The Summer of 1939

Summer of 1939: Lecture Objectives

1. Describe the events of the summer of 1939 and the dilemma of the Nazi vote.

2. Describe the Lewin democracy experiment.

3. State why laissez-faire turns to autocracy.

4. Contrast the nature of democracy and autocracy.

Two events of Summer 1939

Hitler invades Poland & Czechoslovakia Jagiellonian University

Kurt Lewin and his students Ralph White and Ron Lippitt publish their experiments on the nature of democracy and autocracy conducted at Iowa University

Hitler’s rise to power Fought in WWI 1920s-1930s: Germany in relative deprivation (Treaty of

Versailles; Frei Corp.) His demagoguery emphasized: nationalism, anti-

Semitism, anti-communism, Aryan strength Becomes Chancellor in 1932; Nazi party in 1932-33

elections receives 33.1, 37.4, & 44.9% of votes Autocratic rule (propaganda to justify regime; power

accumulated in the Nazi party) Results:

36.5 million human beings died in WWII 6 million Jews (over 90% of the total Jewish population in

Europe) plus untold other “undesirables” killed in genocide known as the holocaust

Kurt Lewin Fought for the Germans in WWI Jewish refugee who escaped Nazi

Germany in 1932 Founder of the field of experimental

social psychology First dissertations in social psychology His heirs in social psychology

Wondered: What is the nature of democracy?

The dilemma of Nazi vote Common definition of democracy:

majority rule of the people (through the vote)

Is it just majority rule and elections? If so, then Nazi Germany was a democracy

And so are: Soviet Union, Castro’s Cuba, Iran, Mussolini’s Italy (mob) plus other despotic regimes

Iraq & Palestine?

What is democracy?

“Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.”

James Bovard (civil libertarian)

What is the “more?” Wertheimer: the protection of minority rights

and the fostering of institutions to support those rights

Imagine that we vote that Student X must always bring donuts to class.

Minority = those not in the majority due to opinion, ethnicity, religion, or whatever.

A common complaint: Why did the courts overturn the will of the people?

Will of the people Power to the people

How to protect minority rights – America’s solution

Madisonian principles in the US Constitution Place checks and balances on the

accumulation and use of power Bill of Rights (plus some

Constitutional amendments) Contract among citizens to protect

each others’ rights

What is the “more?” Kurt Lewin: Democracy and autocracy

are “climates” or patterns of social relationships.”

Democracy: Leader leads the group in setting policy, tasks, and procedures

Autocracy: Leader sets policy, tasks, and procedures

Laissez-faire: Do your own thing; no leader involvement

Conducted an experiment to understand the nature of these relationships

Lewin’s experiment on democracy, autocracy, and laissez-faire

Setting: Boy’s club IV: Different types of leadership

Democracy Autocracy Laissez-faire

DV: Social effects Productivity & Creativity Satisfaction and happiness Hostility (false accusations)

Show DVD of original footage

Results of Lewin’s experiment

Productivity & Creativity Satisfaction and happiness Hostility (false accusations)

Productivity & Creativity Democracy

High rate of production; most creative products

Autocracy High rate of production, but only when

the boss was present; no creativity Laissez-faire

Lowest rate of production; poor creativity

Democracy and Productivity on the world stage Poor democracies compared to poor

autocracies show democracies Higher economic growth rates Better quality of life (clean water, literacy,

agriculture yields, health) 9 years longer life expectancy Better at avoiding calamites (e.g. severe crop failure;

economic ruin) Autocracies show short productivity increases that

then decline From: Siegle, Weinstein, & Halperin Sept/Oct

2004 Foreign Affairs

Satisfaction Democracy

Friendly relations; liked the group and group members

Autocracy Dependency & frustration;

manipulative of others (hide feelings) Laissez-faire

High discontent; bored; high-drop-out rate

Democracy and Satisfaction on the world stage Surveys of 100,000 person in 55

nations. Nations measured on capitalistic

democracy vs. autocracy High income, individualism, human rights,

and social equality Subjective well-being is highly

correlated with the indicators of capitalistic democracy

Hostility Democracy

Moderate rate of hostility Autocracy

Exp 1: Highest rates of hostility Exp 2: Highest rates (for certain leaders)

and lowest rates (for other leaders) that become high when leader leaves

Laissez-faire High rates of hostility due to boredom

(horseplay to pass the time)

Hostility in autocracies Leaders maintain their power through:

Scapegoating (blaming problems on a few out-members)

Leader excuse for failure Hatred of scapegoat increases cohesion Monkey on a stick: You don’t want to be a scapegoat Self-esteem boost (not like them)

Projection (accusing others of your own misdeeds) Deflects attention from leader’s sins and places blame

on others Two important indicators of authoritarian

leaders but it requires careful analysis Sibling accuses sibling of stealing the cookie; to

know the truth requires detailed “detective work”

Why less hostility in democracies? Throughout history: No mature

democracy has ever attacked another mature democracy! War of 1812 possible exception Mature democracies are not less aggressive

than autocracies; just that mature democracies do not attack each other

Immature democracies have higher rates of attacks than either autocracy or mature democracy

Why this pattern? Mature democracies:

Have mechanisms for conflict resolution other than war

Have means for status attainment other than position in hierarchy

Have interdependencies that dampen conflict Immature democracies

Do not have well-established conflict resolution mechanisms

Leaders may need to appeal to the people to maintain power and to do that it is useful to create scapegoats and enemies

Litwin & Stringer 1968 replication Set up a mock business simulation with

autocratic vs. democratic (affiliation) vs. democratic (achievement) leadership

Democratic (affiliation): leader encouraged placing a premium on good (fun) relationships (t-groups)

Democratic (achievement): leader encouraged achievement through personal goal setting

Litwin & Stringer results Autocratic

Norms Leaders and workers separated “Follow the rules or else” norm Do only what you are told

Results High rate of production but a costly

production process that negated profits; no innovation

Low job satisfaction

Litwin & Stringer results

Democratic (affiliation) Norms

Friendliness amongst all Equality Democratic decision making

Results Low productivity and moderate

innovations High job satisfaction

Litwin & Stringer results Democratic (achievement)

Norms (Silicon Valley) Keep busy; take on work Teamwork Individual responsibility for job Make job fun Beat everyone else (competition)

Results High productivity and very high innovations High job satisfaction

The Lewin experiment in broader context

What have we learned about the nature of the three types of climates?

Laissez-faire is not democracy Some of Lewin’s experimenters at first

thought democracy was merely do your own thing

Today’s variants of laissez-faire Libertarianism New Age Radical free market (kleptocracy)

Lesson: Democracy is not the lack of persuasion (propaganda) but persuasion of a certain kind (self-generated, participatory persuasion)

Laissez-faire becomes autocracy Michels Iron Law of Oligopoly: all

forms of organizations will eventually and inevitably develop into oligarchies (political power rest with a few elites) Michels was a socialist observing his own

movement Anthony’s Addendum: unless that

organization takes the steps needed to prevent the rise of autocracy

Why the Iron Law of Oligopoly? Power (influence) abhors a vacuum

Why are there North and South Koreas? Iraq post Saddam

Lord Acton: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” David Kipnis: experimental studies placing

people in power creates a metamorphism: Devalues target of influence; uses influence more;

believe he/she deserves to use power; believe that they are more worthy than others

Nature of Democracy vs. Autocracy The State is a

constitutional democracy or Abraham Lincoln’s principles “of the people, for the people, by the people” under the rule of law

Individual serves state & leader or Ulpain’s principle of Quod principi placuit legis vigorem habet. (What pleases the prince has the force of law).

Nature of Democracy vs. Autocracy Co-participation

of leaders in discovering solutions

Authority used to stimulate discussion

System of checks and balances

Predetermined solution by elites

Authority used to induce acceptance of elites

Leader behavior not constrained by rules of group

Nature of Democracy vs. Autocracy Reciprocity of

influence; multiple independent sources of information

Decentralized communication

Flexible group boundaries and roles that allow additional resources to be obtained to solve problems

Unidirectional influence from elites; single or colluding sources of information

Centralized communication

Rigid group boundaries and social roles

Nature of Democracy vs. Autocracy Minority opinion

encouraged as a means of better decision making; feedback encouraged

Agenda, objectives, and work tasks set through group discussion

Rewards used to move group towards objectives

Minority opinion is censored via neglect, ridicule, social pressure, or persecution; feedback discouraged

Agenda, objectives, and work tasks set by elites

Rewards used to maintain group structure and leader’s status and power

Nature of Democracy vs. Autocracy Merit based

promotion

Decisions are fact-based and requires technical skills

Capable of seeing “gray” of complex issues

Compromise & mutual gain

Promotion based on obedience and loyalty to own group

Decisions based on truthiness, self-interest, and corruption

Manchesian black-white thinking

Squash the opposition

Nature of Democracy vs. Autocracy Persuasion based

on debate, discussion, and careful consideration of options; self-generated and participatory; persuasion as discovery

Propaganda that plays on prejudices and emotions

The next lectures Address John Dewey & Ben Franklin’s concerns:

Dewey: “Democracy has to be born anew every generation, and education is its midwife."

As he left the 1787 Constitutional Convention, a Mrs. Powell asked: “What have you given us, Dr. Franklin?“ Franklin replied, "A republic if you can keep it.”

Freedom isn’t free What are the social psychological processes that

promote autocracy and how can they be checked? Obedience to authority, conformity, granfallooning,

rationalization, propaganda, concentration of power, corruption

What are the social psychological processes that promote democracy and how can they be developed?

Tolerance & empathy, minority influence, prejudice-reduction, growth of middle-class, DIME & conflict resolution

But first….

We will look at why utopias fail See the power of the Iron law and the

need for conflict resolution mechanisms to resolve tensions

Begin our discussion on how to implement the democratic climate

What could these utopias have done to create a successful social organization?