Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Hillary Clinton
Showing Original Post only (View all)The Science Behind Bernie Sanders' Failed Movement, Explained [View all]
Majorities dont just rule, they influence, evenand maybe especiallylocal majorities. More recent research has also found that the effect extends to three degrees of social distance. So it is not only those we know well, but the friends of our friends friends affect how we think and behave, even for health issues like obesity and smoking.
However, Asch also showed that including one or two dissenters in the group drastically brought down the pressure to conform, which creates an urge to stamp out dissent. This presents a dilemma: Enforcing strict adherence to ideology makes for a more cohesive and passionate movement, but it can also make it hard to achieve anything of significance.
.............................................................................
Thats why the true face of revolution always looks more like The Good Wife than it does Homeland. It is not the passion and fervor of the zealots that create change, but when everyone else joins their cause. When accountants and marketing managers start taking to the streets, you know you have something.
So you can see the delicate balancing act that movements must perform. First, they need to create an environment of local majority similar to those in Aschs studies in order to preserve ideological continuity. Yet they also must make inroads to those in the mainstream who are more resistant to the idea, if the movement is ever to grow and affect change..
However, Asch also showed that including one or two dissenters in the group drastically brought down the pressure to conform, which creates an urge to stamp out dissent. This presents a dilemma: Enforcing strict adherence to ideology makes for a more cohesive and passionate movement, but it can also make it hard to achieve anything of significance.
.............................................................................
Thats why the true face of revolution always looks more like The Good Wife than it does Homeland. It is not the passion and fervor of the zealots that create change, but when everyone else joins their cause. When accountants and marketing managers start taking to the streets, you know you have something.
So you can see the delicate balancing act that movements must perform. First, they need to create an environment of local majority similar to those in Aschs studies in order to preserve ideological continuity. Yet they also must make inroads to those in the mainstream who are more resistant to the idea, if the movement is ever to grow and affect change..
Edited to add: This is "lessons learned from the primaries" post, not a rehashing.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2016/06/10/the-science-behind-bernie-sanders-failed-movement-explained/
29 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/726f9/726f9d2d1a621cd2ca5064510c33faeb32aa157f" alt=""
The march on the DNC in Philly will tell. Will it be angry or will it be upbeat?
LuvLoogie
Jul 2016
#26
Instead of attracting natural allies they bullied and therefore repelled them! FAIL!
Her Sister
Jun 2016
#9
I'd say the key is building a coalition. That involves compromise and patience. And organization.
KittyWampus
Jun 2016
#19