities.

Individual voluntary assistance and publicly supported assistance to company research should be granted legal recognition in terms of financial reward for their participation. In medical research assistance often comes from individuals and publicly funded organisations, but when products  come to market there is no pay-back to anyone other than the company which owns the patent.

Dealing With Commitment and Ruthlessness

There is a need to regulate “team building” activities in companies and sporting institutions. They are sometimes used to create heights of commitment which are dangerous. For example, in sport teams use threats and sometimes violence against opponents or match officials – sometimes leading to mass brawls and spectator violence. Fan clubs and organised abusive chanting have led to the need for segregated seating areas to minimise the probability of supporter violence.

Abusive behaviour (including chants) should lead to spectator and/or player and coaching bans and, if there is regular repetition of the offences, then the whole club should suffer spectator exclusion and club relegation or exclusion. The education system should be used to show the dangers of mass behaviour and personal techniques for minimising its effects on an individual.

Dealing With Objectivity and Dual Standards

Company directors and trade union activists make ruthless use of shareholder and member inertia to impose block policies like support of a single political party which aligns with the directors' or union activists' preferences or personal gain. At the same time they claim to be serving the interests of and to have the backing of “the majority”.

The most influential political parties are firmly dependent on funding from these two inertia voting practices, so only the minority parties have a significant interest in legislation to halt the corruption of abuse of the block vote – politicians are themselves masters of dual standards! For many, their stance of being objective supporters of “the will of the majority” is a sham.

The principal need is for a reform of the system of government in most countries – whether reportedly democracies or dictatorships. Specifically, a system of government is needed which reflects the interests and ideals of all citizens rather than giving actual or practical dictatorial control permanently or for periods of several years to minority political parties.

Remember that in many democracies the governing party (or coalition) is rarely supported by a majority of its citizens. They achieve power via a bigger minority vote than was given to their rival minorities and proceed to claim a mandate to implement whatever their political dogma specifies.

top of page