The Strength of Human Obstinance in Society

A somewhat unfortunate reality I’ve had to confront relates to that of human obstinance. I believe with a reluctance that can only come about (ironically) through a major change internally, that obstinance is an underrated strength that keeps our species functioning.

The status quo is a self-policing, auto-generated law and it is held aloft by the stoic immobility of mass human obstinance. Obstinance and stubbornness are not widely considered virtuous. In fact, open-mindedness is widely upheld as the more  virtuous way to live one’s life. However, the pathological reluctance to change, even when change is wholly positive, is a driving force of human society.

It may seem a strange claim to say that inaction is one of the fundamental drivers of human society, but it is the case. Humans are routine-driven animals. We spend an enormous amount of mental energy creating habits so that we can proceed to enact them over and over without thinking. This machine is ruthlessly efficient, as it evolved to be. However, this reluctance towards change on an individual level becomes doubly or triply problematic when extended out to a societal level.

As a finger makes up a hand, a hand makes up a limb, and a limb makes up a body, a person makes up a social group. Humans are at the convenient level where the individual unit is most capable of controlling that which consists of them, and that of which they consist. That being said, it is often the case that large groups of human social structures “act” like the humans which make them up. Businesses, constituencies, countries, all act like individuals, but do not act identical to them. 

Where an individual is capable of change with great exertion of effort, a mass of individual exertions need to take place for a large social group to change. This is the fricticious force of human obstinance played large. The force of obstinance acts in opposition to any and all social change, be it positive, negative, or neutral. This can be seen most obviously in the case of the green revolution, and climate change. 

Studying how individual humans change their minds and / or actions can provide poignant insights into how large social groups are likely to change. For example, in the case of cults, cult recruiters pray on ordinary people who have gone through hardships, loneliness, or a major life transition. Authoritarian regimes act similarly across large social groups. When a large social group has gone through hardships (be the economic or otherwise), a large social upheaval, or a mass cultural of individualism has led to a loss in the collective consciousness, authoritarianism and fascism can take hold. 

So how can we as individuals impact our large social groups in positive ways? Well, humans are very good at calculating risk and cost. Humans have disproportionately negative responses to perceived costs. Loss aversion shows that when a human flips a coin where they will lose €100 if it lands on tails, they will need to gain at least €200 on a win to consider flipping it. Loss aversion is the driving force behind obstinance.

Whenever a human considers doing an action, they instinctively weigh up the costs associated with that action and its benefits. The perceived cost of an action can often be far greater than the actual cost. This is often how procrastination comes about. The   initial analysis of the task makes the perceived cost seem too high to even begin the task. This is especially difficult for people who struggle with self-regulating dopamine levels, like neurodivergent people.  That is, in essence, what obstinance is. It is a superpower developed by humans to prevent losses from ever happening. In theory, obstinance leads to small advantages and disadvantages being preserved, and large advantages and disadvantages being avoided. In practice, however, obstinance combines terribly with another human trait: short sightedness.

Short sightedness or short-term thinking is a consequence of cost vs benefit analysis. Humans are really good at analysing the costs and the benefits of certain actions, better than almost any other animal. Our major superpower as a species is the ability to spend resources on a consistent, long-term basis for long-term positive results. This is “long-term” thinking. However, its opposite, “short-term” thinking sees humans gaining short-term benefits on a consistent, long-term basis with long-term negative results. 

This is not a novel concept, but this long-term vs short-term thinking is the literal origin of most of humanity’s greatest achievements and shortcomings. Some of the major marvels of engineering require huge amounts of brain-power, physical exertion, planning, and generally consistent resource costs for a long-term benefit. Think of any work of art, engineering, or human creation be it the Pyramids, the roof of the cistine chapel, or the CERN Large Hadron Collider. 

Now think of any major failure of humanity, be it inequality, warfare, or poverty. These all derive from short-term human thinking on mass scales.

Obstinance is a preserving force. It is a neutral force, but it cannot and should not be ignored. We need to be targeted with our systems. We need to exert our efforts on an individual level, and in turn on a collective level to create systems that make short-term thinking more difficult than long-term thinking. When our societies take the cost vs benefit analysis, they need to see doing the right thing as twice as profitable as doing the wrong thing.

We need to create incentives for long-term thinking and create additional costs for short-term thinking. Our current systems for this come in the form of governmental regulation often in the form of taxation or judicial legislation. Unfortunately, both of those regulatory organs are beholden to politicians’ individual paranoias regarding reelection. Those elections face many threats, including the modern threat of mass social media manipulation by self-interested multinational corporations. There is also the connected and unavoidable threat of predatory would-be fascists / authoritarians who prey on the working class to sow division and fear amongst our society. 

The question that we need to ask ourselves is not how should we best participate in this (theoretically) democratic system, but how we can change the system to where short-term thinking is more costly than long-term thinking. If our brightest leftist academics can focus their energies on using obstinance rather than solely trying to counteract it, we have a far greater chance of establishing the world we need to exist for the benefit of our species, and on a more selfish (dare I say, short-term level), the benefit of our loved ones and ourselves.