Group cohesion can form through shared ironic distance from rituals, not shared beliefs.

Evidence

What held their rituals together was the dismissive, distant stance toward the rituals, not the rituals’ explicit messages — that is, what members shared was an unspoken relation to rituals more than an ideology. … Members shared this practice more than they shared a theory. … Constant raffles and country music at the clubs helped create the image of a rich common culture without actually creating a rich common culture. — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 830

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Eliasoph’s overarching question about how civic apathy is produced - solidarity via shared disengagement. Echoes Bourdieu’s habitus as embodied shared practice. — connects to: Boundary-crossing arises from habits, not from belonging ties. — Sivamohan Valluvan, Conviviality and Multiculture: A…, 17; Group solidarity can form through shared bodily practice, not shared ideas — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 686; Shared rituals alone can bind a group into a body without any political content. — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 827 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Ritual binds members through shared experience of awe rather than shared belief #qualifies (0.85) — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 871
• Religious unity across ethnic lines rests on rituals and language generating obligated interdependence #complicates (0.82)
• Cohesive groups can unconsciously suspend critical faculties to preserve harmony #qualifies (0.80) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1198
• Ritual separation practices functioned as social integration rather than mere exclusion #exemplifies (0.78) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 127
• Atheists lack the cohesive community that belief-based groups share #contradicts (0.75) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 243