I’ve recently been thinking about movements. Joining (or starting) a movement can be a half decent answer to the ‘what difference can one person make in the world?’ question. If you’re part of something bigger, hopefully you can have a big effect. But I’ve seen a couple of issues with movements:
- When a group of people do things in an organised way, there’s a tendency for people’s consciences to evaporate. If you’re part of a crowd, you don’t feel as responsible anymore. It’s someone else’s job to decide whether something is right or wrong. Diffusion of Responsibility.
- Organisations can be incredibly inefficent. Sometimes they can be efficent, but the big ones often suffer a lot of inefficency due to bureaucracy, maintaining the group. Inefficency.
- In a movement or organisation there is often pressure to maintain the status quo. You do things because that’s how things are done, and whatever you do, you don’t directly go against the grain. Rebels are quickly dealt with. Group pressure.
- Despite this pressure, its inevitable that a movement will diverge from it’s original goal, and eventually turn into something else. Small changes happen, and accumulate, such that eventually the group is going in a tangent to the original direction.
Unfortunately, the small changes in direction aren’t going to follow what is good, or ethical, in fact, it isn’t going to be random. Instead, it’s going to follow the laws of evolution. The characteristics of a movement - the memes - that survive are going to be the ones that make the movement more likely to survive and spread (which explains group pressure). And this has a tendency towards the manipulitive, and the deceptive (for example, pyramid schemes and cults). Group Mutation and Evolution.
So.
This leaves me thinking. If I started a movement that was dedicated to only the most pure and noble goals, it would only be a matter of time before the group diverged from it’s original purpose, before entropy consumed it. So would there be any point in starting something?
Also.
If I were to join a movement, chances are it’s not actually fulfilling it’s original purpose (and let’s face it, the original purpose is not always good), and the movement is probably wasting a lot of the energy that’s put into it, surely I’d be better off on my own?
Your thoughts?
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 10, 2008 at 9:51 am
Nato
I always have more thoughts after posting. I think my main issues are when a movement becomes an institution (and the associated inefficiency, and the pressure to maintain the institution above other things), and the gradual drift of a movement / institution over time towards pointlessness, or worse (unless there’s the equivalent of a revival in the movement).
Yes. Better.
December 10, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Matt
It’s kinda similar to modern corporations, huh? Like, they originally were just a bunch of people who had come together for a common goal, for example building a bridge, and once the goal was complete they’d dissolve.
But modern corporations exist for their own sake, and as a result become these homicidal sociopath entities.
Maybe “movements” should have (1) concrete, outward goals and (2) an expiry date? I like the idea of joining a group for a particular time, to see some goal fulfilled.
December 11, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Dan
Are there any examples of successful movements, i.e. ones that have held to their founding principles/vision/direction and have made a difference?
December 12, 2008 at 10:59 am
Nato
Matt,
yeah, a corporation would be a good example of a movement (of sorts) losing it’s soul, becoming evil as it gets institutionalized. [Though I'm not sure I agree with you over the origins of corporations, I'd say they were probably organized to be ongoing, like a bridge building company, but that's beside the point].
It would be nice to have movements like that huh? I’m reminded of facebook groups, where they aim to get so many people for or against something, and once they meet that aim, the group initiators don’t say “yay! we did it”, but they often try and bend the aims of the group, and keep it going. I guess the temptation is that people don’t want to let go of what they have? I guess people don’t like to relinquish things. Once a goal is achieved, people don’t want to give up on the fellowship and power that they had as a group? It would be a bit of a let down, an anticlimax.
Dan,
yes, probably
the anti-slavery movement pops into mind. I wonder what happened to that after the abolition of slavery?
December 16, 2008 at 7:34 am
Dan
William Wilberforce was tenacious, wasn’t he.