In understanding crowd behaviour and developing effective countermeasures, it is imperative to delve into the psychological, social, and economic dimensions that influence human actions within large groups. Drawing from a wealth of knowledge across various fields, this article explores the nuanced mechanisms of crowd dynamics and offers practical strategies for managing potentially dangerous situations. Through real-world examples, we will illustrate how these theoretical insights translate into actionable steps for maintaining order and preventing violence.
Crowds, by their nature, are complex and unpredictable entities. While most gatherings are peaceful, the potential for aggression and violence always exists. The actions of a few people can quickly change a crowd's mood from calm to hostile. This shift is particularly pronounced in what we can term "hostile crowds," characterised by noise, threats, and harassment of security personnel. Despite their chaotic appearance, these crowds generally lack initial organisation and leadership, making them susceptible to influence and manipulation.
A key factor in managing crowds is recognising the "milling process," where individuals lose personal control and become swayed by the collective excitement. Effective crowd control requires breaking through this process through strategic interventions.
Some key strategies include:
Isolating Provocateurs
One effective method to control a crowd is to isolate individuals who incite violence. By removing these agitators early, the likelihood of the crowd achieving unity of purpose is diminished. For example, during the SEED incursion on Darwin's Parliament House, security and police successfully isolated key provocateurs, which helped in diffusing several potentially volatile situations. This preemptive action prevented the escalation of violence and allowed for more manageable crowd control.
Fragmentizing the Crowd
Breaking a crowd into smaller groups significantly reduces the potential for collective violence. The presence of well-disciplined and adequately sized security forces can help disperse crowds before they become hysterical and aggressive. For instance, during the Victorian COVID lockdown mandate protests, police used strategic fragmentation to manage large groups of protesters, preventing widespread chaos despite high tensions. Unfortunately, they were too politically biassed to use the same techniques on BLM protests that resulted in millions of dollars in damages.
Removing Crowd Leaders
Informal leaders often emerge in hostile crowds, guiding the group's actions and emotions. Removing these leaders can lead to the crowd's dispersal. A notable example is the 1992 Los Angeles riots, where law enforcement targeted and arrested key instigators, which gradually led to the reduction of violent incidents and restored order. These actions were publicised and transparent, and I remember wondering why an instigator would just wait to be picked up. However, I soon witnessed the hubris of these characters, as they expected the crowd to protect them, but they were too busy looting.
Diverting Crowd Attention
Using a public address system to urge the crowd to disperse can be highly effective. The authoritative tone of commands can break the spell of collective excitement. During the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, authorities in several cities publicly used this tactic to manage large crowds, successfully reducing tensions and preventing clashes. The ability to engage, whether through direct police engagement or using public address systems, was a significant factor in the level of destruction carried out.
Random Arrests
Making random arrests on the periphery of a hostile crowd can induce fear and lead to spontaneous dispersal. The unpredictability of arrests creates a sense of insecurity among crowd members. This tactic was employed during the anti-globalisation protests in Seattle in 1999, where random arrests helped diffuse the intensity of the demonstrations. Although I personally detest such actions because they frequently target the most helpless and vulnerable people, police units all over the world use this tool because it is effective.
Using Recognised Leaders
Inviting trusted public figures to address the crowd can mitigate the influence of emerging leaders within the group. During the riots in a major Aboriginal community in the Top End, using the support of an elder played a crucial role in calming crowds and promoting peaceful protests. Their respected presence and appeals to reason helped maintain order during high-stress situations.
Preventing Panic
In escape scenarios, panic can be deadly. Security personnel should provide clear escape routes and guide the crowd calmly. During the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, authorities in Thailand effectively directed crowds to safety by maintaining a calm demeanour and providing clear instructions, preventing mass panic and further casualties. Neighbouring countries without as effectively trained emergency services personnel, security and police fared substantially less favourable.
Directing Women and Children
Demonstrations sometimes place women and children at the forefront, complicating security responses. Diverting these groups or allowing them to pass through security lines can prevent unnecessary confrontations. During the 2019 Hong Kong protests, police faced this challenge and adapted by creating safe passages for vulnerable individuals, reducing the risk of escalation.
Understanding the psychological underpinnings of crowd behaviour is crucial. The collective mindset of a crowd often overrides individual rationality, leading to actions that individuals would not normally consider. Social factors like economic stress, political discontent, and cultural tensions amplify this phenomenon.
Economic instability, for instance, fuels collective frustration and anger. The 2008 financial crisis saw numerous protests worldwide, from the Occupy Wall Street movement in the United States to riots in Greece and Spain. In these cases, the economic grievances of individuals coalesced into large, often hostile crowds, demanding systemic change. This is expected to occur again over the next 12 months as inflationary costs have driven over 300 million people globally back into poverty through sanctions, debt, and misappropriation of funds.
Political discontent also plays a significant role. The Hamas protests are a prime example. The demonstrations quickly escalated into violent confrontations as crowds reacted to oppressive regimes and economic hardships. The failure to address the underlying causes of the discontent has led to prolonged unrest and significant challenges for security forces. Conflating the loss of life on October 7th and the murderous campaign carried out by Hamas terrorists and their associated NGO's and supporters as anti-Semitic with the calls to create a Palestinian state only solidifies their rampage and aggression.
Cultural tensions similarly spark hostile crowd behaviour. The ongoing conflict between pro-democracy and pro-Beijing factions in Hong Kong illustrates how cultural and political identity issues lead to sustained and intense crowd actions. Managing such situations requires a deep understanding of the cultural context and strategic, culturally sensitive interventions.
While maintaining order is important, it is equally essential to uphold ethical standards. The use of unnecessary force exacerbates tensions and leads to public backlash. Security personnel must balance firmness with restraint, ensuring that their actions do not violate individual rights or provoke further violence. Security personnel have no greater power than any other citizen to ensure that they remain flexible, adaptable, and capable of dealing with situations to ensure they are not held accountable for a range of litigious liabilities.
Training and preparedness are vital. Security forces should be well-versed in crowd psychology, communication techniques, and non-lethal methods of control. Regular drills and simulations can enhance their readiness to handle real-world scenarios effectively.
Community engagement is another critical component. Building trust with the community reduces the likelihood of hostile crowds forming in the first place. Transparent communication, community policing, and proactive dialogue can address grievances before they escalate into large-scale protests.
Crowd behaviour is a complex phenomenon that depends on psychological, social, and economic factors. Effective crowd management requires a deep understanding of these dynamics and the implementation of strategic countermeasures. By isolating provocateurs, fragmenting crowds, removing leaders, diverting attention, using recognised leaders, preventing panic, and directing vulnerable groups, security forces maintain order and prevent violence.
Real-world examples highlight the importance of these strategies. Ethical considerations and community engagement are paramount in ensuring that crowd control measures are both effective and just. In the complex and often volatile landscape of crowd behaviour, a nuanced and informed approach is essential. By drawing on insights from psychology, sociology, economics, and security, we develop comprehensive strategies to manage crowds effectively, ensuring public safety and upholding democratic values.
From the author.
The opinions and statements are those of Sam Wilks and do not necessarily represent whom Sam Consults or contracts to. Sam Wilks is a skilled and experienced Security Consultant with almost 3 decades of expertise in the fields of Real estate, Security, and the hospitality/gaming industry. His knowledge and practical experience have made him a valuable asset to many organizations looking to enhance their security measures and provide a safe and secure environment for their clients and staff.
Comments