The Ambivalent
Collective:
Is there
anything good
for freedom in
the “collective”?
Ian Hansen
How social psychology came to
hate the group in 3 steps
• Step 1: Attempt to explain Nazism without prejudicial
reference to “German national character”
Why did we do it? Because mass
murdering death camps are tidy
and efficient, with a romantic
flourish of schaudenfrade
An obsolete explanation
How social psychology came to
hate the group in 3 steps
• Step 2: Do groundbreaking experiments
on how social influence overwhelms
rational, compassionate, industrious
individuality
Group =>
Groupthink
Deindividuation
Social loafing
Prejudice
Diffusion of responsibility
Conformity
Obedience to authority
=>
How social psychology came to
hate the group in 3 steps
• Step 3: Conclude that all social coordination and
social influence is a psychological cousin of
fascism
=
Labor union social coordination
Nazi pilot social coordination
Implication:
Chauvinist
individualism: To
be truly free, we
must all be
atomistic,
unattached
rugged
individualists
(a.k.a. Rational
Economic Man)
Screw the
unions; screw
the welfare state;
do your own
thing, man
Chauvinist individualism as contra
ALL kinds of collectivity and
interdependence
• Both collectiv-ISM (“Asian”ness,
religiousness, other focus vs. self focus,
etc.)
• And collective ACTION (civic participation,
high voter turnout, town halls, mass
protests, labor unions, etc)
• But running a corporation might be okay,
since corporations are individual persons,
and being in the military is okay too—”an
army of one”
Is chauvinist individualism selfcancelling?
It is just like my
country: leader
selected who can
dangle heaviest
weight from his testesack. Leader just like
Stalin, crushes the
stupid peasants to
make Kazakhstan
greatest country!
Cultural Psychology as antidote to
individualist chauvinism?
• Collectivists may not love freedom, but at least
they respect community and divinity, and in
some ways they’re not so rigid:
– Less FAE
– Less narcissism, deceptive self-enhancement
(Japanese)
– Believe in malleability of intelligence, personality,
moral character
– Attendant to the field, not just the object
– Persistence after failure (Japanese)
– More dialectical, holistic
“Collectivists may not love freedom
but….??!!!”
• Is this paradigm really an antidote to chauvinist
individualism, or a patronizing moral consolation
prize to non-Western cultures?
• So when Bush says, “they hate our freedom” is
our response “no they don’t; they hate being
bomded and occupied” or “well, yes they hate
our freedom, but the value of freedom is
culturally relative…”
A look at individualism and freedom
(in 30 nations)
• Individualism (rated by cross-cultural psychology
expert Harry Triandis)
• Freedom (civil and political liberty as rated by
Freedom House)
• Individualism is indeed a robust predictor of
freedom in a nation:
• r(30) = .71, p < .001
Individualism and quality of life in
the U.S.
Individualism (measured by Vandello &
Cohen, 2000)
Quality of Life (2004 Quinto Livability Index)
Individualism is indeed a robust predictor of
quality of life
• r(50) = .46, p < .001
Score one for chauvinist
individualism
Crush the peasants
and let freedom
ring!
This suggests that individualism is
of value to freedom, but in contrast
to what?
• In contrast to collectiv-ISM
• Or contrast to collective ACTION?
• Or both?
• Triandis’ assessment and Vandello and Cohen’s
both work with an individualism-vs-collectivism
scale, but when measured as non-inverse
constructs (e.g. Singelis
interdepence/independence), they are often
orthogonal or even positively correlated
What about collective action
• Collective action as social contract
– Individuals bind together to take action because
of shared individual interests
– Group identity is tentative and subject to review,
subordinate to individual values and goals
– Examples of collective action that individualists
can be drawn to: voting for a political party, a
street protest, joining a labor union
Voting for a political party
Street protest
Joining a labor union
But is such collective action a
psychological trap?
And will it
ultimately lead to
collectiv-ISM and
thus destroy
individual
freedom?
•With deindividuation,
groupthink, conformity,
social loafing, etc,
Obey
solidarity!
Smash
freedom!
Curse you
collective
action!
In fact…
• Union density is positively correlated with national
freedom:
• r(30) = .39, p < .05
• Voter turnout is also positively correlated with
national freedom:
• r(30) = .55, p < .01
• …and both forms of collective action predict
freedom when holding individualism statistically
constant
Union density and voter turnout are
closely linked

Malta


Iceland
S.Af rica
Belgium
Sw eden



80.00
Australi




Germany


Netherla
Philippi

UK
Braz il

Slovakia
Turkey


Denmark
Norw ay


Korea
voting
voter turnout

New Z eal
Taiw an
Ireland
Finland
France

60.00
India


40.00
USA

Singapor



0.00


Canada
El Salva
Japan

Sw itz erl
Colombia
Guatemal
25.00
50.00
75.00
perunio
union
density
100.00
r(30) = .62
p< .001
In the U.S.
• Union density is not correlated with quality
of life
• Nor is it correlated with voter turnout
• But voter turnout IS correlated with quality
of life: r(51) = .60, p < .001
• Again, this relationship is not mediated by
individualism
U.S. union density in perspective
• Very low union density (13.6% in 2000)
• Low correlation because of restricted range?
• In 1964, union density was 29.3%
• In 1964 the correlation between voter turnout
and union density was r(51) = .54, p < .001
• Also, state declines in voter turnout and union
density from 1964-2000 are strongly correlated,
r(51) = .51, p < .001
Recommended reading
All social capital
appears to be in
decline—not just voter
turnout and union
density. Reason?
Perhaps precipitated by
the explosion of
solitary-oriented
technology (TV,
computers, gameboys,
etc), which exploits and
magnifies pre-existing
cultural “space” for
individual solitude
Collective action (and perhaps all
social capital) rise and fall together
• The popularity of one
form of collective
action rises and falls
with the popularity of
other forms of
collective action, e.g.
labor union
participation and voter
turnout
falling
falling
Complex story for freedom
• Collective action (at least voter turnout) predicts
freedom and quality of life independent of
individualism
individualism
freedom
Collective action
Quality of life
+
Implications
• Freedom is most evident where there is a
COMBINATION of collective action with
individualism, rather than one without the other
A freedom recipe?
• Collective action
without individualism
may indeed be more
vulnerable to
groupthink,
deindividuation,
diffusion of
responsibility, etc.
A freedom recipe?
• Individualism without
collective action is
likely to create a
society of winners
and losers, with
winners largely
uninterested in and
unaccountable to the
freedom or general
welfare of losers.
A freedom recipe?
• Individualism with
collective action helps
ensure not only the
security of individual
conscience, but also
the accountability of
the powerful to those
whose lives are
affected by their
economic and political
decisions.
Is there psychological tension
between individualism and
collective action?
• Sociologically they both sit very well with
freedom, but they may be difficult to hold
together psychologically
• Too difficult to be an independent
individual and effectively coordinate action
with others at the same time?
Freedom-oriented people support
collective action in the abstract but
less so in its messy reality
• Freedom-oriented people: those who score low
on Altemeyer’s (1996) authoritarianism and high
on support for democratic values
• Collective action in the abstract: general support
for labor unions in one’s nation
• Collective action in messy reality: support for
actual local labor unions whose actions affect
your life
Sample: undergraduates affected
by teaching assistant strike
Participant variable
Maj. rule (DP1) OpenDebate (DP2)Oppose Aggress.(DP3)
Support most unions
.40***
Support campus unions .12
.32**
.16
DP-total
Tolerance
RWA
.10
-.04
-.45**
-.18
Support most unions
.51***
Support campus unions .23*
.25*
.09
The freedom-oriented undergrads supported unions
generally but were more ambivalent in their support for
real-life teaching assistants and their allies
Coolness, anti-authoritarianism and
narcissistic individualist chauvinism
• Narcissism scales are not related to
authoritarianism scales
• However “coolness”—both friendly,
creative, confident, sexy coolness and
rebellious, ironic, rough & tough
coolness—embodies anti-authoritarianism
(and to some extent anti-traditionalism and
anti-religiousity generally)
Coolness, anti-authoritarianism and
narcissistic individualist chauvinism
• Coolness also potentially relates to
psychological independence and “culture of
narcissism”
• Narcissism, however, predicts some of the same
things predicted by authoritarianism: notably
aggression and intolerance
• Narcissism is also easier for capitalism to sell to
than modest humility
• As capitalism gets stronger, though, so do the
“winners” who may come to depend on
authoritarianism both to “preserve order” and to
prevent populist anti-business policies
Coolness, anti-authoritarianism and
narcissistic individualist chauvinism
• From cool anti-authoritarianism to cool
narcissism to “cool fascismo”:
• from (a) anti-slavery resistance
• to (b) “rolling down the street smoking
indo, sipping on gin and juice, with my
mind on my money and my money on my
mind”
• to (c) “Muslims are stupid backwards
peasants: let’s roll!”
So
• It’s hard to be a cool detached individualist
and a faithful sibling of solidarity too
We want a
contract!
I want a cigarette
But the apparent dichotomy
between individualism and
collective action as a predictor of
freedom is an illusion
Collective
action
Individualism