Is the underlying social current inequalities behind the tragic events in New Zealand, Sri Lanka etc.? People always look for the instant rationale behind the event, without looking to the root of the event. The mainstream media feed information that is swayed towards the hierarchy bias that supports it. This could be argued to be one of the most important instruments into group behaviour of the twenty first century. In other words if you have the money to control what is educating people, the likelihood of manipulation is high.
However, if what you are being shown does not correlate to your reality, and you are repressed in any way, inequalites may become exposed. Those inequalities manifest in various ways and in the UK are exposed with inequalities of wealth. The inequalities have been exposed via the wealth disparities in modern life e.g. more foodbanks; rise in homelessness; increases in poverty. And this is argued to be a trigger behind revolution and non-conformist behaviour.
The extensive research done by Pickett and Wilkinson in their books 'The Spirit Level' and 'The Inner Level' look at and expose inequalities. These books highlight how people react, behave and how societies operate in contemporary society. There are reasonable measures that could be taken, shown in 'The Inner Level' but this may be a lengthy process.
Is the root to terrorism not only the repressed nature of religious practices but the economic inequality of the followers of that belief system? Is the competitiveness of the neoliberal system to the point of that system becoming over toxic to humanity? It would be an interesting concept to experience a more egalitarian society. Pickett and Wilkinson, Dorling and many other academic professors feel this is the way forward, and I agree. I feel that this (if globally accepted) would bring significant changes. However, this hypothesis would need testing with a globally greedy system in opposition.
I wondered what these might be and how effective these are nationally.
Again, this way of thinking is potentially both positive and negative. In the UK, it is invoked positively in campaigns that highlight how immigrants and refugees contribute to British society.
The positives don't seem to get national coverage - but maybe I'm looking in the wrong place. I find the press othering/immigration rhetoric has subsided since 2016 but is still simmering.
For a great insight into how government uses psychology to control the crowd, watch The Century of the Self. It's free to watch online and I highly recommend it
"Should social psychologists let their knowledge become a tool for such manipulation, and if not, how should they resist?"
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Once information exists it cannot be unmade.
Interesting post. It reminds me of Radio 4 'The Power of Negative Thinking'.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b084j8yq/episodes/player
There are also a few books that critique, especially the United States, focus on being happy. For example, America the Anxious: How Our Pursuit of Happiness Is Creating a Nation of Nervous Wrecks.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28220838-america-the-anxious
The dangers seems to be; disconnection from reality - being happy when negative things are happening, and pressure on individual - putting the responsibility of positivity solely on individuals and not the wider community.
I really agonised over this module; it is very close to what I want to do.
Eventually I followed my own advice of "Never again do a module that's just been launched". Just one of those per degree is plenty.