Direct pressure

 
When it comes to "direct pressure to conform", Mormons have an arsenal of pressures and a wide range of pressure points to work with. Members who question the Church will certainly feel it from believing family and they might get called in to talk with the bishop, who will likely send out a request that home and visiting teachers make a greater effort. Every word and every action gets evaluated constantly in order to understand one's strength of loyalty to the Work.

Nowadays every minute spend in church, every lesson-oriented visit, every Ensign article, every second of General Conference feels like direct pressure. 

Illusions of unanimity

 
Apparently the Ancient Romans used to say "Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit", which more or less means silence looks like consent, so you should speak up when you have the chance. 

When you're sitting in church listening to someone spout anti-science trash, racist spew, sexist bullshit, or any other nonsense that no one deserves to be subjected to, think about how your silence might be perceived as agreement. When you have a roomful of people who let shit slide it feels very much like a room full of coprophiliacs united heart and soul. Be aware that feeling like everyone but you is into it might contribute some pressure for you to conform. Don't stand for it.

Differences are okay. I think. At least I want them to be. Speak your mind. Let's see what happens.

 

Self-censorship

The third family of groupthink symptoms covers "Pressures toward uniformity". One of those pressures is the impulse to self-censor. "Ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus" are kept to oneself.

In the Mormon world fear of expressing a dissenting opinion comes from a few places, I'm sure. A few might fear the wrath of God, some might fear Church discipline, most seem to fear confrontation within the ward or branch, and all probably fear disapproval from family members.

Mormons don't want to appear to be out of touch with the Spirit, they don't want to be contentious, and they don't want to take heat for stepping out of line. So what do we do? We keep our iffy thoughts to ourselves and toe the line. At least when people are watching.

Rationalizing warnings

The second set of groupthink symptoms fall under "Closed-mindedness". This involves "rationalizing warnings that might challenge the group's assumptions". 

This entire blog is about how I and others rationalized warnings. For a time I rationalized every problem I encountered with LDS doctrine and tried to keep confrontation at bay for as long as possible. The Church just had to be true. Had to. 

The message was, and still is: don't worry about it now! All questions will be answered after death. All problems solved. All doubts resolved. Believe on.

Unquestioned belief

 
The second part of "overestimations of the group" has to do with "unquestioned belief in [its] morality, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions". I don't think there's any question about Mormons believing that the LDS scriptures and the LDS Church represent the highest possible human morality which means they don't have to question it. Instead they have to live up to the examples set in scripture and by the Church.

That is exactly why Mormons don't worry too much when their scriptural heroes are coercers who needlessly kill, it's why they don't feel too bad about excluding family from weddings, it explains how many members justify racism and sexism, it's how we justify homophobia, and so many other hurtful beliefs, practices, and events.

But how can we see that hurt when the Church is always right? Who are we to trust if not the Church?

Illusions of invulnerability

One problem Mormons face on a regular basis (at least every 6 months) has to do with contemptible instructions handed down from prophets and apostles. What are we to do when our dear leaders screw up or say something awful? Our dear leader Dallin offers this bit of wisdom: 

 But no faithful member should even arrive at the point of criticizing leaders because once the prophet speaks the debate is over. I dare say that most members of the LDS Church never cross the line. Any confusion or frustration caused by the things they hear from our prophets, seers and revelators is put on the back burner, swept under the rug, put on the shelf, etc. In general Mormons readily conform to the thoughts and adopt the talking points laid out to them in General Conference and elsewhere.

This behavior fits nicely into the psycho-social phenomenon known as groupthink. This is where individuals of a given group will defer to leaders to make important decisions regardless of a given leaders competence or of any dissenting opinion an individual might have. Essentially, rational decision-making suffers for the sake of maintaining the status quo.

Irving Janis, the man known for first describing groupthink, created a list of symptoms we can check Mormonism up against. In the category of "Overestimations of the group — its power and morality" we have the first symptom: "illusions of invulnerability create excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking". When I see this I think of the Joseph Smith quote about "no unhallowed hand" being about to stop the Church.

I also think of the LDS Church's quest to dominate the entire world and prepare it for Jesus' millennial rule. How's that for excessive optimism? For a religious tribe that makes up a tiny fraction of the earth's population (about .2% if we're being as generous as we possibly can be) to believe it will save the world and rule it too is nothing short of excessively optimistic.

When it comes to encouraging risk taking the LDS Church is a little hit and miss. In the yes category we have Church teachings on tithing. Members are to take serious financial risks for the sake of paying tithing. On the other hand members are supposed to play it safe by avoiding debt and having food storage on hand. Then again avoiding debt and having food storage only feed the Mormon believe of being invulnerable.

The days of being wild

I think every member has had a conversation or two about the transformation of the Church's image from the early days of unique facial hair styles to the unimaginative, clone-ish, clean cut look of today. We could talk about the history of how this came to be and discuss how silly it all is, but there's something else about this transition that eventually stood out to me.

The more I compared and contrasted the early Church with our current LDS Church, the more I noticed significant differences. Generally speaking, the early Mormons seemed to have a far greater range of expressing individualism and variety of thought compared to today, when so much of what we must think, believe, and do is dictated with precision. What happened to the freedom of belief and expression that once was found in Mormonism?

Then one day a friend of mine pointed out in a brief aside that the early Mormons were incredibly liberal for their times and today Mormons are known for taking a very conservative stance on most issues. How did Utah become one of the reddest states of the U.S.A.? Why does the Tea Party do so well where the Church is strongest? What happened to the spirit of early Mormonism? Why would God find a bunch of liberal, democratically-minded people to start his church only to hand it over to close-minded theocratic reactionaries?

Something didn't seem consistent about the trajectory of this "perfect" Church. Reading about what brought about the changes only clarifies who's really at the helm of mainstream Mormonism.