Sociologist embedded in Stop the Steal rallies insights into Trumpers

[andym]

An Asian woman sociology graduate student at Princeton embedded herself at Trump "Stop the Steal" rallies in Florida to learn more about what their beliefs were. Her conclusions are that the they all are united by distrust in the mainstream media, after that their motivations diverge, although love of Trump (strong leader) and believing him to be a truth-teller are other beliefs held by the protesters. Resentment of black people was mentioned by one participant and resentment of students having their loans forgiven was mentioned by another. A visceral hatred of "socialism" was mentioned by several. Belonging to a "group" who shared their beliefs was a source of pride and unifying force among them. This is a very interesting article that may one day be followed up by a book.

"I Embedded With Trump-Supporting ‘Stop The Steal’ Protesters. Here’s What I Learned."
Megan Kang
Huffington Post
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/stop-steal-protest-trump-supporters_n_60047b38c5b62c0057bdec7b?guccounter=1
....
"But each Saturday from 10 a.m. to noon, this intersection transforms into a political battleground. Since July, a group of Republicans have gathered there with signs supporting Donald Trump, flags, music, and attire. The demonstrators are met with honking, waving, swearing, flicking off, fist pumping, and occasionally, they get into shouting matches with the drivers passing by. Months after the presidential election resulted in a victory for Joe Biden in November 2020, this group of demonstrators continues to show up every Saturday in support of Trump and his claims that the election was stolen from him.

Their efforts are a part of a larger social movement known as “Stop the Steal,” which swept the country in the final months of 2020. It became one of the fastest growing groups on Facebook in early November, amassing 320,000 users in its first 22 hours before Facebook shut it down for trying to incite violence. Despite this, the slogan caught on like wildfire as testimonials alleging voter fraud made their way across social media and onto right-wing sites. The message was fueled by President Trump himself, who claimed the election was stolen on Twitter and official White House platforms. As of early December, one poll found that three out of four registered Republicans said they did not trust the 2020 election outcomes. By that time, “Stop the Steal” demonstrations were taking place on the steps of state capitols, outside of elected officials’ homes, and on local street intersections. On Jan. 6, 2021, the day Congress met to certify the Electoral College votes, “Stop the Steal” followers and other Trump supporters staged an armed insurrection at the country’s Capitol. As a result of the attack, five people died and many more were injured. Footage of rioters destroying parts of the building, sitting inside the Senate chambers, and defacing legislators’ offices offered a shocking display of how far the movement had come.

In effort to try to understand those who are sympathetic to Trump’s efforts to undo the election results, I decided to join them. As a sociology graduate student, my lessons in ethnography have taught me to unravel problems by standing in or near other people’s shoes in the hope of explaining something seemingly inexplicable. Unlike those who study people’s beliefs or behaviors without this context, ethnographers try to capture people within their natural setting by participating in their lives. This is how I found myself spending my last four Saturday mornings at this intersection alongside these protesters. I wanted to get as close as I could to observe and learn how these individuals view themselves and the world they were fighting for, as well as uncover more about their beliefs and motivations.
...
In addition to the misinformation they believed and their allegiance to Trump that brought them together, the camaraderie and pride they shared also kept these individuals coming back to the intersection each week. “Trump supporters know how to have a good time!” Madeline told me. “Once we had five ladies in wheelchairs here. We were all having so much fun.” Each time a car honked in support of the protesters, everyone raised their flags a bit higher, smiles appeared, and a feeling of unity swept over the group. Even I found myself returning smiles to those who honked and waved at me and I felt the elation that my compatriots felt beside me. It was contagious.... "
----
More at the link above.

[jmbar2]

1. I read another analysis

...can't remember where or who at the moment, but they said that continued membership in the group outweighs all information discrepancies. Accepting the lies keeps them together as a in-group. They may not have any other social groups that accept them.

[andym]

2. The power of Groupthink is strong

It would be interesting if you could find that article.

Here is the standard blurb on Groupthink in general from Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

"Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Cohesiveness, or the desire for cohesiveness, in a group may produce a tendency among its members to agree at all costs.[1] This causes the group to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation.[2][3]

Groupthink is a construct of social psychology, but has an extensive reach and influences literature in the fields of communication studies, political science, management, and organizational theory,[4] as well as important aspects of deviant religious cult behaviour.[5][6]

Groupthink is sometimes stated to occur (more broadly) within natural groups within the community, for example to explain the lifelong different mindsets of those with differing political views (such as "conservatism" and "liberalism" in the U.S. political context [7]) or the purported benefits of team work vs. work conducted in solitude.[8] However, this conformity of viewpoints within a group does not mainly involve deliberate group decision-making, and might be better explained by the collective confirmation bias of the individual members of the group.

Most of the initial research on groupthink was conducted by Irving Janis, a research psychologist from Yale University.[9] Janis published an influential book in 1972, which was revised in 1982.[10][11] Janis used the Bay of Pigs disaster (the failed invasion of Castro's Cuba in 1961) and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 as his two prime case studies. Later studies have evaluated and reformulated his groupthink model.[12][13]

Groupthink requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the "ingroup" produces an "illusion of invulnerability" (an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made). Thus the "ingroup" significantly overrates its own abilities in decision-making and significantly underrates the abilities of its opponents (the "outgroup" ). Furthermore, groupthink can produce dehumanizing actions against the "outgroup". Members of a group can often feel peer pressure to "go along with the crowd" in fear of rocking the boat or of what them speaking up will do to the overall to how their teammates perceive them. Group interactions tend to favor clear and harmonious agreements and it can be a cause for concern when little to no new innovations or arguments for better policies, outcomes and structures are called to question. (McLeod). Groupthink can often be referred to as a group of “yes men” because group activities and group projects in general make it extremely easy to pass on not offering constructive opinions.

Some methods that have been used to counteract group think in the past is selecting teams from more diverse backgrounds, and even mixing men and women for groups (Kamalnath). Groupthink can be considered by many to be a detriment to companies, organizations and in any work situations. Most positions that are senior level need individuals to be independent in their thinking. There is a positive correlation found between outstanding executives and decisiveness (Kelman). Groupthink also prohibits an organization from moving forward and innovating if no one ever speaks up and says something could be done differently.....

[Nitram]

5. JMBAR2, that is my takeaway as well. These people are in desperate need of a community and a purpose

thatt will make their lives meaningful.

[rainin]

3. I've believed for a long time that Americans are in desperate need of third spaces

For those of us who don't go to church, the options for congregating with like-minded people are severely limited. Terrorist organizations thrive when people are isolated, lonely, or scared. The best thing we can do is steer the country away from republican policies and simultaneously, think about the needs of people beyond economic security.

[andym]

4. Yours is a very astute observation about belongingness

The need to belong or belongingness is considered a major human motivation. The idea that many lack the desire to participate in traditional group activities like church inevitably leads to the formation of other groups.

A few quick blurbs from Wikipedia on belonginess for those reading this thread:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belongingness

"Belongingness is the human emotional need to be an accepted member of a group. Whether it is family, friends, co-workers, a religion, or something else, people tend to have an 'inherent' desire to belong and be an important part of something greater than themselves. This implies a relationship that is greater than simple acquaintance or familiarity. The need to belong is the need to give and receive attention to and from others.

Belonging is a strong and inevitable feeling that exists in human nature.[1] To belong or not to belong is a subjective experience that can be influenced by a number of factors within ourselves and our surrounding environment.[1]

Roy Baumeister and Mark Leary argue that belongingness is such a fundamental human motivation that we feel severe consequences of not belonging. If it wasn't so fundamental, then lacking a sense of belonging wouldn't have such dire consequences on us. This desire is so universal that the need to belong is found across all cultures and different types of people.[2] "

Abraham Maslow suggested that the need to belong was a major source of human motivation. He thought that it was one of 5 human needs in his hierarchy of needs, along with physiological needs, safety, self-esteem, and self-actualization. These needs are arranged on a hierarchy and must be satisfied in order. After physiological and safety needs are met an individual can then work on meeting the need to belong and be loved. According to Maslow, if the first two needs are not met, then an individual cannot completely love someone else.[3]

Other theories have also focused on the need to belong as a fundamental psychological motivation. According to Roy Baumeister and Mark Leary, all human beings need a certain minimum quantity of regular, satisfying social interactions. Inability to meet this need results in loneliness, mental distress, and a strong desire to form new relationships.[4] Several psychologists have proposed that there are individual differences in people's motivation to belong. People with a strong motivation to belong are less satisfied with their relationships and tend to be relatively lonely. As consumers, they tend to seek the opinions of others about products and services and also attempt to influence others' opinions.[4]"
...
----
The gist of this article suggests that your idea is valid.