The Trouble With Groups

From Small Groups to Corporations to Nations and Beyond

by Jeff Bloom

Humans seem to have a variety of propensities in their thinking and actions that can be either wonderful in a variety of ways or quite troublesome and downright ugly. And, one of these propensities or patterns has to do with some deeply embedded need or desire to be in one or more groups. The vast majority of us enjoy being with others, interacting with others in a variety of ways, and forming a variety of deeper relationships with other people. Fundamentally, such social attractions are a good thing. From the beginning of humankind, we’ve sought out others, created families, and then clusters of smaller groups who banded together to provide systems of shared support. 

We don’t know exactly what happened to such social groupings in the distant past, but many seemed to last for long periods of time. But, in more recent history, especially in the history of what we’ve all experienced, we have had opportunities for close up observation at what happens in groups of various sizes. I suspect that early social groupings fulfilled our need for “belonging” to a group. One of the major aspects of our identities as humans is how significant portions of our identities are associated with membership in a group — a group identity. The core group identity has been family. In many European families, the surnames indicated the familial structure of a person’s identity, A last name of “Robertson” indicated that the individual was in the family of Roberts’ son. Names also were associated with what an individual did, such as “Smith” referring to some sort of metal worker or “smith.” In many Native American nation and tribes, people’s surnames often referred to some quality of being, which was often related to some natural process or animal that represented that animal or process. And, these names also referred to clans. Some surnames also refer to the name of the clan. So, any individual’s name refers to a whole historical lineage and all its various relationships. If you were to ask Native Americans, who identify with their familial and cultural traditions, who they are, they will describe how they fit into their clans. On the other hand, if you ask most people of European descent who they are, they will more than likely answer with a description of what they do. But, both ways of identifying who one is still refer to some group identity. I’m a teacher, I’m a factory worker, I’m a  mortgage broker, I’m a used car salesman. I’m a high school student. I’m a musician. I’m a politician. But, we could easily plug in any sort of group. I’m a Christian. I’m a Jew. I’m a Muslim, I’m Buddhist. I’m a Hindu. I’m an atheist. Or, we might say I’m a Democrat. I’m a Republican. I’m MAGA. We might also say that I’m a Brit. I’m German. I’m a Swede. I’m Russian. I’m an American. I’m Japanese. I’m a Canadian. I’m Navajo. I’m Cree. I’m Brazilian. I’m Mexican. I’m a Ugandan. I’m Nigerian. I’m a New Zealander. But, I don’t think very many people would say, “I’m a nobody.” 

Group identities seem to be core to the way we identify ourselves. Of course, we all create an individual identity of who we think we are as a person, but that individual identity is affected by and infused with all of the groups to which we belong, which may include athletic teams or team fans, immediate family, extended family, racial background, ethnic background, religion or other belief system, political party, nationality, schools we’ve attended, jobs, and so forth. Each of our identities is some sort of “gumbo” of different relational flavors. 

As humans developed over millennia, the number of potential groups to which one could belong increased. The rate of increase exploded with each new technological development. For the most part people were born, grew up, and did whatever, including starting their own families, in the same general location. Even though each new travel-related technological development made it easier for people to move from one location to another, the most dramatic effect of the fragmenting and dispersal of families occurred in the mid-20th Century, when ships and trains were already well-embedded modes of travel, but then cars became available to the majority of people living the in the U.S. Shortly after, this travel by plane, became more reliable and affordable. In the history of the Bloom’s, my great, great, great, great grandfather left Germany and moved to the central part of the Colony of Pennsylvania. But, then all of the subsequent Bloom’s stayed within a day’s walk of each other for several generations, with a gradual movement towards eastern Pennsylvania. But, by the time I was still in single digit years of age, my immediate and extended families started to scatter all over the country. 

And, with this scattering came the fragmentation and disconnection of family relationships. People started losing all contact with family members who were once very close. As a child, my parents and I would vacation together with my mom’s brother and his family. They lived in southern New Jersey, we lived just north of Philadelphia, but were only about a half an hour drive apart. So, we’d get together fairly often. Within a decade, everyone had scattered. A funeral or two later, everyone stopped getting together. There are members of my family I’ve never met. But, a few months ago, I met my great nephew and his wife for the first time, after he scattered and ended up working on his PhD in Arizona. 

As people start to lose their family and neighborhood identities, they subconsciously look for other social identities. Sometimes that’s the workplace, especially if it promotes social identities among its employees. People’s social identities may shift back to childhood religions or to new religions, spiritual paths, or other social groups that provide some perceived source of support and focus separate from other everyday activities. Or, in the present day, we see a surge in people “joining” politically oriented groups that provide a large and often highly emotionally-charged, but somewhat nebulous social group. There also is an equally nebulous and emotionally-charge group in opposition to the new MAGA government. These nebulous groups have no particular leader. As intense and negative as the emotions are, these nebulous politically-motivated groups provide an equally intense social identity as well as a sense of belonging, much like that provided by families and some religious or spiritual groups. 

There’s nothing particularly wrong with social identities. We are social beasts. We like to feel appreciated and valued, and to feel like we have some sort of purpose or contribution to a group or even multiple groups. But, there is a continuum between benefits and dangers of groups. At one end of the continuum are the attributes of group cohesion and group support. At the other end are the insidious and destructive attributes of elitism and exclusivity. And, these destructive attributes seem to creep into more and more groups across the spectrum of contexts: religious/spiritual, political, educational, racial, ethnic, nonprofit organizations, businesses and corporations, athletic, and a wide assortment of other groups that in themselves vary from nebulous to more structured groups. For most of these groups, there are at least the rumblings of disconnections from other people. Some organizations start off being much more open and may even proclaim their intent to be inclusive. Then, over time, which may be just a few years, the group begins to develop a sense of being the elite ones or the ones with the “goods,” where other people are of lesser “value.” At the same time, there are patterns of interaction that begin to promote a sense of belonging to the group, which would be okay at that point, but, at the same time, there’s at least a subtle divisiveness that develops. There are people who don’t belong and should never belong. And, the “list” of those who belong and should never belong increases in length and breadth. And, then such groups begin to create disconnects within the group itself. There’s an internal re-classification that slowly pushes some people out to the perimeter of participation and belonging, and maybe even pushing them out of the group entirely. Sometimes such patterns of exclusion are quite apparent, while other versions of the patterns are more subtle. 

These patterns of exclusion seem to be much more common than what one might like to think. At the extreme, we see Republican politicians dropping all pretenses of political and personal integrity to try to stay within the in-group. At the other end of the spectrum, where variously structured or unstructured groups begin to ignore one or more members. Over time, certain people are driven out of the group, at least from the perspective of participation. In such cases, some people may by name remain in the group, but they no longer  participate. They’re relegated to the fringes. 

 How do we deal with these patterns of elitism and exclusion? 

These patterns are similar to those involved in racism and other biases. They are all forms of bias. If you grew up in a racist household you have been given those patterns of thinking, whether you like or want it, or not. You can’t get rid of those patterns of thinking. You can’t ignore them. If you do try to ignore them, they just operate more deeply at subconscious levels. With elitism and exclusivity, we may develop these patterns of thinking from others, as well as from our own perceived need for safety and protection. They also may arise from our  ego-oriented justifications for the same sorts of protective actions. 

They only way I see for contending with these patterns of bias, elitism, and exclusion, is to remain vigilant. Every time you notice such a pattern of thinking or acting, you need to ring a bell in your head. Notice it: “There it is… again… grrr.” Then, drop it with a chuckle. “Just a thought: drop it.” It takes a long time to start catching most of those thoughts. You’ll never get rid of them, but they will no longer control you. 

So, don’t avoid groups, organizations, or whatever. Just go in knowing what to expect. Maybe you can even have impact on others and develop more inclusive groups. And, then maybe, you can even avoid groups that are obviously deeply embedded in these sorts of patterns as a significant and explicit part of that group identity. 

© 2025 by Jeffrey W Bloom

SHARE:

PLEASE RATE: