Groupthink: A Study in Self Delusion

by Christopher Booker

In Groupthink, his final book, the late, eminent journalist and bestselling author Christopher Booker seeks to identify the hidden key to understanding much that is disturbing about the world today.

With reference to the ideas of a Yale professor who first identified the theory, and to the writings of George Orwell from whose 'newspeak' the word was adapted, Booker sheds new light on the remarkable - and worrying - effects of 'groupthink', and its influence on our society.

Booker defines the three rules of groupthink: the adoption of a common view or belief not based on objective reality; the establishment of a consensus of right-minded people, an 'in group'; and the need to treat the views of anyone who questions the belief as wholly unacceptable. He shows how various interest groups, journalists and even governments in the twenty-first century have subscribed to this way of thinking, with deeply disturbing results.

As Booker shows, such behaviour has led to a culture of fear, heralded by countless examples throughout history, from Revolutionary Russia to Napoleonic France and Hitler's Germany. In the present moment it has caused countless errors in judgement and the division of society into highly polarised, oppositional factions. From the behaviour of the controversial Rhodes Must Fall movement to the sacking of James Damore of Google, society's attitudes towards gender equality, the Iraq war and the 'European Dream', careers and lives have been lost as those in the 'in-group' police society with their new form of puritanism.

As Booker argues, only by examining its underlying causes can we understand the sinister power of groupthink which permeates all aspects of our lives.

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction, Politics, Philosophy

240 pages, Hardcover

Published May 19, 2020

About the author

Christopher John Penrice Booker is an English journalist and author.

Reviews

[Anastasia · Rating 1 out of 5]

A rant of an old white man about how the world used to be such a great place for white men before women and different other groups without a voice inconvenienced everyone by starting to speak up and demanding a better life for themselves. Seeing how incredibly biased, closed-minded and misogynistic his views were in the first half of the book, it was difficult to take anything else his 'intellect' (Booker's overwhelming use of quotation marks to mock pretty much every concept in the world was baffling) has managed to come up with later in the book seriously. The fact that Trump is mentioned favourably in the book twice says it all. That's right, in a book whose aim was to warn the world of the dangers of groupthink that is supposedly based on wishful thinking and denial of objective reality! How does Trump come out well in that? I picked it up thinking I could get some new perspectives on things, what I got was pages and pages of old prejudices that have nothing to do with science or even logic. Even the concept of groupthink wasn't well-defined. I genuinely learnt nothing from this book

[Kerem · Rating 1 out of 5]

Using the scientific phenomenon of groupthink as a front, the author dedicates almost entirety of this book to push his frustrated, hateful, disgusting right wing agenda. A total fail and rip off.

[Emma · Rating 3 out of 5]

He makes some interesting points regarding thinking for yourself but after finishing I still disagree with all his own personal views which come across strongly

[Thomas Edmund · Rating 1 out of 5]

So, just to begin with I was actually pretty surprised when I picked this up, that Christopher Booker in fact wrote "Seven Basic Plots" I hadn't grabbed the book knowing that, I was more interested in the psychology of Groupthink!

And well, to be honest I was more shocked at the contents of this book than the fact I'd enjoyed the author before.

Let me begin.

First of all Groupthink, if I remember undergrad correctly, is a very interesting a well established psychological phenomenon were oftentimes groups make poor decisions, usually through mechanisms such as false consensus and power dynamics.

This is very briefly mentioned in the introduction talking about some poor past political decisions, and a mention of some good decisions made when efforts were put in place to consider multiple perspectives. It was a little weird that Booker was going mostly from literature from the 70s rather than psychological theory but hey - so far, not too bad. There were a few wedge/hot topic political issues mentions but I was ready to listen and learn.

Now how to begin... I'm just going to speak honestly.

I was appalled to start reading the content of this book and find it was effectively just a unilateral expression of Booker's conservative political opinions all EXTREMELY loosely framed in this concept of "Groupthink."

Honestly I genuinely laughed out loud in in the brazen lack of self-awareness: Booker claims that "Groupthink" is just like Orwellian terms and Communist "Correct-Thinking" and then promptly proceeds to claim everything he disagrees with is guilty of said Group-Think.

Except of course the one or two issues where he concedes that BoTh sIdEs engaged in Groupthink. This is an all too common bad faith tactic to make oneself appear reasoned and neutral when you are in fact Big Brother.

So overall there is a big problem were Groupthink is poorly defined, I mean there is a vague sense of 'going with crowds' or 'what's expedient to say' but its not really elevated beyond a buzzword, again super ironically because of the accusation its like an totalitarian "correct-thinking" let Booker is using the term loosely to label everything he disagrees with!

If you think I'm incorrect or have the wrong take. Let me at least lay some more detail. The very first topic which almost 50% of the book is devoted to is Political Correctness.

Now I'm confident that anyone reading this already has their opinions on the matter so let me just lay out how the argument presented by this book is objectively bad, without jumping into the topic itself.

First Booker highlights the rise of "cancel culture" and the general cultural shift of public and prominent figures being held accountable in this way - and presents this as implicitly bad with no explanation.

Some of you may read that and say 'well-duh' but let me re-iterate, the thesis here is that Groupthink is slavishly following crowds, you'd think someone saying that write with a bit more objectivity. Booker does briefly mention that people's careers can be harmed unfairly and free speech can be damaged.

OK so even if we give a bit of benefit of the doubt maybe cancel-culture is bad - how does this related to Groupthink then....

Well, basically Booker just outright asserts that those who engage in cancel-culture are in fact engaged in Group-think. Is there any evidence presented for this - any interviews or analysis of the behaviour of some people who did cancel someone?

Nope, nada.

We do get page after page of examples of how bad PC all is, all the various talking points which again ironically I'd actually heard before from other conservatives lamenting the topic (Group-think maybe?).

I guess I'm trying really hard to reason this out because I myself don't want to Groupthink, so let me try to present a rational argument.

Booker presents Political Correctness as bad, says Groupthink is bad thusly, and thus concludes that those engaging in Political Correctness are guilty of Groupthink.

So maybe you agree that PC is bad AND that whoever these people are also engage in Groupthink. BUT there was no argument in this book to support that link. He didn't even really define the "who" had the Groupthink. Surely even a person who 100% agrees with Bookers opinion can also see that any term could have been shoved into the argument with exactly the same amount of robustness or evidence. Booker could have called his concept "Grumpywords" and cut and paste it instead of Groupthink and their would have been no material difference.

So following PC lambasting was a little bit of an odd detour, Booker presented several revolutions throughout history including for example the Russian Revolution after WWI and the rise of Hitler and Nazism. While this section was by its nature less polemic, it still reinforced my criticism. Here we just had several descriptions of historic events with some vague hand waving "people did the Groupthink here too."

The thing it this book SOUNDS like a great topic 'Groupthink' you'd think it would explain how to recognize that you might be engaging in this dangerous thing or even spot examples of it happening, even perhaps some remedies. Of course like all polemics the true remedy is to think exactly the same as Booker which would be the only way to avoid being accused of the dreaded "Groupthink."

The final two chapters on Global Warming, and I almost couldn't really believe it, Darwin's theory of Evolution.

Now credit where credit is due and just to prove that I am critiquing this book with robustness Booker presents more specifics in his criticism of global warming politics - they are of course tired conservative and disinformation taking points BUT they are included in the argument claiming that anyone not wanting the planet to become insufferable is Groupthinking.

However the final chapter is cringingly bad as Booker tries to Both-Sides debate between creationism and Theory of Evolution to make palatable the 'enlightened' middle ground of teaching intelligent design in schools, lamenting that this was struck down in court (I believe in the US or possibly UK). At this point the book is clearly and ridiculously conservative apologetics.

In conclusion you might be thinking "well you just don't like it because you disagree with it, or perhaps Thomas you ARE in fact brainwashed by Groupthink." To which I would reply I can't rebut that because I just read a book which failed to properly describe or articulate what Groupthink is.

Even if you totally agree with the political positions within this book I would challenge you to resist the INTENSE irony of captioning a book "a study in self delusion" and then literally just expressing all your own opinions with the vague claims that those that disagree engage in "Groupthink"

So finally I honestly can't recommend this book to anyone, if you are conservative you already agree with everything within and there is little to no point reading it, if you are progressive and think it might be worth reading to hear some dissenting viewpoints, all of Booker's stances are well-known conservative talking points that I would be surprised you hadn't heard before.

And of course if you're like me and wanted a book actually on the topic of Groupthink you are completely out of luck!

[Danielle Julian · Rating 2 out of 5]

This may be one of the most infuriating books I’ve ever read. Simply on the fact of using feminism and gender theory heavily in my own work. A personal exercise in mental torture, but I think there is merit in facing to opposing believes in some cases. This book did not deliver what it read on the blurb for me.

[Ellissa Cleveland · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I don’t agree with basically anything Booker says (basically that the 1950s were that last time anything was right in society because white men ruled the world, women shut up, and no one messed with the status quo) I can appreciate the concept of groupthink and his explanation of how society has developed into these silos of thinking.

[Yama Chen · Rating 1 out of 5]

The book’s name is misleading.

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

This excellent non-Christian book should be read by all. As the author's final book, it ends a bit abruptly, and was finished by his friend Richard North, together with an Afterword by his son Nicholas. I believe it is very topical and pertinent in the light of the present Covid "crisis". According to the blurb, groupthink is: "the adoption of a common view or belief not based on objective reality; the establishment of a consensus of right-minded people, as an 'in group'; and the need to treat the views of anyone who questions the belief as wholly unacceptable". This leads to a culture of fear, hence its relevance to Covid. As it's not written by a Christian, there's no real and true hope at the end, but, nevertheless it's a very good book.

[J · Rating 1 out of 5]

Oh boy… this book is really something.
It’s a huge rant about any progressive opinion formed since the 70’s.
It’s nothing to do with the psychological aspect of groupthink. Just the authors rants (cited mainly from the daily mail) about equal rights.
Some interesting points are made about thinking for yourself. But I’m thinking for myself by not recommending this book.

[Julia · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am committed to reading across the political spectrum and often go out of my way to read books that argue political and moral positions very different from my own.

Booker held some very different positions to me but that’s not what disappointed me. His book lacked rigour and did not set out to to do what it promised. Booker’s analysis was shallow and without nuance. My sense was he struggled to separate out some very clear examples of groupthink from things he just didn’t like or agree with.

His examples were often only from one side of the political spectrum: Left leaning groupthink, which to give him credit,has been quite spectacular in the last few years, giving him an endless supply to pick from. But groupthink plagues the right too. Boy does it ever.

I enjoyed his historical accounting of the political and cultural movements of Britain since the 1950s not because I agreed with everything but because his perspective was interesting and provided context to this beliefs.

Two stars: felt rushed, was repetitive, lacked direction, muddy thinking.

[Gabe Segal]

I stumbled upon this book at the library and decided to give it a go as I have a keen interest in social psychology. Some of the ideas conveyed in the first chapter left me excited to read on and see what I could learn, however, the remained of the book left me very disappointed. I was hoping to read a psychosocial exploration into the phenomena of groupthink. Rather, I read a journalist's collection of articles on various issues that they feel strongly about. This book gave me an understanding of Booker's opinion on the European Union, Brexit, global warming, and evolution. I did not learn much about groupthink.
Finding out this book was published post-humorously may explain a lot.

[Jo · Rating 3 out of 5]

It’s always good to expand your thinking and looking through Christopher booker’ lens on life was interesting - applying the concept of groupthink is important again to question how we develop our views - his conclusions after applying the lens to issues like climate change don’t align with mine, but he’s entitled to them.

[Timothy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A non-partisan phenomenon.

Hatred and division in the name of caring. Essential for making sense of the world today. This is a non-partisan phenomenon. And it’s ripping us apart. It is central to why we can’t get along.

[J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

The late British journalist Christopher Booker posthumously published book continues on the theories of Irving Janis. Booker was a well known Conservative in England and held to the ideals of his generation. He was born in 1937 into what is considered a traditional Christian values. In a way, one must worry that these beliefs might in themselves lead down a corridor of Groupthink. The best thing about Booker is his constant challenge of accepted thinking and professional narrative.

In the book he questions Climate change, sexual identify, and Darwinism. He does this in some very intelligent discussions on the subjects and provides an attractive case. As I read it, however, I had to wonder how many of the readers would not just embrace their own Groupthink in digesting the pros and cons of his purpose...a purpose that explicitly invites the reader to doubt any set narrative or as the Royal Academy motto : Nullius in verba "Take nobodies word for it". I also have to wonder if we have gone too far as a species in our self-delusion, click bait news and social media warriors to even listen to any prompt to question what we already believe to be true.,,especially when we are only looking for reaffirmation of our own delusions.

There is always something positive to be said for the other person's argument if it is presented with intellect and purpose. It is only by testing our own facts and opinions in honest debate that we can actually learn something that is at least close to the truth. (Debate contrary to social media warriors method is not just calling names and dismissing argument). in the core of this book Booker provides a method to do just that, regardless of his own personal opinions on "how the world should be run" or "what the science is".

[Gerald · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably the most underrated book I've ever read. This book starts by defining the rules of Groupthink, then looks at the conditions that create the circumstances for Groupthink, then looks back at how Groupthink has dominated practically every aspect of human existence throughout history.

This sounds a bit obscure and probably does nothing to capture the imagination but what is spectacular about this book is that it clearly explains how and why popular beliefs, often based on nothing more than an abstract ideas, often with little regard to truth and fact, gain momentum and in doing so, are defended to the hilt by those who subscribe to them and continue to grow and whose supporters tend to refuse to enter into meaningful dialogue preferring instead to discriminate against, marginalise, discredit, intimidate and ridicule anyone who does not agree with their (flawed) version of events.

This book was published in 2020, the author having died the year before. The term 'Groupthink' and its meaning was coined by Irving Janis in his 'Victims of Groupthink' published in 1972 upon which the contents of this book have been built.

Despite having been published before the current 'pandemic' situation, it is patently obvious that much of what is going on at the moment (dare I say on both sides) has everything to do with Groupthink and little to do with truth or fact which makes this book even more fascinating.

A stark and unemotional view of the (humanity) world as it really is. Should be compulsory reading for everyone!

[Cartoisb · Rating 5 out of 5]

Groupthink: A Study in Self Delusion is a clearly-written book which helps explain the many odd and disturbing features of today’s Western culture, in particular the hyper-polarisation of politics, political correctness, identity politics, “cancel” culture and the general unwillingness (including in mainstream media and universities) to tolerate differing opinions and theories and to discuss and debate political, scientific and other issues in a civilised and open-minded way. There are some similarities between this book and Murray’s The Madness of Crowds , although Booker’s book provides a broader and more systematic analysis of the concept of “groupthink”, showing how its principles apply not only to today’s culture and contemporary issues but also to various examples in history, including among others the 17th century English Revolution, the French Revolution, Russian Revolution, Nazi Germany, Darwinism and the social revolution of the 1960s.

[Brenda · Rating 4 out of 5]

I didn't agree with every single idea in the book but I liked the message overall, the support given to each idea, and the development of the subject. I've read about similar issues from American authors and it was refreshing to read about this from the perspective of a Brit. The author doesn't mince words-he feels organized religion is bad and yet further into the book he actually defends the presentation of the possibility of intelligent design. There are some pitfalls of groupthink in organized religion, even if the tenets of beliefs are sound. Groups influence thoughts and direction and it's worth considering this. I loved the information on Darwin and hadn't read much about how even Darwin had suggested there may be some major flaws in his theory. I especially enjoyed that section of the book.

[Manish · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the things that I've come to enjoy a lot these days is the points of view elucidated by conservative ideologues and thinkers. While we hardly have any noteworthy right wing ideologue in India, there seems to be no dearth of them in the West.

Christopher Booker makes a very compelling case against falling victim to the phenomenon of Groupthink. Any idea which has a mass following with any basis in objective reality can be considered to be Groupthink. Booker explores Gender identity, Climate Change, the EU, Darwinism amongst others in this thought provoking book. While I may require some more deep thinking to agree with some of his ideas, the very fact that they resonated is a testimony to his brilliance.

[Kunal Thakker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great insight on how humans can get carried away with mob mentality, and how self-denial works when it comes to current issues regarding traditional values. I agree with sections on politics and historical revolutions but I'm not enough of an expert on the science of global warming to have any significant opinion on its causes. He does makes some interesting points on how current climate change policies and treaties are significantly unfair to Western countries while allowing developing nations like India and China to get away with mass polluting.

[Andrea · Rating 3 out of 5]

Groupthink...."The rise of a rigid belief system not connected to reality, the intense pressure to insist that its make-believe was supported by a consensus of ALL right-thinking people, and consequently the extreme intolerance displayed towards anyone even wrongly suspected of failing to confirm with it."

I enjoyed his perspective and insight as to how groupthink has inflated our lives especially in regards to Darwinism and climate change. (And it could easily be applied to other current topics such as Critical Theories).

[Elizabeth Burton · Rating 1 out of 5]

I borrowed this from the library, and am glad I didn’t spend money on it. The author is a hardcore conservative, and instead of an unbiased analysis of how populations have been cultivated in the last 5 decades to be easily manipulated into groupthink, as he initially implies, it’s just another diatribe about the insidious influence of what is clearly what his group calls “liberal thinking.”

In other words, it’s a groupthink analysis of the opposition’s groupthink, not a discussion of the psychological mechanisms involved.

[Ash · Rating 1 out of 5]

👎🏽🤮
0.000000000000001 stars.
Not about groupthink at all, unless it’s in an ironic sense where the author engages in is own abhorrent self delusions about how the world was so much better when ‘the blacks’ (his words), them ‘backward’ and ‘violent Islamist’s’ (still his words) and all the ‘lesbian feminists’, ‘poofs’ and ‘faggots’ (his hate knows no bounds) ‘knew their place’.
Couldn’t stomach it, my ancestors didn’t survive what they did for me to intentionally put myself through this guys hate-filled, scientifically erroneous delusions.

[Laura Heilbrun · Rating 1 out of 5]

Yikes, I’m only on part 1 and this book already seems like a test not to be persuaded by the author’s not so subtle biases. Is this a book itself a challenge not to groupthink with the author? Lol

Some of the things he says directly contradict points made in paragraphs right before. Interesting.

Real review to come when I actually finish. While I agree with the main concern and obviously the history cited, I am a bit concerned this is going to be a painful read…

[Pam Keevil · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked the description of the development of group think using examples from recent history. I felt his section on climate change reflected his own views rather than group think- unless i'm part of that group think. However, March 2020 is a great time to read it and it provides some brilliant reflection and thinking points.

[Toby Aldridge · Rating 1 out of 5]

The author's lack of self-awareness means that the book includes a heavy dose of their own delusions about the world. The author presents their own perspective as 'neutral', inevitably leading to the forms of groupthink they engage in permeating the entire text in a way that convolutes the discussion. Would recommend people find another text to enter this topic.

[Sc Chu · Rating 1 out of 5]

The book is not a Study on Self Delusion. Rather it should be studied as an example of Self Delusion. This is Obious since the author has no self doubt or self awareness. HE thinks delusions are always on the part OF OTHER PEOPLE THAT HE DISAGREE WITH

[Riccardo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Human beings are very good at deluding themselves, not just as individuals, but often in large groups. From the Russian revolution to the Crusade, humans are great at self immolating all the while being blissfully unaware of how ludicrous they appear to others. This in short is group think, our tendency to, when taken up by the fervour of the mob, to discount all common sense and embrace communal lunacy.
Christopher Booker takes us on a fascinating journey on human folly along the way challenging even our most firmly held beliefs. Be warned, all of us love group think books when then speak of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, but his questioning of Global warming, Darwinism and other politically correct dogma is likely to leave any liberal progressive worth their salt seething with politically correct rage.
Unfortunately Christopher passed away before the book was finished. Some chapters feel very much unfinished, and the structure of the book is poor. It is posthumous conglomeration of many of his ideas rather than a coherent and structured book.
It is none the less on of the most fascinating post modern critiques of liberal-progressive group think that I have read. It is a shame that he passed away before the recent furor of COVID but I suspect he would have had a lot to say about our current collective madness.

[Brandon · Rating 2 out of 5]

He makes some interesting points about the double standards of some liberal movements. However, he kind of uses this as justification to make an opinion piece on the left in general as crazy fanatics.

I was expecting a more a nuanced and empirical viewpoint. I think I'll just read the Janis version he kept mentioning.