1954 social experiment on group division

[Pappy]

"Social psychologist Muzafer Sherif brought two highly similar groups of 11- to 12-year-old boys to Oklahoma’s Robbers Cave State Park in 1954. His intention was to study how hostilities arise between groups.

The boys arrived on separate buses and camped in different areas. One group decided to call themselves the Eagles; the other, the Rattlers. When the groups met, they fell into conflict. First, there was verbal sparring and then physical confrontation.

Sherif changed the terms of the experiment. He didn’t bring the boys around a campfire to express their feelings – polite chatter wasn’t the answer. Sherif gave both groups a problem to solve. He had jammed the camp’s water supply. If the boys wanted water, they would have to work together to fix the jam.

The boys collaborated on several problems. The hostilities dampened, and they stopped calling each other names. Several even asked if they could ride home together on the same bus.

Since the mid-1970s, Americans have been self-segregating. We live in neighborhoods, go to churches, read news and join clubs that are increasingly politically homogeneous. We even date and marry within our chosen party. We are Rattlers and Eagles – and the consequences in 2022 are the same as in 1954.

What can we do? Mandatory national service. For a year or two, we would join others – a tossed salad of class, race, religion, party and way of life – to work on a problem facing the country. Not talk – do.

It could be through military service or a new version of the Appalachian Volunteers, the Peace Corps or Civilian Conservation Corps. But everyone at some point – Rattlers and Eagles – would have to work together to make the United States a better place.

Studies of World War II support the notion that working together reduces tensions between groups that might otherwise be hostile toward one another. White troops who fought alongside Black soldiers held less racial animus post-war. The same was true with White merchant marines who served with Black sailors.

So let’s carry that lesson into the present day. And when our time of service is up, we just might choose to ride the same bus home together."

~Bill Bishop

 

[Hobie1dog]

If we had a decent educational system, Worldwide, which we don't, it would require that every kid starting at kindergarten and all the way up through the 12th grade, would have a mandatory class every year dealing with strictly on how to treat each other with compassion and empathy. So basically a class in human behavior so that there are situational role plays through the year. Rotating students to maximize all the different types of personalities. This would have everyone experience what it's like to be talked down to, made fun of, treated differently because of race, economic status, etc. Waiting till they get out of school is too late.

 

[jqavins]

I don't believe that stuff can ever be taught in a class. It has to be taught from birth onward, by example, by patents, grandparents and aunts and uncles, siblings and cousins, friends, parents and so on of friends... the whole village. (That's just part of what "it takes a village" means.) And not just taught be example, but learned through experience. Trying to teach it in a classroom is, I believe, like trying to teach a pig to sing; it will only waste your time and annoy the kids.

A few days working together in a forrest makes a difference, clearly, based on that experiment. Were those kids followed? I bet it faded, a lot if not completely. A couple of years fighting together in a war surely has a much greater effect, but I wonder how much that faded with years also.

It's got to be taught be example and learned through experience from birth on because only that way can it become part of a person. And this is part of what I'm talking about when I say (as I've said before) "Every child is home schooled; what are you teaching yours?)

That'll be $0.02 please.

 

[Pappy]

i disagree that teaching anything in a classroom is a waste of time, for good or ill. the classroom provides an environment for discussion, whereas home environment is often one of dictate. jane elliot comes to mind. i don't think she was wasting anyone's time. i don't think kids are as unaffected long term as you believe, and certainly not every kid.

I agree with the importance of home schooling, and would like to draw from my miss jane reference and point out as an example, racism. this is not instinctive, it is taught, not in classrooms, but at home. can we agree that there are a whole lot of racists in the world, and that racism sucks?

classroom teaching is important.

 

[jqavins]

I don't disagree that classroom discussion is somewhat valuable, and I should have been more clear. My list of those from whom kids can and should and one hopes do learn to be decent people should have included teachers and classmates. Classroom teaching alone is not even close to adequate for this, and classroom teaching in addition to a good a home and community environment will make some, but not much difference. Not much, simply because a good home and community environment wouldn't need much help.

 

[smstachwick]

Social experiments have revealed much about human nature and its many flaws. They have replicated on scales as small as a single classroom the conditions under which various forms of fear, anger, hate, and suffering flourish, with predictable and disturbing results.

So the mechanisms are generally well-understood but what is less clear is how exactly to undermine, disrupt, and replace these conditions on national and global scales. New ideas can be instilled in the test groups to great effect, but occasionally ethical issues force the experiment to be ended altogether. Both of these are very hard to do on a supermassive scale.

 

[dr wogz]

Toss "religion" into the mix as well. Some are better at berating others than other religions.. (How are women treated? how are other religions treated?) Some laws enacted recently to "level" the playing field.. but have their own draw-backs..

The education side also shows that the lesser your level of education, the more likely you are to be "turned" or have a vociferous opinion..

Social Media & 'reality TV' isn't helping either.. Not to mention the mud slinging the parties toss at each other. (Its always easier to blame & point that prop yourself up.)


One issue I feel you (The US & England) have is that you only have two parties. And you only allow for the two parties.. (Yes, you do allow for others, but they never make 'the cut'.) Canada, and some others, allow for a diverse pool of parties, and they all tend to even each other out..

 

[KenECoyote]

I grew up in a very diverse neighborhood and later hired and managed an extremely diverse staff of all types (NYC).

In my opinion, discrimination is ignorance and the way out of ignorance is through learning, understanding and experience, so I agree with what the OP noted.

Whenever I'm discriminated against, I don't get upset...I actually feel sorry for the person who is ignorant and proving themselves so.

In my birth country, most of you here would be the minority and likely discriminated against for the same reasons...but not by me. Especially since we all love rockets!