Polarisation

Who we are and what we do depends a lot on the people in our social environment; especially on those we directly interact with in one way or another. We see some we interact with as “us” and the rest as “the others”, and we behave accordingly, even to that extent that we may come to see “the others” as enemies; and sometimes even to that extent that we behave violently towards “the others”. It’s a well-established fact from social psychology. To see how it works, the Turkish-American social psychologist Muzafer Sherif and his colleagues performed in 1954 the so-called Robbers Cave Experiment. In this experiment, two groups of eleven 11 years old boys took part in a summer camp in Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma, USA. The boys in each group didn’t know about the other group. During the first part of the experiment the boys

“spent time with members of their own group... The groups chose names (the Eagles and the Rattlers), and each group developed their own group norms and group hierarchies. After a short period of time, the boys became aware that there was another group at camp and, upon learning of the other group, the campers group spoke negatively about the other group. At this point, the researchers began the next phase of the study: a competitive tournament between the groups, consisting of games such as baseball and tug-of-war, for which the winners would receive prizes and a trophy. [From now on] the relationship between the two groups quickly became tense. The groups began trading insults, and the conflict quickly spiraled. The teams each burned the other group’s team flag, and raided the other group’s cabin. The researchers also found that the group hostilities were apparent on surveys distributed to the campers: campers were asked to rate their own team and the other team on positive and negative traits, and the campers rated their own group more positively than the rival group. During this time, the researchers also noticed a change within the groups as well: the groups became more cohesive.” (quoted from the ThoughtCo website)

Before I’ll describe how the experiment ended, I want to look at what is happening around us in many countries in the world and especially in the Western world, but not only there. It was important for the experiment, that there were no fundamental differences between the Eagles and the Rattlers. The researchers had composed the groups (the background characteristics of the boys) as equal as possible, and the boys didn’t know each other before the camp started. So it was not this that the group rivalry could explain. Nevertheless, once they knew about the existence of each other, they began to see each other as rivals if not enemies. Just this makes the Robbers Camp Experiment interesting and important for understanding the growing polarisation in many countries, like the USA, the Netherlands, France, etc. For are the differences between the poles – let’s call them R and L for short – really that large that it is obvious that the present societies become polarized? Is there a real basis for the polarisation in the countries concerned and is the R-L split a reflection of real differences? Although I don’t want to deny that such differences exist, I think that the basic ground for the growing polarization is different, namely a sharp decrease in the number of contacts between different groups, views, ways of life, etc. in society. Nowadays. people interact with, deal with and get along with other people who are different from themselves less frequently than they did in the past. People interact less with people who are unlike themselves, have different views and opinions, have different lifestyles, are younger or older, etc. It is not that we should adopt the opinions, lifestyles, etc. from the people we meet, but by meeting others who are unlike “us”, we see that they are in many respects like “us”; they are as human as we are. In such a situation, if we disagree with “the others”, we are more prepared to try to make a deal with them, to find a consensus and to find common solutions, in case of conflict. However, nowadays it’s just the opposite that happens: People tend to limit their contacts more and more to their own bubbles. What happens then is shown by the Robbers Cave Experiment: Limited to your own bubble, more and more you tend to think: We are right and they are wrong. You tend to see those in other bubbles as rivals and enemies, with the use of violence against those you don’t agree with as the ultimate consequence. Society becomes polarized and once there this polarization increases itself.
But let me tell now how the Robbers Camp Experiment ended. I quote again from the ThoughtCo website:

To reduce the group conflict, the researchers “tried having the two groups work on what psychologists call superordinate goals, goals that both groups cared about, which they had to work together to achieve. For example, the camp’s water supply was cut off …, and the Eagles and Rattlers worked together to fix the problem. In another instance, a truck bringing the campers food wouldn’t start (again, an incident staged by the researchers), so members of both groups pulled on a rope to pull the broken truck. These activities didn’t immediately repair the relationship between the groups …, but working on shared goals eventually reduced conflict. The groups stopped calling each other names, perceptions of the other group (as measured by the researchers’ surveys) improved, and friendships even began to form with members of the other group. By the end of camp, some of the campers requested that everyone (from both groups) take the bus home together, and one group bought beverages for the other group on the ride home.”

So, once there, polarization can be reduced: Create common goals. Moreover, I think that as important as common goals – which creates an external enemy, and I wonder whether that is a good idea – are the interpersonal contacts that common goals involve. Since the present polarization in society is largely the consequence of the decrease of interactions between people with different backgrounds, I think that it is very important to restore such contacts again. Try to demolish interpersonal barriers between people and even more between groups of people. Make that people of different backgrounds come into contact with each other again. Institutionalize that people talk with each other; and then better in a café than in an official meeting. Mix them!