Societal emotional process describes patterns of interaction one finds in large societal groups, similar to the patterns of interaction which Bowen observed in the nuclear family. Two patterns of societal interaction observed so far are social category projection process and reciprocal societal projection process.
The first, social category projection process, is very like family projection process. Members of one category with more power believe and act as if another social category contains inherently inferior and despicable people, just as the parents in a family who have more power will declare a dependent child to be inferior in abilities and character, and behave as if that is true. The social group with more power can enforce on the subordinate group restrictions on their access to societal resources. The social categories include social class, race, sexual identification, religion, those with disabilities, nationalities, and identifiable cultural groups(e.g. cult groups, certain political groups, religious sects, less valued occupations).
The second, reciprocal societal projection process, pits large opposing groups against each other. The groups have about equal power and each believes the other to be inferior in abilities and character. There is never a clear winner. The two groups do a continual jockeying back and forth with their opposing projections and mostly equal power.
Both kinds of projection process depend on individuals’ automatic emotional reactions in which one group considers themselves superior to another group, justified by the presumed inferiority of the second group. The first group then behaves as if the second group are inferior.
These patterns have consequences. When there is inequity in power between the groups, the dominant group restricts access to many social privileges for the subordinate group. These actions are enforced by the power of the dominant group who believe that the subordinate group does not deserve access because of their presumed inferiority. The subordinate group mostly does not have the power to effectively contest this imbalance in access to social resources.
Thank you, Jim Edd, for this bold and astute statement. My question is how am I participating in these processes? As in Bowen’s description of emotional process in the family, I assume participation is also a matter of degree. Because it is automatic and instinctive, I assume we are all part of the problem. I like the way you present your idea in strong and unambiguous strokes. Very thought provoking.
Laurie
Yes Laurie, we all have a part in these patterns of societal emotional process. I can say something about the issues in managing my own personal part in the process, but I so far have not learned anything useful to say about the big societal part.
Basically, as I would with my part in nuclear family emotional process, I try to observe and manage my functioning when I am interacting with a person from one of the social categories or with a person from one of the big groups from reciprocal societal projection process(RSPP). Also I try to observe and manage my functioning when I’m talking to anybody about any one of those critical social categories or about one of the big groups of RSPP. I have learned some things as I talk to my brother about some of these issues on which we strongly disagree.
All of us can be automatically intensely reactive in any of these situations. I can make headway on the personal challenges presented by these situations, but so far I have not found a viable approach to the larger societal problem.
Clearly stated Jim. There is an aspect to the Family Projection Process, as described by Bowen, that interests me on a societal level. That is the idea that treating a person (or group here) as sick, disadvantaged, weak, or needing special help can pin them down.
Amen!
Jim Edd,
You make an important distinction between two ways that the societal emotional process plays out. I associate the first pattern, dominance of one group over another, with the hierarchical instinct that I think is part of our evolutionary heritage. The second pattern, groups functioning in opposition to one another, I associate with our tribal instinct. Would these both be outcomes of “man’s disharmony with nature,” and our increasing disconnection from the land as we have created (and are somewhat trapped in) what John Gowdy calls the “expansionist global economic superorganism?
Thanks for your comment It helps me to see my thinking through a different theory lens.
I believe that the impulse to find others to whom one can feel superior is basic. It is powerful and fundamental in human emotional functioning. I am trying to integrate it with Bowen Theory.
Both societal projection processes seem to have a competitive component, which could arise from competition over shrinking land resources.
Having lived in both Rochester NY and Colorado, there is a difference between the two in what resources are available. Rochester and western New York have plenty of water but less land available. Out here in the West, the opposite is true.
It is useful to look at the availability of a variety of resources necessary for sustaining life.
Jim Edd