Conformity pressure cannot explain group-wide perpetration when most members oppose the act

Evidence

The notion that peer pressure, namely the desire not to let down one’s comrades or not incur their censure, could move individuals to undertake actions that they oppose, even abhor, is plausible even for the German perpetrators, but only as an account of the participation of some individuals in the perpetration of the Holocaust. It cannot be operative for more than a few individuals in a group, especially over a long period of time. If a large segment of a group, not to mention the vast majority of its members, opposes or abhors an act, then the social psychological pressure would work to prevent, not to encourage, individuals to undertake the act. If indeed Germans had disapproved of the mass slaughter, then peer pressure would not have induced people to kill against their will, but would have sustained their individual and collective resolve to avoid killing… . The explanation is self-contradictory when applied to the actions of entire groups of Germans. — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 325

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: Goldhagen’s logical demolition of ‘everyone conformed but no one approved’ is dense: if most disapprove, peer pressure preserves refusal; a conformity account only works for tiny minorities, so it cannot scale to mass perpetration. This inverts the Asch motive — conformity reinforces existing norms rather than overriding them.
• XREF: Directly relevant to the reader’s purpose: the logic that pressures scale only to small subgroups mirrors the small-exclusive-subgroup mechanism literature being bridged here — whether scapegoating/perpetration needs genuinely shared norms rather than isolated conformers. — connects to: Echo chambers convert the social-corrective group effect into conformity pressure — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 120; Groups tolerate dissent unless it threatens identity-defining core beliefs — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1407; Mixed-identity members may exit a rejecting group rather than fight for inclusion — Anna X. Huang, Jacqueline M. Chen, and Juliane Degner, Being One or the Other, Both or…, 109

Broader Connections

• Groups tolerate dissent unless it threatens identity-defining core beliefs #complicates (0.85) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1407
• Echo chambers convert the social-corrective group effect into conformity pressure #qualifies (0.78) — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 120
• Mixed-identity members may exit a rejecting group rather than fight for inclusion #complicates (0.73) — Anna X. Huang, Jacqueline M. Chen, and Juliane Degner, Being One or the Other, Both or Neither, 109