Crowd Triggers

Group dynamics depend on the individual.

In Chongdo, students may elect to study multiple opponent control, which covers crowd control, foot and vehicle traffic patterns, large security management for large audiences or events, and so on. One aspect to this includes understanding what turns large groups of people into problems.

The average person is astounded at the actions of angry crowds or mob actions. Who could act like that, or allow themselves to be duped into acting illegally? What’s the problem with these people?

One surprising revelation is that the typical person involved in a mob tends to be just like you. Sociological studies reinforce the idea that anyone can be involved in a civil disturbance: even mild-mannered individuals can become embroiled in a situation...if the right blend of issues are present. Further, a non-participant can be drawn into a disturbance if he or she is in the right place at the wrong time. Sadly, in other cases, even law enforcement officials can become just as dangerous to the crowd as agitators—except that in most cases, these officials are much better armed and equipped, often with tragic consequences.

In all cases, however, there is a crowd of people present, whether large or small. Crowds may be planned and organized, such as those gathering to protest an issue or listen to a speaker. Yet just as often, disturbances can arise from crowds with no planning or organization: post-game crowds at a sporting event can turn destructive whether their team wins or loses. Even so-called “casual crowds” (such as those in a large store or at a busy intersection) can become a serious threat in a panic or hysteria.

Both sociologists and psychologists are quite familiar with crowd behavior, although no one can predict a crowd’s behavioral evolution with any scientific accuracy. Some of their observations include:

A person’s behavior changes in a crowd. For some people, their behavior becomes more friendly. For others, it becomes belligerent. For others, anxiety or fear takes over. Regardless of what the effect is or who the person is, there will be behavioral changes.
In a situation where leadership is uncertain or influences are mixed, individuals begin looking to the crowd for some sort of directional cues as to how they should behave. People may begin exhibiting behaviors that could gain acceptance, and will exhibit behaviors which do gain acceptance. Since other participants are looking for direction as well, this fuels a chain reaction of potentially destructive behavior.
People begin to transfer moral responsibility from themselves (normally ingrained through ethical opinions or religious experience) to the crowd: basically, what the crowd believes is right, and other opinions (however logical or strong) are wrong. Only very strong-willed people—or individuals who have not been among the crowd for long—can resist this. In other words, the person is calm and rational, but the group is not.
Unfortunately, for those individuals assigned to control this crowd, the effect is just as strong on them. Well-trained and well-intentioned security teams can react to provocations with violent rampages. This also fuels a situation.

There are also some observed triggers that a peaceful crowd will become violent:

Frustration can turn an orderly protest violent, particularly when representatives of “the other side” begin making weak excuses, ridicule the crowd, or patronizingly dismiss their concerns. This causes the crowd to transfer their anger with the situation to those who might represent the situation. This is common in labor cases.
An unexpected increase in the anticipated number of protestors. Even well-organized, well-trained security teams will lose control of the crowd if numbers of protestors become multiples of the anticipated number. The protest organizers, no matter how well-intentioned, will lack the necessary skill to control the crowd: speeches and rhetoric designed to motivate a small crowd can readily incite large crowds, and cause chaos.
Agitators who suddenly divert attention away from the speakers to themselves.
Something strange indicating the psychology is changing. It is vital to watch the crowd for cues: anything not part of a so-called normal protest is a warning signal. For example, a party atmosphere with music and drinking breaks out among the group, a seemingly unaffiliated third group of people show up in large numbers, and so on. If the organizers didn’t expect this to be occurring, and can’t otherwise account for it, it’s a warning sign.
Strongly opposing groups are allowed to come into proximal or immediate contact. Even a 50-foot separation may not be sufficient, if one group can act as an agitator for the other.

Not surprisingly, crowds obey the principles of ûm-yang. A crowd will act one way, rightly or wrongly, in the presence of leadership, or they will act another way, again rightly or wrongly, in the absence of leadership. They will act one way or another in the presence or absence, of social conditioning: for example, some cultures are trained to “obey the norm,” and therefore can be suddenly subdued...or they can be ingrained to become violently aggressive. Generally, what each undetermined individual will tend to follow whatever he perceives to be the majority. Further, the presence or absence of prevailing morality can influence a crowd: certainly even religious beliefs can promote people to extreme cruelty and violence.

It is also important to remember that crowds reflect the needs, the hatreds, and the prejudices of the individuals within the crowds. The simple truth is that crowds react the way its most influential members want to act. Influential members of the crowd will bend the intentions of that crowd, which in turn give the individuals a corporate courage. This of course makes crowds very dangerous weapons, as chain reactions will occur and worsen the problem

Further complicating the issue is how skillful agitators can use this for their own ends. Crowds can be manipulated through many means. Television and radio can allow agitators to influence crowds without even being physically present. Some agitators can incite crowds to dangerous acts by appearing to appeal to law and order: the order to riot can be given by asking for peace in the right manner.

Of course, civil disturbances can occur without any agitation or leadership whatsoever in cases of panic or hysteria. Factors which can turn crowds into a mob are:

The truth or perception that danger is so close that the only alternative is to flee. This is especially true during fires.
The truth or perception that escape routes are non-existent or at best extremely limited. Trampling, physical violence, and betrayals are ugly forms of this factor.
The belief that that law enforcement or other attempts at restoring order will become lethal.

As you can see, the crowd has its own agenda often separate from the beliefs of its members...yet, it is ultimately the beliefs of those members who influence the crowd’s next move.