A crowd shouting a slogan has one idea. A group discussing has many ideas. If crowd’s idea turns out to be wrong, the crowd cannot course-correct. The means to do that is absent. They can only receive a new slogan from the authority within that group, in the same way a congregation cannot change what is within their holy text.
The group’s consensus can always be challenged by any individual. The ability to re-calibrate the groups direction and values rests on the ability of each person to articulate their unique opinion. That opinion can only be heard when the rest of the group is listening.
If identification with a group is more important than the ideas of any individual within that group, when different groups collide the means of diplomatic discussion are absent.
If we want to live in a society where the rights of each person are valued, then paired with that is the responsibility to promote ideas over groups, listening over shouting, reasoning over dismissal of what seems challenging.
It rests with each one of us – if you agree with the above – to articulate our individual perspective as eloquently as we can. A singular perspective may seem to be carried away in the cacophony of raised voices, but it is not. The volume level of confused and ideologically motivated shouting has an inherent sameness to it. The unique voice is inherently attractive, because the promise of a more evolved vision rests within it.
Think of yourself as part of the Resistance. Many films have been made depicting some sort of virus that infects humans and causes them to act mindlessly as a group – not alive, and not dead, seeking to consume the brains of the living. The anti-virus is created not by the group, but by the individual. That’s our responsibility.