the social horde - the bell curve, a living metaphor of dependence.

[floyd]

http://www.mattmonnot.com/archives/pic/bellcurve-small.gif

society exists as a moving horde more than a group of individuals who just happen to be moving in a similar direction. the horde dictates how people move/act. but, who directs the horde? do the leaders of the horde just reflect the collective desires of the horde? or are the smarter members of the horde dictating direction? the history of societies rising and falling (mayans, chinese, greeks, romans, etc.) suggests that there is maybe no intelligent minority dictating direction as societies tend to mindlessly grow larger until the environment can't sustain them and then colapse (suggesting that the appetites of the unchecked horde are really driving things). society statistically resembles (the bell curve) and behaves like a wave, growing and crashing.

there is some evidence that primitive societies were more communist. i think tyrannies and dictatorships are not far removed from communism as they are basically a family with one parent (authoritarian communism). more advanced/complex societies seem to be dominated more by an elite subculture/aristocracy (although they may still have a strong socialist/communist underbelly in so far as the elite panders to the masses, as much/little as they have to, to stay in power).

subcultures are just mini-horde, sub-hordes. people in subcultures typically fashion/identify themselves as better/different than the those in the horde and they may be... but they are still not individuals. subcultures seem to exist between self sufficient independence and total dependence. the popularity of the film napolean dynamite suggests maybe a mainstreaming of subculture identification... "i am not like most, but i still seek a group to identify/bond with." if you talk to older people, there was far more style uniformity in the past. looking at old high school yearbooks, this appears to be evident. of course, most women still wear makeup and many white collar employed men still wear ties. many intps on this board have expressed a preference for being employees, so even intps are not immune from horde/subhorde preferences.


horde culture elements
- wage slaves/employee culture
- prevelant universal shared traditions/preferences
- intolerance to diversity
- few people have individual power/freedom

sub-horde culture elements
- trade unions, worker rights
- more diverse traditions sets (but most people still identify with a select group)
- tolerance of diversity
- some people have individual power/freedom

self sufficient culture elements
- ? independent contractors, small business owners
- ? cultural dynamism, no traditions
- ? expectation of diversity
- most people have individual power/freedom
------------------------------------------------

so how do you identify yourself in reference to the horde or sub-horde? how much have you conformed to the horde or sub-hordes to survive or fit it? is this something you are highly aware of? annoyed by? resigned to? do you prune/conceal your weirdness/outlierness to stay employed, attractive, etc.?

what will a self sufficient culture look like?

feel free to add any thoughts on this topic...

[eyebyte_atWork]

http://www.mattmonnot.com/archives/pic/bellcurve-small.gif

society exists as a moving horde more than a group of individuals who just happen to be moving in a similar direction. the horde dictates how people move/act. but, who directs the horde? do the leaders of the horde just reflect the collective desires of the horde? or are the smarter members of the horde dictating direction? the history of societies rising and falling (mayans, chinese, greeks, romans, etc.) suggests that there is maybe no intelligent minority dictating direction as societies tend to mindlessly grow larger until the environment can't sustain them and then colapse (suggesting that the appetites of the unchecked horde are really driving things). society statistically resembles (the bell curve) and behaves like a wave, growing and crashing.

there is some evidence that primitive societies were more communist. i think tyrannies and dictatorships are not far removed from communism as they are basically a family with one parent (authoritarian communism). more advanced/complex societies seem to be dominated more by an elite subculture/aristocracy (although they may still have a strong socialist/communist underbelly in so far as the elite panders to the masses, as much/little as they have to, to stay in power).

subcultures are just mini-horde, sub-hordes. people in subcultures typically fashion/identify themselves as better/different than the those in the horde and they may be... but they are still not individuals. subcultures seem to exist between self sufficient independence and total dependence. the popularity of the film napolean dynamite suggests maybe a mainstreaming of subculture identification... "i am not like most, but i still seek a group to identify/bond with." if you talk to older people, there was far more style uniformity in the past. looking at old high school yearbooks, this appears to be evident. of course, most women still wear makeup and many white collar employed men still wear ties. many intps on this board have expressed a preference for being employees, so even intps are not immune from horde/subhorde preferences.


horde culture elements
- wage slaves/employee culture
- prevelant universal shared traditions/preferences
- intolerance to diversity
- few people have individual power/freedom

sub-horde culture elements
- trade unions, worker rights
- more diverse traditions sets (but most people still identify with a select group)
- tolerance of diversity
- some people have individual power/freedom

self sufficient culture elements
- ? independent contractors, small business owners
- ? cultural dynamism, no traditions
- ? expectation of diversity
- most people have individual power/freedom
------------------------------------------------

so how do you identify yourself in reference to the horde or sub-horde? how much have you conformed to the horde or sub-hordes to survive or fit it? is this something you are highly aware of? annoyed by? resigned to? do you prune/conceal your weirdness/outlierness to stay employed, attractive, etc.?

what will a self sufficient culture look like?

feel free to add any thoughts on this topic...


Still at it I see :)

[Snowflake]

I consider myself independent, but I have a tendency to respect the subhordes of society, as it were. I enjoy individuality, I enjoy having a sense of freedom to do what I please.

It used to be that I prefered to blend in as much as possible, but as of late, I could care less about that even. I do what I have to in order to get by, but in the future, I would like to be completely independent of society.

[Lilykins]

I own my own small business.

I don't like to follow any cultural tradtions, except I do occasionally stop at
Starbucks for coffee, but not every moring like the rest of the horde.

Love diversity, have a bumpersticker to prove it.
And I am all about personal freedom and power.

Often I find myself supporting sub-horde culture because I think a self sufficient culture would be way too scary for the mainstream. (But I never loose hope.)


is this something you are highly aware of? annoyed by? resigned to?
All of the above

[Jacque]

Have you tried measuring the distance between the grazing cattle?

What about inter-horde relations. Won't two hordes collide more readily than dispersed sub-hordes or non-hordes? And then there's survivability. Do hordes offer protection or do they merely attract predators?

[Xenophon]

I think you have a really important point. The fact of the matter is, no matter what your personal choices are you exist within the framework provided by the "horde". It is very difficult to change the momentum of the horde in any meaningful way. I can think of only a handful of people who have had a meaningful impact, people such as Ghandi, Mandela, and Martin Luther King.

I fail to see however, how a large company is more part of the "horde" than a small company is. This is an accepted part of the social norm and thus part of the horde mentality. If you want to break free from this, you have two options. You can try to change the direction of the horde (pretty much and impossible task), or you can try to live outside of the social boundaries that define the horde.

I'm pretty much resigned to living within the standard cultural norms because I value comfort too much to live outside those bounds.

[joft]

I'm frighteningly deviant in thought, calculatedly compliant in action... and exceedingly fucking sick of it. hence my consideration of dropping out of college and becoming a homeless drifter, for example

[Tensore]

Although the word "horde" seems barbaric, it truly does define the world as a whole. Society is just as unruly and savage as it was 100, 1000 and a million years ago. Though the tactics have changed, little has changed in the principles of society.


if you talk to older people, there was far more style uniformity in the past. looking at old high school yearbooks, this appears to be evident. of course, most women still wear makeup and many white collar employed men still wear ties.

It makes sense. Back then people were expected to learn one occupation and master it. With today's rapid technological advances, one simply won't survive in that manner.

[rufio]

I wouldn't define culture as hoarde-like or as a mod mentality. Things that are in similar contexts and that abide by similar laws will act similarly, but not necessarily because they are all trying to be the same; if you drop two objects, they'll both fall. Human beings have agency and don't have to abide by the rules, it's true, but given that we're all dumped into the same environment and take the same things for granted, there's really only so far most of us consider it to be worth deviating.

Just look at this board. Everyone is convinced that they are the unique one and everyone else is the hoarde. Baaa.

Of course other cultures (and past cultures) look more structured and standardized than our own - we don't notice the things we do on a daily basis that define our daily lives because we take it all for granted.

[floyd]

when i was younger, i started noticing the oddity of different hollywood studios frequently coming out with similar projects around the same time, this is still very common. if the copying took place after a certain film was successful, that makes capitalist sense, but when the convergence/similarity occurs in the development stages that speaks to the inherent human tendency of mirroring/copying others. i don't think the "if you drop two objects, they'll both fall" explains that (or the short lived popularity of member's only jackets) .

i had similar drop out of college ideas as you joft. however, unless you are immune to the elements and don't need to eat i think trying to find an optimal (or at least tolerable) niche in the horde economy might be more pleasant than being a homeless drifter. alternatively, living a sustainable agrarian life might be interesting, but i don't know how possible that is these days.

[rufio]

If the movies are the same in the development stages, than I doubt the similarity has anything to do with mirroring. I was under the impression that things that were in their development stages weren't announced until they were almost finished, to prevent such. If two producers make movies at the same time that turn out similar, I'd guess it's because they're responding to the same perceived demand simultaneously and independantly, kind of like two objects dropped at the same time respond simultaneously and independantly to gravity.

Fads like members only jackets, beanie babies and tamagatchis are great examples of why mob mentality does not produce actual culture. In the future, is anyone who was not alive (or wasn't a certain targeted age) when those things were produced going to know about them? No. Did they have any affect on the cultural make-up of this country? No.

[floyd]

have you ever heard of the predictable human tendency to talk, gossip, disclose even when there is an expectation of secrecy.

explain cultural uniforms - coat and tie for men, makeup for women. member's only jackets did not last because they are not well designed. that they were popular in the first place suggests that the mob will adopt bad designs just based on momentum alone.

if the horde is not the source of life for most, why do most people (including introverts) not respond well to long stretches of social isolation? why has it been found that infants have higher mortality rates when they are isolated from human contact (but still fed)?

are you familiar with the concepts of group think and social loafing?

consider rwanda, arbitrary divisions (made by europeans) caused two not very different groups of people to be at each other's throats. if people really existed outside of a group attachment mindset (a hoard mindset), how would that scenario ever have happened.

[Jacque]

http://us.st5.yimg.com/store1.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1862_3908288

[Master O]

http://us.st5.yimg.com/store1.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1862_3908288
this is the sick dream of corporations and government.


i pretty much concur with Joft except i don't calcualte as much, since i'm pretty much on autopilot - i've probably just had more practice. oh and forget the homeless part, i need comforts and unlimited internet access.

[rufio]

have you ever heard of the predictable human tendency to talk, gossip, disclose even when there is an expectation of secrecy.

I've seen it in action. So what?


explain cultural uniforms - coat and tie for men, makeup for women. member's only jackets did not last because they are not well designed. that they were popular in the first place suggests that the mob will adopt bad designs just based on momentum alone.

They didn't catch on because they didn't mean anything. When a man goes to work in a suit and tie every day, it says something about his status and his level of professionalism. It changes the way people treat him. The same goes for well-dressed women. Members-only jackets are meaningless and if anything probably only have the opposite effect.

Yes, the mob will accept meaningless things just based on momentum, but that won't change the fact that they're meaningless.


if the horde is not the source of life for most, why do most people (including introverts) not respond well to long stretches of social isolation? why has it been found that infants have higher mortality rates when they are isolated from human contact (but still fed)?

Because we are social creatures, at the root of it. Social does not mean mob-like.


consider rwanda, arbitrary divisions (made by europeans) caused two not very different groups of people to be at each other's throats. if people really existed outside of a group attachment mindset (a hoard mindset), how would that scenario ever have happened.

People draw lines - it's how we understand the world. Is it a mob-like quality that we can all agree on what is "red" and what is "orange" most of the time? If we didn't draw the same lines, we wouldn't be able to communicate; our ancestors wouldn't have been able to give accurate instructions in dangerous situations and we wouldn't be here today. Hell, what else is this site here for, but to draw arbitrary lines between people based on MBTI? Does drawing those lines so that we can bitch about a group arbitrarily defined as 'SJ's make us a mob or a hoarde? You came of your own free will, and you post your own opinions and your own thoughts - but you draw the same distinctions as the rest of us. Is that groupthink?

[floyd]

Is it a mob-like quality that we can all agree on what is "red" and what is "orange" most of the time?

in the cases when what is deemed red is not red, and what is deemed orange is not orange, that is mob-thinking.


Hell, what else is this site here for, but to draw arbitrary lines between people based on MBTI? Does drawing those lines so that we can bitch about a group arbitrarily defined as 'SJ's make us a mob or a hoarde? You came of your own free will, and you post your own opinions and your own thoughts - but you draw the same distinctions as the rest of us. Is that groupthink?

the mbti is only partially arbitrary, if it was more than 50% arbitrary i would have no interest in it.

[meshou]

in the cases when what is deemed red is not red, and what is deemed orange is not orange, that is mob-thinking.I think you're assigning below-retard level of thought to the average person.

Yes, I know you don't mean colors. But honestly, the truth is either blindingly obvious or relatively obscure. In the first case, most people will get it right. In the second, the answers are usually varied and up to heated debate.

Sure, there will be more than one hoard at work, but that wasn't your point. You're talking like there are no voices of dissent, and right ideas are often overlooked. There's more than one hoard, and people tend to believe, if not The Truth, something that works.

[rufio]

in the cases when what is deemed red is not red, and what is deemed orange is not orange, that is mob-thinking.

So, you have an absolute objective definition of 'red' and 'orange'? When they taught you the colors in elementary school, did they teach you the exact frequencies at which one color becomes another? Do you have objective scientific rationale for your distinction of colors? Tell me why, if someone were to claim that what you say is 'red' is actually 'orange' you would be right and they would be wrong.

There are some things that can be described more accurately by people who have grown up in the right environment than by computers. Stress, for example, (in language) can be agreed upon by all speakers of the same stressed language, but it cannot be determined by complex scientific equiptment. Should we attribute this knowledge to mob-mentality? Perhaps we should just attribute everything we know to it and resort to nihilism, the only truly individualistic kind of understanding.

[illusivemind]

Language itself is a system that only works through consensus. Try coming up with a language that expresses 'the truth' beyond the mob-mentality of the social 'hordes' and no-one will understand you.

To 'enlighten' people of the conventionality and arbitrariness of the demarcations that make up their reality, you have to abolish the lines that seperate people, not create a class of people that is the 'mob' and those above the mob.

[rufio]

So you do think that culture is mob-mentality? Very well then; have fun locking yourself in a box to prevent any social interaction. There's introverted, and then there's just sociopathic. If you truly think there is nothing to learn from human interaction, feel free to remain in ignorance.

[floyd]

I think you're assigning below-retard level of thought to the average person.

Yes, I know you don't mean colors. But honestly, the truth is either blindingly obvious or relatively obscure. In the first case, most people will get it right. In the second, the answers are usually varied and up to heated debate.

Sure, there will be more than one hoard at work, but that wasn't your point. You're talking like there are no voices of dissent, and right ideas are often overlooked. There's more than one hoard, and people tend to believe, if not The Truth, something that works.

how many people understand most of the things they believe?

explain how europeans artificially created two african groups of people in rwanda, and most of those people stayed true to those divisions to the death? what explanation is there other than the inherent horde orientation of man? if people are really remotely self aware individuals (or generally sensible as you claim), the above could not have occurred.

freud may have been wrong about why people are irrational and driven by unconscious drives (or that psychoanalysis could free them of that), however i think he was right that they are irrationally and unconsciously driven and that reality is still dominant.

[rufio]

But they were right. There was a division between the two groups. There was a difference and it had an observable effect on the social dynamics. What about race in general? Would you say there is no difference between a person who is black and one who is white? Maybe not on a philosophical level, but there is a difference in how you are treated, in what you were probably taught and what social groups you are allowed access to. It may be self-fulfilling, but it was true nontheless. To deny it would be futile - the rest of the world would continue to acknowledge the line and reinforce it.