LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

As Haddam leader kneels, don’t be swayed by Groupthink

Groupthink was first studied by Yale’s Irving Frank in 1972. Groupthink is the psychological mindset when one person, typically a strong leader, decrees an interpretation, usually a negative one. So Groupthink was expressed in Haddam by some townspeople when a selectman quietly bent her knee and bowed at a meeting during the Pledge of Allegiance.

Kneeling is a simple act, but explanations were elaborate. Some people in Haddam interpreted kneeling as “a perpetual state of rage,” “disrespecting,” “inappropriate,” “selfish.” The kneeler herself explained that she took a knee in disagreement with presidential policies of collaboration with Russia and separation of children. She wanted to show support for the principles of “liberty and justice for all.”

The rush to negative interpretations is an example of Groupthink. Why not listen to the kneeler? Why not accept that different people have different interpretations?

The conditions for Groupthink were present. There is a prejudiced leader, an identified group in a divided country, and strong emotions. In history, Groupthink has had disastrous consequences, such as in cult behavior and subprime home mortgage loans, and small consequences, such as in Y2K panic.

Today, we hear fake news, hyperbole, onesided statements and name-calling. It is easy to use simple, negative, predetermined views as in Groupthink. It is more complicated to analyze for oneself.

But careful thinking, not Groupthink, is needed during this political season. This is a time to hear consultants, facts, alternative views and then make personal decisions. Kneeling during the Pledge of Allegiance is unusual, yes. A teaching moment, perhaps. But disrespectful? Not intended. Alma Elder, Middlefield

At primary, vote for Lesser, champion of public education

We are living in a defining moment for the future of public education. After years of cuts to education funding, stagnation in teacher salaries, and corporate privatization schemes, more and more parents and teachers across the country are rising up and declaring that enough is enough.

But here in Connecticut, we’ve been moving in the wrong direction. Just last year, amid education cuts across the state, the legislature turned against our teachers by passing a new tax just for them — a teacher tax.

Connecticut has long prided itself in developing one of the most educated workforces in the country. We need to elect people who will build on that legacy and strengthen our schools and teachers, not diminish them. As a retired teacher, I am proud to be supporting Matt Lesser in the Democratic primary for the state Senate Aug. 14. When Matt fought against the teacher tax, his opponent voted for it.

For me the choice is clear. If we want to provide a better future for our students, that begins with well-funded schools and competitive teaching jobs. Matt has been a champion of public education as a member of the state House and he will continue to fight for our students and teachers as a member of the state Senate.

Barbara Coyle, Middletown