I am an So dom, and I don't strongly relate to most of the descriptions of this instinct or what other So doms say about it because both tend to focus on social aspects of small groups (such as a group of friends). I'm not even interested in having a group of friends.
What really gnaws at me is the lack of social cohesion in broader society. I live in the United States, which seems to me to be a very divided, sprawling, socially disorganized society. I actually don't think that a group as large as a country is a workable social unit for human beings; a tribal social structure seems much healthier, so I don't even have any hope of this country (or most others) socially improving much.
Thus my main focus as an So dom is the lack of tribes or something approaching them (such as a commune, for example), which is a torturous focus to have because I'm unlikely to ever get any sort of tribe. No friends, no significant other can satisfy this need.
What I want to know is whether anyone else is so intensely bothered by large-scale social incohesiveness and how you deal with that.
Man, that's a serious issue. Short answer on the why it is like this: capitalism.
One reason tribes grew, I faintly remember ANTHRO256, was because they realized the potential in agriculture so from then on breeding and social expansion, social organization has become more premeditated. Yes, there is a limit to it and I'm also bothered, more precisely by the huge mobility but not just in the U.S., it has started in Europe too, job related, short term jobs, pick you up, then dump you, people traveling around as a profession, then in E-Europe the money lure of higher currency wages from the west, thus emigration, etc.
Enneagram-wise I'd put it in the category of the 6. Although not all 6s are social types, and not all social types are conservative/community oriented.
Another prospective factor comes from learning that people have the freedom to move since familial abuse, feeling misfits in their own culture grants them the right to "cocoon out," to explore other parts of the world they might call a "2nd home" beyond their original one. After all, tribes can be very limiting, abusive, blackmailing, dragging you down if you wanted to break out from the endless cycle of social responsibility/debt. So concessions have to be made: against depopulation, so still keeping some youth, (for some have already decided not to reproduce, others leaving, etc.) an idea could be to monitor well being of children in families. And if child's complaint persists, therapist unable to appease the parties, move the child to another family (more matching type-wise).
Another is to create jobs for ones for whom more of the fitting jobs are only available somewhere abroad (e.g. Paris for artists).
Investing in activism. Gov's closer cooperation with civic organizations.
I think the biggest problem about being social consisting a tribe and preserving a healthy unit, while still keeping in touch with a larger unit (state, fed gov) is exactly that it has become very "social." Very... unnatural, unspontaneous, by rote. It has become so social that it is now a herd mentality, a blind following of the rules, a "Mass Ornament." What is lacking is the intimacy of the social, the telling stories by the camp fire, the familiarity that allows for physical closeness, emotion expressed through touching and of course, the slowness of times to allow for consistency for that familiarity to develop. And more specifically: board games, team games but anything without digital devices.
Without a "tribe," a smaller unit that is able to account for its members but that still could be taken accountable by a larger unit, there is no healthy communication between the smaller unit where the
events happened and the larger unit that could discern whether the smaller unit is taking ethical decisions to solve its problems. The police can't be there 24/7 and the police can't be always accountable for knowing the laws right. Fractions can keep information hidden from the whole of the smaller unit and at the end of the day the small town we're talking about would be just another mound of opportunism where everyone tried to get the most out of everyone being together (and working in hierarchy).
Now that's just the smaller scale incohesion. But what if there's no larger unit, an overruling authority to watch over the smaller unit for it has the same fragmentation, even worse as being bigger, as the smaller unit? What if the people who justice in one unit can't find the justice people in another unit for it has a completely different style of dressing, of self-presentation and where it said "police" it is actually mafia-allegiance, where it said transparency organization, it actually is the conglomeration of deregulationists, where it said "church" it is actually a community of people calling themselves conservatives but are actually narcissistic child abusers caring for a community as long as the members have a similar rate of profit/year? Will the justice seekers be able to find support elsewhere to do justice in their already awry, incohesive "community?"
Sprawl in the U.S. is a funny thing, though since they bought territories so recently they are still, even to this day, trying to populate them. Whereas best would be perhaps if more large unit people descended to small unit people to vet their law system.
Moving out and creating new "lifestyle enclaves" does not insure a transmission of cultural knowledge consisting of laws, cases and empirical solutions that were effective in dealing with abuses.
Moving out and starting anew does not insure a community rooted in history, where people are accountable for the long time publicity of their family names, so in a sense it does not insure accountability, cohesion at all. If the authorities of a smaller unit are not responsible to a community based on stronger, more direct familial ties and yet ones allowing them to pass judgment in the most unbiased way possible, then the only authority supervising them is a higher one which may or may not be aware of the contextual details of their decisions. Where there is no accountability, there is fragmentation.
......
and answering the question: I don't know. I don't deal with that at all. Perhaps unconsciously by going to the same places I went to eating out. Small diners, where they already recognize my face. Just today they allowed me to have the fruit soup, the extra dish as part of the daily menu. So I didn't have to pay extra. But this is just minor result. Competition has to be reduced for healthy "tribes" to flourish. If there's too much instability over who belongs to what social class and what other possibilities on the horizon keep egging others one, then they will never get settled with that they already have, with what social group belongs to that material/life standard. Check on YT how much people try to monetize on typology videos.
