if you’ve ever studied sociology, you likely do not need me to tell you this.
group dynamics and the usefulness of groups as beneficial environments depends in large part upon the diversity of the opinions they contain. well, if you assert that any group’s purpose is to increase the long-term benefit of its members (this, a given, is often refuted by some, so i present it here as an initial assertion/axiom).
it is curious to me how social groupings tend to ultimately act to their detriment over time. particularly, the manner in which dynamics of control and social status inevitably lead to the deterioration of the group as a whole, until such time as the weight of defending or maintaining social status becomes the core bond and the initial impetus about which the group was formed is usurped.
this seems to be particularly common in western society and all but requisite in american society. i sometimes entertain myself pondering why this is, and it always comes to the conclusion that individual desire for social status and control erodes and will eventually consume any group that does not take consistent steps to avert it or that does not consistently enforce the benefit of the group as primary and of highest priority.
there is a rather lengthy and very pointed paper on the matter here:
http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/episteme/v003/3.1solomon.html
i’ve attached it in its PDF Version in the event the link ever dies.