Mobs, Characteristics of Susceptible Followers – Appears to be True in Sonoma County

From what I observed when my harassment began this time in October of 2016, the people initially involved were white, many or most highly religious, and believers that some crimes justified stepping away from religious teachings and/or modern law.

I was coming up from Southern California after Thanksgiving, and there was no doubt: more than normal fish on cars, personalized plates, and some older style conservative clothes. There was definitely a conservative religious and “my way is the right way” component.

Here is a great article on the characteristics of susceptible followers (spellings tend to be British spellings)

Self evaluation list below.

I believe that the Cause Stalking phenomenon includes some people who are more likely to come under roles that require obedience to authority, are more prone to mob thinking (it must be true and justified, there are so many I am not responsible – own actions, really?), are from a group that finds this harassment socially acceptable (the particpants are contributing to the social group and reap social benefits). There are other types of participants, but the following articles touch more on traits that make one susceptible to becoming a member of a Vigilante Stalking network. Another time I might try to tackle why independent thinkers might participate.

The cause: Frustration that society cannot prevent crimes against others, rise in crimes committed by certain groups (actually, it’s probably not so much a rise as that it was not reported and/or that group was not seen as the “typical” offender).  Frustration that women offenders were not being punished in the same manner than male offenders were. A feeling that something needs to be done and “the end justifies the means”. The problem is that there are so many holes in this thinking and so many ways this mob can be used to benefit individuals’ own agendas (particularly men, as there are more women Targets that men). But, I digress.

I ask myself day after day, how so many people, including some highly intelligent (book wise) people would be participating in something so anti: our Justice system. Today, I found some answers I think.

With vigilante justice there is a component of Mob mentality. When part of a large mob, what one does is supported by the number of other participants. Also, there is sense that one has stepped back from individual responsibility because of the numbers.

Additionally among the believers of Vigilante Stalking/Harassment/Cause stalking, many members fit into people more prone to be caught up in a mob. Actually, many people can succumb to this. There is a very good article above and below that talks about experiments where the results were so disturbing that no one wants the experiments to be repeated (i.e. Stanford).

Some religions require blind faith. The religious doctrine becomes part of that persons life as soon as s/he is born. Some religions encourage (strongly) that children attend a school affiliated with that religion. Very strict churches tend to make the church activities so numerous that almost all activities outside of the weekly church ceremonies include the religion and or family. Read the article on followers.

Also, persons who are used to the “for the good of the team”, “good of the whole”, “fighting for the people” could be involved. Some: law enforcement officers, fire fighters, electrical and gas service providers, some military and relatives of military personnel. Just by being present and participating gives more credence to other followers faith in the “truth” behind the accusations.

I risk really being called “crazy” as those people would not break the law, right? You run with that one. Then, there may be some not actively involved, but they are part of that team and will not act against their team members – write someone anonymously. Might not help me, but after so many reports someone will listen. Read the articles on followers.

There are others who “serve the public”, may or not belong to a strong religious group, but see themselves as the perfect people to help carry out such a campaign:  persons who deliver packages, letters, and delivery type service. They are readily available and can change which order they make deliveries, where they park, or take a different route to continue to do their jobs. Read the article on followers

Many of the people involved are breaking the oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Anyone who worked for the government (including all school personnel sign an oath). I would assume that some roles require making an oath to laws and defending or helping people in this country. I am astonished that people would put their religious or personal beliefs over the oaths they have taken and/or participate in an illegal activity while on their job (or borrow official vehicles on their off hours). Read the article on followers.

Here is a great article on the characteristics of susceptible followers (spellings tend to be British spellings)

“The Implications for Modern Organisations

The characteristics of susceptible followers (i.e., low self-evaluations, unmet needs, and low psychological maturity) interact with the three social forces (obedience to authority, role conformity, and group apathy) to make individuals more susceptible to the influence of toxic leaders. These characteristics of followers and the innate hardwiring of our social natures make individuals uniquely susceptible to instructions of toxic leaders.

  1. Obedience to Authority
  2. Role Conformity
  3. Group Apathy                                                                                  

(My note: Not all persons meet the low psychological maturity category, but I would argue that following a religion that does not allow any questioning or real discussion of church doctrine, produces people who have to hide their questioning nature, or they truly have developed low psychological maturity – that is the way they have been raised)

Continuation of article) In order to battle this effect, and to evaluate how susceptible you are, ask yourself the following questions:

  • Am I enticed by what the leader can offer me? Do I have basic needs that are unmet such as a need for security, certainty, or basic resources? Am I in a threatening environment at work? Do I seek certainty from my leader(s)?
  • Do I have a sense of self beyond my professional life? Can I differentiate between who I am, and what my organisation is, or is my identity interweaved with my organisation’s identity?
  • Can I distinguish between a good logical argument and an emotive charismatic argument? Am I easily won over by charismatic/emotive speeches? Do these speeches/emotive arguments make me feel strongly and deeply?
  • Do I tend to do as I am told, or follow an ideal that others lay down for me? How critical and mindful am I about my actions on a daily basis?
  • Do I tend to disappear into the background in meetings and group discussions? Do I stand apart from the group’s views, or do I tend to often do as the group wants?
  • What is my degree of comfort being told what to do by a leader? Do I fear to make my own structure, or following my own convictions?
  • Am I able to take individual responsibility and accountability for my actions, or am I more likely to share responsibility with the group? Do I often think that someone else will do the right thing instead of me?
  • Do I often feel lost when I am not told what to do by others or a system of structure? Am I capable of creating my own certainty or structure, or am I dependent on others for this?”


As we have seen with online bad behavior, being invisible lends itself to Cause Stalking – you are part of a mob – you are invisible because of the numbers.

On another but related note: The Wikipedia article I found talks about the Crusades in the manner in which I view them. Two religions justifying random killing in the name of Christ or Islam.

“Religious fanaticism is uncritical zeal or with an obsessive enthusiasm related to one’s own, or one’s group’s, devotion to a religion – a form of human fanaticism which could otherwise be expressed in one’s other involvements and participation, including employment, role, and partisan affinities”

I worry about religious fanaticism being played out today. With little regard to God’s teachings, Muhammad’s teachings, the Old Testament, The Koran, Jesus’s teachings, taking ancient texts’ times into account (stoning), fanatics from both the Christian and Islamic faiths (Daesh or Isil) are here. Then there are Jews, Christians and Muslims that aren’t fanatics, but nevertheless insist that the religious beliefs they have are the “true and right” beliefs. I say Jew, because I saw a documentary on a Jewish group that feels that the occupation of what has belonged to the Palistinian people is their destiny/belongs to them (Oh, no! Dare I question the current Israeli government?) Thankfully, there are still people who are the “right” type of believers (according to their definitions), but don’t try to force it on other people (not exactly on topic, but Jefferson was a Deist).








Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s