Both of the new ideas introduced in the readings, domination/subordination and dissent, echo similar themes we discussed in class regarding groupthink. Miller talks about how in situations of inequality we often “speak in abstractions” which “permits us to accept what we might not admit to on a personal level” (p. 223). This concept reminded me of how we discussed that groupthink creates an environment where the individual suppresses their own opinions in favor of the assumed group opinion. Furthermore, similarly to the invulnerability symptom groupthink has, Miller states that dominants experience a similar false confidence in the fact that “the way things are is right and good” for them and their subordinates (p. 227). These ideas of the oppression of individual opinion and the assumption that the situation is right or good parallel groupthink symptoms and dominate/subordinate relationships that Miller discusses.
Cheney and Lair define dissent “as ‘the rejection of the views most people hold’” (p. 184). As we discussed in class, dissent is a major concept rejected in groupthink. Dissent would mean going against the group and thus is highly unpopular as we saw in the case of the Bay of Pugs and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Towards the end of the essay, the authors state that “as long as the glamor of [war] is sufficiently represented in popular culture… it is difficult to mount credible opposition” (p. 198). Because society accepts war and its consequences, it is hard to oppose it publicly. Dissent in the case of the Iraqi or Vietnam war and other global situations with negative outcomes, in my opinion, is like groupthink on a societal level.
Be First to Comment