In Groups and Out Groups

I learned about it from my friend Delray, the idea of in groups and out groups, and that's when I first started thinking really hard about it.

I think he was using Max Weber, Weber's text, and probably the first person to put this idea forward.

I saw it confirmed, maybe in Riggio's Industrial-Organizational Psychology, but I don't have the source handy.

We discussed the idea of scapegoating on this blog, in an essay I originally entered to my International Political Economy.

There was an experiment we did together: we went to a party, we picked (an acceptable? I'll try to show you what I mean) universal scapegoat, and we tried to strengthen the group.

The scapegoat that we chose was a bully who had died in a car crash. He was a local bully and he was a seemingly justified target (don't take me out of context; I'm going to talk about this in a second).

So we did it and of course it worked. We were playing a game and we brought it up, making fun of the kid;

It wasn't even making fun of the bully, it was a game we were playing called "non-factors in Clinton, New York."

And he said it, and everyone felt the sort of anger at this bully and the (guilty?) pleasure of saying this kid's name. After all, he was dead!


I've been thinking about the ascetic life lately in previous posts, but I'm also considering the life of the outsider.

Eugen Victor Debs wrote:

As long as there is a lower class, I am in it
As long as there is a criminal element, I am of it
As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free

Which is about the fact that we establish low class as a way to recognize the other; we pose these people as criminal because we don't want to recognize the other; and we put them in prison because we don't realize this process.

I keep thinking to myself that I don't want to be part of the in-group, and I don't want to fit in; because I run into these problems of wanting to please people. It's dangerous stuff!!!

But more on this later......(a thought terminating cliche??)