Talk:Social engineering (political science)

Article is negative

Consideration of "social engineering" need not be restricted to its negative implications. For instance, the discipline of practical interventions in intergroup conflicts propose manipulating group dynamics, cognitive processes, situational variables, economic rewards, and other macro level factors to moderate the negative outcomes of intergroup behavior (e.g., stereotyping, prejudice). Indeed, one could argue that some social engineering attempts, such as affirmative action programs in the US, actually produce benefits for the society at large.

In a democratic society, social engineering is a tool of governance, and it can be a particularly powerful one. The use of the tool to achieve specific ends is typically driven by policy, and its impacts interpreted according to values. As G.W. Allport noted in his 1954 volume The Nature of Prejudice:

Democracy ...places a heavy burden upon the personality, sometimes too great to bear. The maturely democratic person must possess subtle virtues and capacities: an ability to think rationally about causes and effects, an ability to form properly differentiated categories in respect to ethnic groups and their traits, a willingness to award freedom to others, and a capacity to employ it constructively for oneself. All these qualities are difficult to achieve and maintain. It is easier to succumb to oversimplification and dogmatism, to repudiate the ambiguities inherent in a democratic society, to demand definiteness, to "escape from freedom" (pp.. 477-478).

Twenty-first century democracies leave little time for the average citizen to maintain a "maturely democratic personality."

Just as with any other tool, persons applying social engineering in governance are ultimately responsible for the ramifications of them. The complex and chaotic nature of society complicates forecasting these ramifications beyond the overt and immediate. A practicioner of the science of social engineering ultimately relies on his or her own values, and of those groups they represent, to direct the application of their craft to serve what he or she considers desirable social policy.

Therefore, even though social engineering can be used to manipulate individuals and groups for selfish gain (e.g., demagoguery), it can also be used to encourage behaviors for a greater good (e.g., conservation and pollution control). Our conviction must be that if we can control the forces of society, we must also practice mature democracy. User:DrCotton (sig added by Sam Spade 16:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC))

I agree that the article is less than neutral in its presentation of the subject. it also focuses overmuch on a large quote. Sam Spade 16:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

I also agree that the article is much much too negative and one-sided. Added NPOV tag. The general quality and detail of the article also needs significant work Bwithh 14:11, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree too, more that the article is of poor standard, as I believe that countering civil liberties will inherently give a bias regardless of the views of the author. --62.190.198.154 10:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

I've cleaned up the page formatting slightly and changed the cleanup for an expand tag. It doesn't need a cleanup as so much as a lot more info. - FrancisTyers 12:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Use of the Tool

  Prospective social engineers will rely on their wisdom in manipulating the populace.  Yet if they were wise they would be trying to acquire knowledge enough to realize that in a democracy the free will and freedom of choice of the populace must be respected and encouraged.  As soon as you start engineering the populace--even if you think you are doing good and accept responsibility for the consequences of your actions--you have ended democracy.
  Lower level social engineers of democracies need to understand that they themselves have been socially engineered to carry out the functions of a non-democratic program (the social engineering of citizens who need to be encouraged--even taught, if young--to be free, self-geverning and self-educating/informing).
  On the other hand, if you don't believe in the people, just say so; otherwise this doubletalk about responsible manipulation of the minds of democratic people's is just too Orwellian for words.
  The article as it stands goes wrong right from paragraph two by petifogging that legitimate institutions such as law and education are inherently forms of social engineering.  Clarity about the topic is over before it's even begun. 
   The totalistic bias of the article is invidious, or in any event least self-contradictory.  The premise is that we need social engineers to mindlessly shape the minds of citizens of democracies. Well who steers these steerers? Textbooks on how to be a low-level social engineer written by men and women who are apparently determined to create a society of robots rather than encourage humanity and democracy, which may well be attainable goals after all, that is to say, without ending global freedom before it finds its legs by cynical social engineering.
  

[ ]

I have attempted to clean up, structure and neutralize the content on this page without adding a lot of information. I think from this point it will be easier to streamline, update and expand the information. - User:hartfordshawn 2:09, 04 January 2006

Social engineering of Jews in Imperial Russia

Beyond the Pale: The Jewish Encounter with Late Imperial Russia (2001) by Benjamin Nathans quotes Terence Emmons (himself cited in Russia's Great Reforms, 1855-1881 (1994), p. vii), who describes Tsar Alexander II's domestic policies as "the greatest single piece of state-directed social engineering in modern European history before the twentieth century" (p 69).

The term social engineering is used here with particular reference to Alex. II's use of (1) policies that promoted the political and geographic integration of Jews, their commercial markets and social lives into the Russian mainstream, and (2) the selective use of these policies toward Jews deemed good for the Empire, i.e., university graduates, successful merchants, highly proficient artisans or retired Russian soldiers, so as encourage scholarship, commerce, and military service.

Social engineering? Please comment.

Omphaloscope » talk 22:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)