At the end of part 1 of this series concerning social control and war crimes, I concluded that;

“within hierachical mass societies, not everyone was (or is) committing atrocities but many by following scheduled tasks, obeying specific orders and staying silent, were (and are) directly and indirectly enabling such atrocities to be committed by others.”.

Part 2 provides further evidence to support that observation.

Following the Leader. (Learning to obey authority.)

In the 1950’s and 1960’s, a number of psychologists in the USA, were so perturbed by the Nuremberg prosecution and defence (as noted in part 1) that they decided to test the following concept: that ordinary ‘normal’ (ie. hierarchically socialised) people could be recruited into doing abnormal things by circumstances and by being situated within a chain of hierarchical authority. In particular one psychologist, Stanley Milgram, mentored by the academic Solomon Asch, devised an experiment to test the validity and extent of the ‘I was following orders‘ defence of ordinary hierarchical mass society citizens who had carried out inhumane actions. The experiment involved recruiting a series of ordinary people to assist in what was claimed to be the development of an educational learning method. Each volunteer played the role of a teacher and another participant played the role of a learner. The teacher was told that the learner was the subject of the experiment when actually it was the teaching role that was the subject of the experiment.

The learner was attached to fake electrical wires and although not receiving an electrical shock was asked to pretend that he had received one if the teacher attempted to administer one whenever the learner got the answers wrong. The teacher was told to give the learner a list of things to remember as a task and if the learner failed to remember accurately the teacher was to press a switch ostensibly giving the learner an electric shock. This was justified to the teacher on the basis that the pain would improve the learners ability and motivation to learn. There was a range of switches facing the ‘teacher’, labelled from low, to medium, to high and on to dangerous.

The organiser of the experiment, in this case the ‘leader’ Stanley Milgram, was dressed in a white coat and explained to the ‘teacher’ that the experiment required that the electrical voltage should be increased if the learner kept failing to answer correctly. To the amazement of the originator of the experiment (and the many other university departments who later replicated it), up to 75 percent of people would push the scale of electrical shocks to the learner up to the dangerous and lethal levels despite the pretended screams and cries to stop from the pretend learners. Milgram reported that;

“Many subjects will obey the experimenter no matter how vehement the pleading of the victim being shocked, no matter how painful the shocks seem to be, and no matter how much the victim pleads to be let out. This was seen time and again in our studies and has been observed in several universities where the experiment was repeated. It is the extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority that constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.” (Obediance to Authority’ by Stanley Milgram. Chapter 1. Emphasis added RR.)

In other words, the majority of participants had been successfully taught (and thus ‘learned’) to obey authority. The explanation for such inhuman conduct of one person against another clearly lies within the total implicit and explicit socialisation process in hierarchical mass societies, with its routine disciplines, divided loyalties, vested interests, and reinforced habits of obedience and conformity. However, along with the often seemingly benign circumstances of routine grooming/socialisation to economically and socially ‘fit in’ to hierarchical mass societies, there exists a range of punishments and rewards available to hand out by the elite ‘leaders’ in charge of them. These design factors, introduce to the process of socialisation a layer of malign purposes to the process of conformity and obedience to authority. This is something which occurs within all hierarchical mass societies.

Therefore, it should be clearly understood, that these methods and purposes are not deviations from some benign hierarchical mass society norm, carried out by some occasionally demented power-hungry psychopaths – as many blinkered hopefuls suggest they are. Historical and contemporary evidence, both written, verbal and observable confirms that severe or light punishments on the one hand, and small or huge rewards (bribes) on the other for obedience and conformity or lack of it, are not deviations from the hierarchical mass society norm – they are the continuing norm! In this particular 20th century case, the author summed up the results of these experiments in the following way;

“…the most fundamental lesson of our study: ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority. A variety of inhibitions against disobeying authority come into play and successfully keep the person in his place. (ibid)

This not only explains how the authority of the Nazi Fuhrer (leader) controlled state-authorities were able to programme the total war conquest of other nations and organise their final solutions for extermination of disabled people plus Slavs and Jews, but much more. It explains why the allied armies and civilians also became willing agents of Churchills war cabinet and Commander (fuhrer) ‘Bomber Harris’s, brutal area carpet bombing campaign of German cities, the intentional holocaust fire bombing of Dresden, and the US Presidential (leader) unopposed authorising the double Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The evidence suggests that the vast majority of all hierarchical mass society citizens have been (and are being) taught to and learning to obey authority rather than their own more humane actions and attitudes. However, before considering this aspect of obedience to authority further it is worth considering some other, equally interesting/chilling social experiments, which nonetheless illustrate the problems of human alienation and alienated behaviour within hierarchical mass societies.

The previously noted mentor of Stanley Milgram, Solomon Asch, conducted experiments on conforming behaviour in which peer group pressure could actually result in people disbelieving their own eyes and conforming to expressed opinions that were not their own and which were clearly and verifiable false. The Solomon Asch experiments involved presenting a line of a standard length and three other lines, two of which were the same length as the standard and one a different length.

The participants were asked to identify the line that matched the standard one. All participants taking part on their own quickly identified the correct match, however when they were part of a group – the rest of whom were covertly asked to deliberately identify an incorrect line as matching the standard line – most participants in the experiment eventually altered their decisions to conform to the group judgement. The results were clear.

“The subject hears the unanimous verdict of other subjects (three or more is all it takes) that one of the unequal lines is in fact , equal to the standard. The group judgement contradicts what the subject sees clearly with his or her own eyes.” (The Legacy of Solomon Asch. Edited by Irvin Rock. Section 1).

This indicates that influential opinion, advocating fake news/opinion succeeded in influencing people away from observing or seeking the actual facts, way before fake news became the standard operating procedures for official and unofficial influencers. In a variation of the above experiment it was recorded in the same section of the above book that;

“…ninety percent of the minority subjects went with the majority, shunning the other correct alternative”. (ibid)

In other words ninety percent of group participants ignored the reality of their own senses and agreed with a false ‘fake’ reality promoted by a group of manipulating influencers. This phenomenon became known as peer group pressure in that within most social settings there can be pressure from peers group members as well as authority figures to adjust to or coordinate ones own perspective of reality to ‘conform’ to the perspective of the ‘leader’ or others. The motive being in order to attempt to achieve a “mutually shared” view of reality, or at least to avoid group friction and dispute.

In such group dynamics, the social nature of human experience attempts to overcome any competition and alienation within hierarchical mass societies by denying it and by the subordination or sublimation of ones own view of reality in order to feel a sense of belonging, (however tenuously) to a part of the community. That part of the community being the hoped for source of some form of support to be gained or threat reduced. These two experiments confirm the reality of hierarchical mass society pressures that most of us experience daily, weekly and yearly, from our childhood to our adulthood .

Both the patterns of obedience to authority (ie. following a powerful or ‘charismatic’ leader) and the wish, (or need) to conform to peer group ‘common sense’, ensures that any changes or challenges to the open or covert oppressions endemic in hierarchical mass society living (from sexism, racism, homophobia, social inequality, air pollution, low pay, state orchestrated violence at home and abroad, etc.) are frequently accepted or ignored.

Consequently, any changes not directly and consistently championed by authority or sanctioned by the ‘leader’, will in general only be championed by those few ‘misfits’ who can manage to summon up the resources needed to resist authority. In most instances, the rest of the population will simply follow the leader or influencers or simply follow the majority. This partly explains why so little is being currently done to stop climate change by fossil fuel burning, air and water pollution by over-production and over consumption of raw materials, commodities and leisure services.

But missing from such socio-psychological analysis which are primarily directed at the masses, are the distorting effects of hierarchical mass society living on the humanity of the ruling elites and their leadership contenders. With the exception of Xerses, Ramassees, Alexander, Nero, Caligula, Vlad the Impaler, Charlemagne, Hitler, Mussolini and a few other power-hungry demented individuals, ‘leading’ hierarchical mass societies, little of use has been published on the social psychological effects of the dehumanisation of elites in general and leaders in particular.

Of course, not all of the histories of thousands of elites, from ancient to modern times will include executing their own fathers, mothers, brothers and children who got in their way or exterminated whole tribes of dissenters who failed to pay tribute or taxes on time. However, the effects on leaders (and politicians) of living ‘above‘ and ‘beyond‘ the rest of their communities they rule, takes it’s own toll on their individual and collective humanity. In general the top leaders only hear what their lackeys think the leader wants to hear. Deep down, they also know that their inevitable inabilities and shortcomings negate their own pretense and any public expectation of them being above average or even ‘great. This socialised distortion of their individual and social essence, cannot do anything other than distort their humanity away from any semblance of a natural and un-groomed form.

Having the best of everything whilst those around you are treated many times worse than your favourite horse (eg. Caligula), shoe cupboard (eg. Immelda) or corgi dogs’ (eg. Elizabeth 2) must numb or suppress ‘normal’ human emotions away from the reality of social inter-dependence of all. Relying on the masses to supply electricity, water, food, clothing, transport, sewage removal, cleaning, etc., whilst not seriously caring how they survive cannot but create a constantly schitzophrenic intellect when they regard the rest of the hierarchical mass society form of which they are the parasitic ‘establishment‘. And this is just to reference the very tops of the hierarchical mass society pyramid these elites sit upon.

Below them are the elite enablers of their exalted positions who are able to legally and informally extort high government salaries, for mediocre abilities (ie. for managing! Brexit, Pandemics and school building repairs etc) and milking the Parliamentary system (consultancies and cash for questions) for Covid contracts and bloated expenses. Mediocrity, and lead swinging of course permeates all classes in hierarchical mass societies, but only among the elite in such societies, can mediocrity be rewarded so handsomely and undeservedly. Rambling speeches and articles, delivered by well placed elites, (Blair and Johnson etc.) containing little or no rigour, rectitude or relevance can attract hundreds of thousands of pounds per lecture or per article.

In contrast the pay for the obvious rigour, rectitude and relevance of essential workers such as the majority of nurses, teachers, care workers, shop workers, transport drivers and firefighters etc., can barely keep pace with current rent and mortgage rises. The elite at all levels, are intelligent enough to know the unfairness of the existing system and the physical and mental damage this hierarchical mass society form of existence does to all classes within the system, yet they prefer to keep their relative privileges intact by perpetuating the existing hierarchical system.

This preference includes perpetuating the nonsensical myth that to ‘follow the leadership’ of a bumbling blond-haired clown, a pint swilling Knight of the Realm, or a geriatric candidate for a care home, is better than following no leader at all. Yet as any orchestra or complex organisation constantly demonstrates, the rank and file doing the actual jobs can do their tasks just as well – or even better – when not hampered by someone who thinks they know better that the collective intelligence and experience of the workers actually staffing the public service or manufacturing enterprise.

In concluding this second part of a look at Technology and Social Control, it is worth reminding ourselves that even after thousands of years of ethnic, cultural and gender discrimination and exploitation within and by hierarchical mass socienties, no one is actually born with the discriminatory attitudes of racism, sexism, or ageism etc. Nor is anyone born as an arrogant, supercilious elite tax avoider and exploiter. Furthermore, no one is ever born with the characteristics of an obedient, gullible follower of some self-deluded crackpot or incompetent leader.

The stubborn fact is that each of these characteristics have to be taught and learned during the socialisation and grooming processes occuring within hierarchical mass societies. Moreover, these divisive characteristics have to not only be encouraged and supported but also repeatedly enabled by rewards and punishments in such a consistent way that many people come to embody them throughout their adolescent and adult life.

Similarly, no one is born a capitalist or a worker, they are subsequently groomed and placed in these socio-economic positions by a family and class system which is based upon controlling an occupational, class based status and perpetuating an understanding of what the mode of production they have inherited considers is ‘business as usual’. Consequently, if the dominant message from authority and peer group influence is to continue business as usual – and business as usual is the mass production and consumption of commodities and the mass burning of Petro-chemical based fuels – then most citizens will conform to that so-called form of wisdom and ‘intelligence’. The majority will not fully understanding the actual and future potential cul-de-sac humanity and the rest of life on earth is being escorted down.

This pattern of hierarchical mass society socialisation also helps to explain why those few activists who do persistently advocate change are easily labelled as anti-social ‘rebels’, by elites, by their supporters and those by those existentially trapped in the hierarchical mass society rat-race. This pattern of response to anti-capitalist activism is also the basis for the following conclusion. That until a sufficiently large critical-mass of national and international citizens cohere around a revolutionary-humanist perspective on revolutionising mass societies, very little will change. The need to actively commit to a future which re-balances the human relationship with it’s own species and the rest of life on earth and consistently adheres to it, has yet to emerge.

The relatively large destructive impacts of climate change and species loss in many regions of the world, on their own, are creating no significant alteration or transformation of the current industrialised path of inter and intra species alienation, death and destruction. Faith in ‘leaders’ of hierarchical mass societies, to sort out problems they and their systems are responsible for, is as self-delusional as the leaders themselves. Elites convincing themselves that they are part of the solution rather than the problem is itself a symptom of alienation – this time also from reality.

Roy Ratcliffe. (September 2023.)

Part 3. ‘Profiting from Death, Destruction and Extinction’, will follow soon.