In last week’s column, the law was addressed as an instrument of social change. This week’s column briefly addresses the four main types of resistance to social change that are interwoven. They consist of social factors, economic factors, psychological factors and cultural factors that are evident in all members of society resisting social change.
At the core of resistance to social change revolves financial wealth in North America, where the financial aspects determine what someone is worth. Wealth equates to a perception about power. It also defines and creates a social class and social stratification, much like a measuring of a person’s value in mainstream society. The dominant value system within North America is in attaining more material items, which in turn equates to power and social status.
The main component for resistance to social change is due to a shift in power dynamics. It is inevitable that social change compromises some members of society while enhancing the social standing of others. Individuals within the society who have suffered through oppression or are identified as members requiring the basic human right for equality for instance, initiates the shift to redefine status within the society through social changes. These types of social changes may not psychologically align with individuals who experienced an extended period of time having formal and informal control methods shape and reinforce a psychological barrier revolving around who enjoys status. This affects their perceptions about social change.
The psychological factors also include every individual’s ability to process the change and either accept it or reject it based on their own core values. The perception of fairness or legitimacy of the new shift occuring in the collective culture within the existing society may create a chaotic environment as the transition occurs. Individuals experiencing a loss of wealth, power and prestige due to the social change know their vested interests and prior privileges may be jeopardized.
Habits are hard to break. Resistance to social changes often occur due to developed habits repeated over and over. Social change challenges these habits and existing ideologies, which are the foundation for defining where a person’s position is in society, many times based on economic and political policies.
Due to the fact that social change creates a power shift, even when it is an equalizer to ensure that all Canadians enjoy the same rights, freedoms and opportunities, the loss of power for those who traditionally enjoyed a status and privilege over generations can motivate resistance. The social change forces them to shift their world view, the foundation of who they are, and face the issue and reality of others to be elevated with equality.
A social shift in power, whether negative or positive, may simply spark resistance due to ignorance about the issues. When a lack of knowledge is present, fear enters about a foreign and new idea being injected into society. Resistance continues when there are selective perceptions about the reason for the change and the internal measuring about what is morally right and wrong by the individuals resisting the change. This again includes how they are socialized into accepting particular thought patterns and accepted social norms.
Shifts in power may also spark a gathering of people without the power they feel they deserve. This results in organizing groups in opposition to social changes. Often times, the motivation to do so results from the perception of lacking power and agency in the social climate where they experienced racism, bias and oppression. Agency is simply when people voice and express their desire to remain independent in their decision making when it comes to their life choices and decisions. Often times, this type of resistance from a group involves their financial resources being controlled and taken from them.
In addition, the perception about what is happening during a social change may either frighten them or sooth them, depending on whether or not their morals, integrity, and belief systems align with the social changes. They may also experience a deep mistrust in the newly developed social change, feel a range of emotions such as frustration, anger, terror, while mentally processing what exactly the changes mean for their ability to thrive and survive to various degrees.
Due to this, individuals experiencing the social climate and changes may become divergent within the new culture emerging. This puts them at risk. They may suddenly find themselves demoted and ridiculed by a group that once looked to them as their leader. Their mode of dress may be changed by force, their language may be forbidden, their spiritual practices may be condemned. They find themselves an outsider who can no longer reason with the newly embraced changes occurring within the culture through the social change. What was once tradition and a society that functioned with predictability becomes unpredictable, along with new rules and conduct that are being established.
The natural, primitive human response for those who do not embrace the social change may involve the classic “fight, flight or freeze” response to the developing, or sudden, social change. The change stimulates an upset within the society and existing culture as the new order and power shift stipulates new conduct, laws, etiquettes, and traditions, and situates members within the group into a state of vulnerability or security, depending on whether or not they view the social change to the culture as positive or negative. This is because they may or may not share the values of the newly formed culture that the social change and its policies brought.
An example of this is Nazi Germany in World War II and the Jews, Polish and Russians, who had to suddenly adjust to the new Nazi regimes expectations. It began with the Jewish community, who had prospered spiritually, physically and financially. Hitler’s regimes ensured through his private police force that Jewish people had their livelihoods, businesses and homes taken from them.
Suddenly, Jews found themselves in a position of being forced to submit to sub-standard living conditions and qualities of life when not arrested. Next, they were forced into fleeing and going into hiding. Upon the arrest of Jews, it became worse, including with humiliation and mass deaths. The devaluation of existing cultures that once thrived.
Many Jewish people, and Polish and Russians, as well as the rest of the world were forced into the “fight, flight, or freeze” survival mode. Every genocide seeks to destroy the social hierarchy, the psychological state, and the culture of their targeted groups. Although this is an extreme and historical case, it is the one I am presenting as a powerful example of the impact social change has on societies.
People are motivated when they are bound by their cultures and what they value as either an informal law or a formal law. Societies are also socialized into particular patterns of thought.
Every Friday in Prince Albert’s Daily Herald, Sheila Wanite Bautz addresses various Sociological issues in laymen’s terms for her readers. Sheila achieved dual Honours BAs with Majors in Sociology and English at the University of Saskatchewan. She is a journalist with the Prince Albert Daily Herald, Rural Roots and The Northern Advocate.
