As much as people are willing to mimic the behavior of others in order to fit in, they often secretly wish for the strength to show dissent. We admire the person who has the guts to do what we dare not do  – challenge group norms. So the heroes of novels are often the wildcards, impetuous, untamed but with a good heart. We love to cheer on these principled rebels.

They challenge both higher ups and friends, not because they are disloyal, but because they want to incite those with power to help others. In fiction the hero often sways the fence-riding group to rebel against the villain by the use of stirring altruistic words. And, sometimes the hero engages in a knock-down, drag-out physical fight, too. But what occurs in real life? In a true uphill struggle by the minority voice of dissent to influence the majority, the rebel with a cause must be consistent. Consistency is not necessarily the hobgoblin of small minds.

Group dynamics affect the challenge of being a real-life rebel with a cause. Social groups tend to seek consensus so that everybody can get along. The fact that everybody else seems to hold the same opinion provides enough validation for most people to follow a leader. Once they have committed themselves, they don’t really want to hear someone who questions their ideas. In the novel, when the hero questions the consensus, they run the risk of being excluded. This of course creates a nice plot twist. Although the hero will not change colors, those that back this character risk exclusion, too. Just as in real life, the group excludes those supporting the person who questions their authority._[1]

Persistence on the part of the minority is their major weapon. The majority group starts with the assumption that the rebel is not correct but the persistence on his or her part creates a conundrum. “How can they be so sure and yet so wrong?”_[2] If the rebel view is going to have any chance of gaining a following the supporters must remain consistent over time. If sticking to their guns is seen as attention seeking, or a rigid belief rather than consistency, it will fail.

Also, the rebel with a cause does not have the luxury of both ‘winning friends’ and ‘influencing people.’ Rebels may influence others by remaining adamant in their position, but most people will not like them. And, the rebel hero must remain strong when punished by the status quo. Any attempt to gain support through appeasement may result in influence going down the drain._[2]

Basically, the uniform view of the majority is never as solid as it appears. Many people conform not because they agree with the large groups, but because they fear exclusion. However, timing is everything when trying to convert private dissenters into open rebels. This works in fiction plots as well. The hero must speak up before members of the group have a chance to act based on the mistaken majority beliefs. When people comply with a demand, and then someone criticizes that demand, they tend to take the criticism personally.

It is those waffling fence-sitters who cling tightly to their fence that are most willing to admire the person who dissents on principle._[2] When the rebel with a cause voices an opinion that they secretly hold, these secondary characters slide off the fence in his or her direction. They have a sense of liberating relief that they can now do the right thing.

 “Indeed, people may speak up and dissent from important group norms not because they want to be difficult and destructive, but because they care for the group and its future.”_[3]

_{[1] Levine, J.M. and Vernon L. Allen, V.L. (1968) Reactions to Attitudinal Deviancy, Report from the Per Group Pressures on Learning Project. Vernon L. Allen, Principal Investigator. Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, The University of Wisconsin}

_{[2] Nemeth, C. J. & Jack A. Goncalo, J.A. (2011) Rogues and Heroes: Finding Value in Dissent.  In J. Jetten, and M.J. Hornsey,(eds) Rebels in Groups: Dissent, Deviance, Difference, and Defiance. 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd[1] Monin, B.and and O’Connor, K. (2011) Reactions to Defiant Deviants-Deliverance or Defensiveness? In J. Jetten, and M.J. Hornsey,(eds) Rebels in Groups: Dissent, Deviance, Difference, and Defiance. 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd}

_{[3] Levine, J.M. and Vernon L. Allen, V.L. (1968) Reactions to Attitudinal Deviancy, Report from the Per Group Pressures on Learning Project. Vernon L. Allen, Principal Investigator. Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, The University of Wisconsin}