The Herd

(Source)

We humans are not really a herd animal, we're not loners either, not by any means. We can tolerate it, but it's not good for us. No, our species is made up of family groups. Those groups at one time would gather into tribes (in some places that's still the case). Larger groupings were found to be conducive to survival, both in terms of the ability to protect the group and through dividing up the jobs: some folks out hunting and gathering, other folks staying back at the camp/cave/what-have-you tending the fires, mending stuff, making stuff, and taking care of the young 'uns.

We are most comfortable in cooperative groupings which share a common background.

Now a comment on my post the other day got me to thinking, again. (And yes, it's starting to make my head hurt.)

Definitely a brain bender. Is it evil if I and my society destroys another because we see them as a threat? The victors write history, and so get to define what the 'greater good' was. What short term "pains" (i.e. deaths, to take it to the absolute) are worthy of longer term "gains"? And who gets to make the judgement? One sees this played out whenever the use of the atomic bombs on Japan is discussed. "Bad" vs "evil" on the way to a "good" outcome.

I'm also pondering if the First Principle is universal. If my society believes in it, but the society down the block doesn't. Or is the Principle true, and the challenge is that all men are also self-directed beings of Free Will. Who may decide to subordinate their will to that of others.

Much to ponder.

/L.J.

That bit of subordinating one's will to that of others really made me think. After some time of pondering and digging into the books, I am pretty sure that that whole submission, subordination thing is pretty good in small groups. After all, someone has to actually be in charge. Well, I don't know about "have to," but I think it's the way we're wired. Put a bunch of people together, give 'em a task (like go into the wilderness and survive) and someone is eventually going to emerge as the leader. Sometimes, if the group is large enough, it might even be several leaders, each possibly responsible for some aspect of the group's survival.

So if someone is in charge, someone else (usually several someones) is not in charge. They get to be the worker bees, if you will.

Which leads to another comment I saw some place (and yes, I forgot to note where I saw it, if someone recognizes this, please let me know)...

The truth is, Socialism fails because it gives power to a few, and people are greedy, self-centered creatures. It is part of what in Judeo-Christianity is known as the ‘sin nature’.

We cannot trust any human being, even ourselves, to not at some point act in a self-centered manner. We need a system of checks and balances, of accountability, a buddy system, to keep ourselves in line.

Even more so our governments. - Graybeard

Too much all for one, one for all, ain't such a good thing.

We tend to get crazy if there are too many of us with time on our hands. Especially if we get angry about something, then our species can do things they wouldn't think of doing if they were on their own.

A large crowd can be panicked, just like a herd of sheep/cattle/horses/whatever. In that panic they will overturn anything in their path, they will even trample and kill the slower members of the mob.

Get a mob riled up about something, good or bad, and the crazy takes over.

Hey, we're pissed because of Trump! Let's burn the town down, let's block traffic, let's break stuff. (Replace "Trump" with whatever cause du jour springs to mind, it doesn't really matter.)

Hey, we're happy because our team won the big game! Let's burn the town down, let's block traffic, let's break stuff.

It makes no sense to me, how could people behave that way? Well, I think it's because when there are too many of us in one place, we subordinate our will to that of the mob. We are no longer individuals, we have become part of a collective, the hive mind takes over, and bad things happen.

I lived in Germany for seven plus years, I love the land and its people. I often asked myself, how could these peoples' parents and grandparents murder over 18 million people? (That figure includes Jews, Russian civilians and POWs, gypsies, homosexuals, and every other sort of group that the Nazis didn't like.)

While individuals did the killing, the group made the individuals feel less culpable for their actions. It was the group, the hive if you will, who murdered all of those people. At least that's how the individuals got through it. Many didn't, they lost their sanity, many killed themselves when the enormity of what they had done sunk in.

But as part of a large group, people can do anything. If the leaders of the group are intent on evil and destruction, that's what will happen.

We're pretty decent individually and in small groups. Get too many of us in the same place with a "cause," and things can get scary in a hurry.

One of our problems right now in this country is that are too many groups with grievances, both real and imagined, being manipulated by unscrupulous people with very sketchy goals. If you ever feel the need to be part of a mob, ask yourself, who benefits from this? If I block a roadway as part of some nebulous protest, who benefits? If I get thrown in jail, who cares? If the whole thing makes the news, the people behind the scenes are happy. They really don't care what happens to the little people. They are merely pawns in some greater game. A game which benefits only a few, not the many.

Don't be a pawn, don't stampede with the rest of the herd.

Think!!

This kinda crap is really pissing me off.

Sarge, out.



I need to post more plane pr0n and historical stories, this serious stuff really makes my head hurt.