In any group . . . there is one side in favor of giving in to demands, avoiding conflicts, honoring the “rights” of the complainers, and
taking the easy way out. The other side favors principle, staying on a predetermined course in spite of opposition, and “responsibility” ahead
of “rights”. Too much “giving in” results in a spiral of increasing demands and more giving in, until the group collapses in chaos, violence and
strife. Immaturity in “giving in” results in over-leniency and social chaos. Immaturity on the other side results in cruelty and meanness. There is
another important variable in this. In any group, the average functioning of the group can go down toward more immaturity, or up toward greater
maturity. In periods of stress, the average level of maturity can go down. In periods of calm, the average level of maturity goes up.
In a family or small group (and I believe it operates also on national and international levels), the chaotic, disturbed, over-lenient or
over-mean, “rights” oriented, group can begin to pull up to better maturity. This occurs when one family member, or one person, can begin to assume
responsibility and can spearhead a course of action based on principle that is not partisan and not FOR or AGAINST anyone. The principle followed is
not as important as having a clearly defined blueprint and knowing where one stands. In time of chaos, people are generally pleased to have a person
who is sure of his convictions and who can take action. Then comes the first action and the leniency group squawks, a second action and a louder squawk,
etc. Eventually the leader is forced to take unpopular action which is followed by monumental opposition. If the leader still stays on course, the opposition
subsides and the whole group is operating on a new level of maturity and integration.