Hive Mentality and the Importance of Individualism—First Rough Draft

Hive Mentality, also known as “groupthink”, is a psychological state in which

people living in a tightly knit community forsake all outside opinions, questioning of
community leaders, and alternative lifestyles and ways of doing things. Social
psychologist Irving Janis, who coined the term “groupthink”, explored this topic
extensively throughout his career and has offered fundamental insights into highly
structured group behavior that illustrate the immanence of this frightening reality. One of
his most important contributions was a list of eight “symptoms” of groupthink, which can
be used to determine whether or not a group has succumbed to this state of mind. Janis
also investigated the inefficiency and unreliability of the media, which contribute to the
growth and development of groupthink in America. Other psychologists have determined
a number of “remedies” for groupthink, but these are mostly preventative measures that
would not be helpful after a group has adopted a hive mentality. (“What Is Groupthink”)
While the causes of groupthink are unclear and definitely varied, the symptoms of
groupthink are well defined. They are listed as follows: “[the] illusion of invulnerability,
collective rationalization, belief in inherent morality, stereotyped views of out-groups,
direct pressure on dissenters, self-censorship, [the] illusion of unanimity, [and] self-
appointed mind guards” (“What Is Groupthink”). The illusion of invulnerability is an
important aspect of groupthink because it provides the community with undue confidence
that often results in taking dangerous risks. Collective rationalization asserts that
community members do not process critical advice and never review or examine their
decisions before carrying them out; it requires absolute certainty, which can be compared
to hubris, the fatal flaw in many great literary works as well as some historical
occurrences. Belief in inherent morality is very beneficial to a developing hive mentality
because it allows the leader to discount outsiders and boost morale and confidence on that
basis. Inversely, those who do not conform to the group are regarded as inherently evil. It
also allows the community to engage in dangerous or harmful behavior without fear of
repercussions; some groups may even believe that one god or another has them under
divine protection (Greenaway). Stereotyped views of out-groups serve the same basic
purpose as a belief in inherent morality; they discount the opinions of outsiders and
bolster the group’s self-perceptions. They allow a clean, stark separation between those
who are “in” and those who are not. Leaders of groups engaged in hive mentality use
direct pressure on dissenters as a tactic to quiet divergences from the group’s ideals. It is
propagated by the most central and devout members who help to keep outliers and
newcomers “in line”, often by public ridicule or punishment of the dissenters. This
discourages other members from rebelling and reinforces the idea that the group is the
highest moral order. Self-censorship refers to the community members’ voluntary
repression of “doubts and deviations from the perceived group consensus”; the
expression of this symptom is significant because it suggests that members may not yet
be convinced of the absolute morality and invulnerability of the group, making it easier
for them to disengage and recover from groupthink. The illusion of unanimity is
important to hive mentality because it assures the community members that they have the
support and care of the entire community and gives a sense of “everyone else is doing it,
so it must be okay”. This is reassuring because even in the event that one of the members
doubts the group, he can be certain that no matter what happens he will not be alone.
Finally, self-appointed mind guards are significant because they actively and knowingly
obscure facts and evidence from the group and its members to ensure the survival and
stability of the group’s ideals. These are often the same people who enforce the direct
pressure on dissenters, and work to keep the other members from extricating by any
means necessary (“What Is Groupthink”). In any society or group, it is important that
these symptoms be recognized in a timely manner in order to actively address the
developing problem.
In every community, there is a possibility of the community members developing
a hive mentality, but some communities are more susceptible than others. The national
community of America is at a greater risk of its members engaging in groupthink due to a
number of different factors. These include the increasing monopolization and bias of the
media, the illusion of individualism, extreme patriotism, the laziness of the citizens, and
even the regimentation and uniformity of public education. Some of these elements can
be seen in real-world examples of groupthink, such as Nazi Germany, in which children
were indoctrinated with Adolf Hitler’s ideals to ensure their commitment to the Nazi
party (Llewellyn), and contemporary cults, religious or otherwise, in which the group and
its ideals are viewed as wholly moral and righteous (Greenaway) and (Kerr). The
majority of American citizens display at least four of the eight symptoms of groupthink,
and various groups within the American national community display the others as well.
The first and most prominent symptom of groupthink exhibited by most American
citizens is the illusion of invulnerability. They have been conditioned to think that
America as a country excels politically, technologically, economically, and educationally,
even though the only area in which it leads is in its military. This perceived invincibility
is a product of America’s success in warfare and the educational system’s neglect to
explore military and political failures or even to mention them at all. Americans have
been taught only about the bravery of the revolutionaries, the morality of the states during
World War I, when American troops “remained neutral” until one of their own ships was
attacked, and the ease with which American forces swooped in, saved western Europe
from certain destruction and claimed victory during World War II. This blatant neglect to
cover relevant historical events is evidenced in Takaki’s A Different Mirror, in which he
does investigate various occurrences that are glossed over or ignored in middle school
and high school curriculums. Many of the events contained in his book shed a negative
light on America, its policies, or its leaders, which would be damaging to the citizens’
illusion of invulnerability. They would also undermine citizens’ belief in inherent
morality if that were a more widespread symptom in this country. Examples of incidents
that would be considered damaging to America’s image include the debasement of the
Native Americans due to government policies, the internment of Japanese immigrants
and their naturalized children and grandchildren during World War II, and the exclusion
of immigrants from many civil rights (Takaki). Other events that are rarely covered in
depth include the Vietnam and Korean Wars, neither of which produced the US
government’s intended outcome. The more recent conflicts in Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan
have also been subjected to silence. Updates regarding casualties and bombings were
often publicized, but the motives and morality behind them were rarely discussed, and
never analyzed to the extent they should have been. The retraction of these facets from
public discussion helps to maintain the image of America as it is described above.
Other relations from Takaki’s book destabilize the second major symptom of
groupthink presented in America, stereotyped views of out-groups. This is an extensive,
rampant, and underrated problem. Citizens hold or at least have heard negative views of
every other country’s inhabitants. Many even encourage and support these stereotypes,
including a range of generalizations as innocent as the belief that Europeans do not
shower to the damaging notion that all Middle Eastern people are terrorists. Each of these
stereotypes supports the perceived superiority of intelligence, physicality, and civility
gripped by the majority of American citizens. In A Different Mirror, Takaki details and
celebrates the achievements of immigrants and citizens who were not of European
descent. These show that without the capability and determination of numerous “out-
groups”, America could never have become what it is today. These accounts also
demonstrate the corruption and immorality of the American political system through
consideration of the many obstacles set in the path of non-white people in America, even
if they were citizens. Some examples of ethnic groups and individuals who overcame all
obstacles and accomplished great things for America include Frederick Douglass, the
Japanese and Filipino Federations of Labor, W.E.B. Du Bois, and many Jewish
immigrants who were able to blend into American life and culture (Takaki).
The third symptom that the majority of American citizens display is collective
rationalization. Often, the political party in charge completely discounts the advice of the
opposing party, even if it is sound and logical. In this way, the political system of
America is polarized and divided into two opposing groups, neither of which is willing to
think critically about the other’s views or establish rational compromises. This symptom
is often seen in concert with the fourth major symptom, direct pressure on dissenters,
which is referenced in de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America when he discusses the
tyranny of the majority. He writes, “An individual or a party is wronged in the United
States, to whom can he apply for redress? If to public opinion, public opinion constitutes
the majority; if to legislature, it represents the majority and implicitly obeys it; if to the
executive power, it is appointed by the majority and serves as a passive tool in its hands”
(Tocqueville). De Tocqueville is arguing that when a citizen or group opposes the
majority’s school of thought, their ideas are suppressed with no hope of consideration.
This implicates the development of groupthink because it is a form of direct pressure
being placed on supposed “dissenters” whose thinking is not in line with those in charge.
These problematic behaviors constitute half of the possible symptoms of groupthink,
which is a very discouraging sign. The others are all displayed throughout America, but
not by the majority of American citizens, which is yet another concerning thought.
In Ragtime, when Coalhouse assembles his gang, he is able to convince his new
followers that his cause is worthy and just. He also assures them that there is no other
way to achieve it than through the destruction of the fire station and other well-known
properties. The gang, whose members begin to refer to themselves collectively as
“Coalhouse”, believes with certainty beyond a doubt that their cause is unanimously
accepted and inherently moral, and they have dedicated the remainder of their lives to
Coalhouse and his cause, willing to fight and die if necessary for his ideals (Doctorow
246). The Coalhouse gang’s obvious engagement in groupthink demonstrates one very
important aspect of hive mentality that America has not yet acquired; this is a charismatic
and persuasive leader behind which the community members can rally. Just like drones
and worker bees are lost and incapable of action without their queen, so are the members
of a community engaged in groupthink bewildered and incompetent without a leader.
Community members are usually led into groupthink by the leader; they do not engage in
groupthink and then allow someone to gain control over the community. This is evident
in V for Vendetta when the chancellor’s rise to power is presented; he takes advantage of
a beleaguered population, enticing them with promises of strength, security, and safety,
but he plans to accomplish this by eradicating rebellious and divergent individuals from
society (V for Vendetta). This is a direct reference to Bush-era politics, which issued a
passionate and patriotic “call to arms” against Islamic and Middle-Eastern people, who
were then and are still perceived as terrorists, not unlike those that have been issued
against homosexuals and immigrants in the past. All of these occurrences have the same
common problems, the most significant of which is the failure to differentiate between
“dangerous” individuals and the group as a whole. This neglect creates collective
animosity against an entire group of mostly, if not wholly, innocent individuals that leads
to violence, systematic oppression of certain groups, and presentation of these groups as
“out-groups”, which are then stereotyped, even if they exist within the national
community. All of these effects can be set into motion by a single, compelling leader who
can grip the attention and capture the minds of the majority, which de Tocqueville
describes as being the single driving force behind every political action taken in America.
Another example of an outwardly charming leader’s ascension to power is Adolf Hitler’s
political conquest of Germany. The German citizens looked to him for hope, unity, and
restoration after their bitter defeat in World War I. After the war, they were united by
their shared misery at the hands of the Allies, and Hitler was their reprieve. He was able
to provide new vitality to his followers, and once they relinquished their independence
and melded into the Nazi party he was able to do whatever he wanted without opposition
from his new subjects. After the end of World War II, many of Hitler’s chief officers and
generals were quick to blame whoever was above them, not because they doubted the
atrocity of their crimes, but because they had been acting under their commanders’
influence with unthinking, unhesitating obedience characteristic of groups that have
succumbed to hive mentality. Even the German admiral who had been chosen by Hitler
to succeed him as fuhrer, Karl Doenitz, was quoted at the Nuremburg trials saying,
“[politicians] are the ones who brought about these disgusting crimes, and now we have
to sit there in the dock with them and share the blame!” (“The Nazi Defendants”). The
effectiveness of the leader is not, therefore, in his ability to command attention, but in his
ability to convince the group members to give up their logic, critical thinking, and
individuality.
One of the most important and pervading qualities that American citizens apply to
themselves is that of “individualism”. Although the connotations of this term may vary
from person to person, most Americans would agree that it denotes a sense of uniqueness
that serves to separate them, their actions, and their achievements from those of other
people. However, despite this perception of personal separation, American citizens are
alike in many ways, and they form a cohesive national community that, while not entirely
unified in all aspects, is joined on many fronts. The idea of individualism in America is
very superficial and often meant in a purely material sense. It refers to differing styles of
dress, tastes in music, hobbies, and other such trifles, which lack true importance and are
chosen based solely upon personal opinion. Public institutions such as the educational
system, the electoral system, and others are nearly identical throughout the country.
These establishments have criteria that they must meet, which are dictated by the federal
government and serve to standardize American citizens’ experiences. This is supported
by de Tocqueville’s claim regarding individuality that “as each class gradually
approaches others and mingles with them, its members become undifferentiated and lose
their class identity” (Tocqueville). Although he is describing purely economic
circumstances, this argument applies to other aspects of life as well. The standardization
of experiences allows the government to eradicate true individualism, which would be a
threat to the American system and its functionality. The way the political and economic
systems of America are constructed, the needs of the many are placed in the hands of a
few very corrupt, wealthy, and powerful groups of lawmakers and CEOs, even though, as
de Tocqueville states quite eloquently, “[citizens] acquire the habit of always considering
themselves as standing alone, and they are apt to imagine that their whole destiny is in
their own hands” (Tocqueville). If American citizens could begin to develop a stronger
sense of individualism and conviction, they might be able to band together and modify
this system. While some modifications would be beneficial to the country, they would
reduce the wealth and power of those in charge, who, in their corruption, will do virtually
anything to maintain it.
Through careful regulation and well-defined rules, the government is able to
ensure that each citizen is trained to do things the “right” way. Citizens are also taught
that the “right” way, as defined by this system, is the only way, thus removing the threat
of individualism and creating the illusion of unanimity. A very powerful example of this
illusion is the Scientific Method. Every fifth- and sixth-grader is forced to learn this six-
step process of “proper” reasoning, which can lead only to a “yes” or “no” answer. In this
way, all children who attend American schools are taught the necessity of certainty in
American society and the fallacy that all problems are black and white with very little
ambiguity. Such definitive thinking negatively impacts individualism because it forces
students to “pick a side” instead of trying to find constructive compromises. This method
of reasoning carries through high school and even pervades some college classes. It is
propagated by standardized tests and other such fixed assignments. These came as a great
shock to me when I entered the school system after years of in-home education. I had
always been allowed to work through problems on my own and interpret causation and
results creatively. When I entered school, I experienced a forced brand of groupthink in
which my teachers dictated how I was allowed to think, what I was allowed to interpret,
and the ways in which I could go about interpreting both scientific data and literary and
artistic pieces. In addition to being taught the importance of distinctness and polarity,
American children are very subtly instilled with the negative connotations of curiosity
throughout their time in the school system. Teachers repress or ignore questions
pertaining to material outside of the course curriculum and often tell students outright
that information that will not be on the test is unnecessary and insignificant and that they
should completely disregard any such irrelevant material. I have experienced this
personally throughout my time in the school system, including here at Quinnipiac; most,
if not all, of my professors have disregarded my questions when they deem them
“irrelevant”, and I have been told outright that “once you take the test, you don’t need to
know it.” Students are taught that the only pertinent information is that which will get
them an “A” in whatever classes they are taking. They are told that the most important
part of going to school is getting good grades, regardless of how much information they
retain. Students are molded into complacent citizens who simply do what they are told
without questioning or arguments.
 This line of reasoning ties in to Henry Ford’s thinking in Ragtime when he
describes the assembly line workers in his factory as “replaceable parts” (Doctorow 136).
Like Ford’s workers, citizens who graduate from American public schools—and most
American private schools—know their job, their place in the hierarchy of the company or
institution that employs them, and the consequences of deviating from these in thought,
word, or deed. They have been conditioned to accept orders from authority figures and to
not assert themselves, even in the face of ample provocation. These types of people are
perfect candidates to become victims of hive mentality because they are easily led by a
charismatic authority figure and do not have much personal conviction. They simply “go
with the flow” because they feel powerless to do anything else, which is shown in de
Tocqueville’s writing, in the section of Democracy in America entitled “The Tyranny of
the Majority”. He asserts that people who do not go along with the majority are
ostracized and helpless against the oppression inflicted by the majority. A strong majority
also helps to put direct pressure on people who disagree with the community leader,
which is one of the symptoms of groupthink described previously. Adolf Hitler
understood this necessity and used a similar system to create a supportive yet placid
majority. He employed Nazi teachers in all schools and established youth groups, which
were segregated based on gender, in order to drill his ideals into the minds of the German
children. In an interview with Hermann Rauschning, he said, “In my great educative
work, I am beginning with the young…[but] I will have no intellectual training.
Knowledge is ruin to my young men” (Rauschning). Hitler’s teachers and youth groups
were instituted to prevent German children from developing a sense of curiosity and to
reinforce only the lessons and principles that he wanted them to learn. The school system
strived to “enhance loyalty to Hitler and prepare millions of boys for military service”
(Llewellyn). Girls’ education was important as well, preparing them to be docile
homemakers and caring mothers who would in turn teach their children the ideologies of
the Nazi party (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum). While these tactics are far
more organized and conscious than the suppression of curiosity in American schools,
these could easily evolve in conjunction with the media, which plays an equally
important role in the conditioning of citizens, to perform a similar function.
Most of the information that American citizens are exposed to through media is
stagnant, biased, and lacks deviation from the two poles of opinion. The main cause of
this monotony is American corporations’ creation of a near-monopoly on the media.
Ninety percent of America’s media is controlled by only six major news corporations.
These media outlets often emphasize opposing themes, reinforcing the polarity and black-
and-whiteness of the stories they cover, but they fail to investigate any problem or story
in depth or pose unanswered inquisitorial questions regarding the causes and effects of
the events. They also often twist stories to support their constituents’ opinions, thus
reinforcing existing biases and failing to introduce new ideas or assess existing values.
This phenomenon is outlined in Ragtime when the local newspaper publishes a story
about Coalhouse with a picture of Scott Joplin, a famous composer of ragtime music,
showing that the newspaper’s editors do not care about the actual story and only how
they and their story will be perceived by the consumers (Doctorow 222). It contributes to
the possibility of hive mentality because it allows people to think less and merely absorb
whatever is put in front of them. Citizens do not have to think critically about stories
covered by their chosen news stations or media outlets because they simply reaffirm
these people’s preexisting beliefs, opinions, and ideals. A lack of critical thinking is
evident in each of the symptoms of groupthink, and introducing critical thought into
communities plagued by groupthink would essentially “cure” them. However, the burden
of providing knowledge does not fall solely on the media. Citizens would have a much
better idea of the reality of all kinds of different issues if they could find the motivation to
check a variety of different sources whose backgrounds were varied. This laziness
evident in most American citizens is also a contributing factor to the ever-growing
possibility of the American national community developing a hive mentality. People who
engage in groupthink are sometimes led to this state after feeling overwhelmed by the
situation of their lives, nations, or other communities. They find it easier and less
stressful to give in to groupthink and allow someone else to make difficult decisions for
them. This is evident in post-World War I Germany, when the German citizens felt that
they were being oppressed and diminished by all other countries. Harsh post-war policies
were enforced on them, and they felt they had nowhere to turn until Adolf Hitler came
along and reinvigorated them with national pride and a sense of security. They felt that he
was more capable than they were, and they were happy to allow him to make decisions
and lead them to the national success that he had promised.
America is a country whose national community is at great risk of surrendering
their minds to a state of hive mentality. Though it has not yet produced a leader who is
charismatic and captivating enough to lead the citizens into this state, it exhibits many
qualities characteristic of groups already engaged in groupthink. American citizens have
already submitted to the effortless acceptance of biased media, and they exhibit excessive
indolence in their media consumption, never bothering to check the authenticity of the
stories about which they hear and read. The majority also displays half of Irving Janis’
symptoms of groupthink, which according to de Tocqueville is enough of the population
to enforce these ideals on the rest of the citizens. America’s political and educational
systems support the transition into hive mentality as well, teaching students the values of
unquestioning obedience and stark polarity and reinforcing them throughout their lives.
Citizens are being conditioned in a manner that will allow a smooth, passive transition
into groupthink, and people will not even realize it, as most do not, the exceptions being a
few conscientious citizens and the rare people who are able to escape from cults.
However, though the dawn of hive mentality in America may seem immanent, it
can be prevented. American citizens need a rude awakening regarding the reality of their
situation, and if it does not come quickly, they will pay with their conscious thought. In
Ragtime, Emma Goldman condemns Younger Brother for his inability to “accept his
freedom” (Doctorow ???). Throughout his life, Younger Brother had been controlled by a
hive mentality, and even though he rejected the school of thought that his family and
coworkers projected onto him, he was not able to escape from a life ruled by groupthink.
Goldman is encouraging him to think for himself instead of simply joining up with a
different hive that he deems more “worthy” or “acceptable” than that of the middle class
whites. She understands his thought process and realizes that if he is ever going to break
from the trappings of hive mentality he must learn how to think critically before
accepting anyone else’s logic, regardless of how moral or credible it seems on the
surface. Like Younger Brother, many American citizens cannot or do not want to think
for themselves. Allowing oneself to be led along by people who are “more qualified” to
make decisions or agreeing with the perceived majority opinion are much easier than
actually analyzing presented information and determining alternative arguments and
courses of action. In order to disrupt this ingrained system of unthinking acceptance, we
must begin reformations in the educational system. Children are naturally curious, and
they analyze anything that enters their consciousness. These traits should not be stunted
by teachers or tests that require very narrow, focused thought; they should be embraced
and rewarded with answers. School boards also need to reorganize history curriculums to
make them more factual and inclusive. Glorifying America and its government will only
contribute to the belief in its inherent morality and invulnerability and will foster hive
mentality. The next most important reformations would be of the American media. The
media produces pieces that are wholly biased and sometimes even outright untrue. While
there is little that American citizens can do to police the media, they should require that
media outlets post disclaimers regarding the absolute truth of their stories and provide
easily accessible resources for both fact checking and exploration of the opposing
argument. This would encourage citizens to become more knowledgeable about cold hard
facts and to form an opinion based on a well-rounded perspective on the issue at hand by
making it easier and simpler to do so. Most, if not all, other preventative measures must
be taken on a personal level. Citizens need to concern themselves with finding the truth
through critical and logical evaluation of facts and opposing arguments. This is especially
true regarding political matters that require action and “out-groups” that are vilified by
any large group. They must also engage in critical discussion with people whose views
differ from their own instead of simply disregarding them based on preconceived ideals.
If each citizen made a conscious effort to reject biased and one-sided arguments and
become more educated and more willing to listen to and converse with others, the
development of groupthink in America would halt and cease to be.
 Works Cited
1. Doctorow, E. L. Ragtime. New York: Random house, 1975. Print.

2. Greenaway, Naomi. “Brainwashed, Torn from Her Parents, and Abused at the
Age of Four: Sex Cult Survivor Tells Her Harrowing Story.” DailyMail.com.
N.P., 28 Jul. 2014. Web. 08 Apr. 2015

3. Kerr, Lisa. “My Story.” My Cult Life. N.p., 20 Jan. 2011. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

4. Llewellyn, J. et al, “Children in Nazi Germany.” Alpha History. N.p., 2014. Web.
08 Apr. 2015.

5. “The Nazi Defendants in the Major War Criminal Trial in Nuremberg.”

University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

6. Rauschning, Hermann. Hitler Speaks; a Series of Political Conversations with

Adolf Hitler on His Real Aims. London: T. Butterworth, 1939. Print.

7. Takaki, Ronald T. A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America.

Boston: Little, Brown, 1993. Print.

8. Tocqueville, Alexis de, Phillips Bradley, Henry Reeve, and Francis Bowen.
Democracy in America. New York: A.A. Knopf, 1945. Print.

9. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. “Shaping the Future:

Indoctrinating Youth.” Holocaust Encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

10. V for Vendetta. Dir. James McTeigue. By Andy and Lana Wachowski. Perf.
Rupert Graves, Natalie Portman, and Hugo Weaving. Warner Bros., 2005.
DVD.

11. “What is Groupthink.” PsySR. N.p., n. d. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.