Threatened Powers: When Blaming “the others” Grows out of Internal Instability and Protest

  • Sandra Penic
  • Dinka Corkalo Biruski
  • Guy Elcheroth
Chapter
Part of the Peace Psychology Book Series book series (PPBS, volume 17)

Abstract

Once we have established that social and psychological functions of collective out group blame vary across contexts, it becomes important to explain the role of contextual factors more precisely. Two central questions are further investigated in this chapter: Under what circumstances are people prone to resent other groups for past wrongdoings? How is out-group blame related to in-group protest? In both cases, the authors propose an argument that completes or qualifies traditional perspectives on intergroup relations and social conflict. These tend to stress the importance of past victimisation. As a complement to this work, the authors show here that adverse societal circumstances can lay the ground for public mobilisation against out groups, even when these conditions are not a direct consequence of past victimisation caused by external enemies. In the first part of the chapter, the authors focus on the context of the new Croatian nation-state. Levels of social and economic deprivation in Croatia range from relatively low to moderate and are largely connected to direct consequences of ethnicised war. Findings show how these structural particularities have created an opportunity to demobilise system critical opposition: higher levels of social and economic deprivation here lead to stronger out-group blame but not to increased internal protest. Lower levels of popularity of the main left-oriented oppositional party in the most deprived areas partially account for this pattern. In the second part of the chapter, analyses are presented that show that, contrary to findings for Croatia, at a larger scale, internal protest is highest within those regions of the whole former Yugoslavia that have endured the highest level of social and economic deprivation. Furthermore, the highest levels of assignment of collective guilt to other groups can similarly be found in the most deprived regions. Furthermore, the individual-level relationship between internal protest and out-group blame varies significantly between contexts: with increasing rates of social and economic deprivation, these two dimensions of political attitudes become increasingly unrelated. These findings provide an illustration of the way in which societal circumstances of system threat can provide both an opportunity to mobilise the public towards domestic reforms and an impetus for elites to mobilise out-group blame.

Keywords

Former Yugoslavia Intergroup relations Social mobilization Croatia Victims 

References

  1. Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  2. Ajdukovic, D., & Corkalo Biruski, D. (2008). Caught between the ethnic sides: inter-ethnic relations of children and parents in the post-war community. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32, 337–347.Google Scholar
  3. Blalock, H. M. (1967). Toward a theory of minority-group relations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Bagic, D. (2007). Politički rasjepi i stranačke preferencije na izborima za Hrvatski sabor 2003. Politicka misao, 4, 93–115.Google Scholar
  5. Bogardus, E. S. (1925). Measuring social distance. Journal of Applied Sociology, 9, 299–308.Google Scholar
  6. Branscombe, N. R., Slugoski, B., & Kappen, D. M. (2004). The measurement of collective guilt: What it is and what it is not. In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje. (Eds.), Collective guilt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Broz, S. (2005). Good people in an evil time: Portraits of complicity and resistance in the Bosnian war. New York: Other Press.Google Scholar
  8. Castano, E., & Ginner-Sorolla, R. (2006). Not quite human: Infrahumanization in reponse to collective responsibility for intergroup killing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 804–818.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, L. (1993). Broken bonds. The disintegration of Yugoslavia. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cular, G. (2003). Stranačka identifikacija i potpora demokraciji u Hrvatskoj. Politička misao, 40 (4), 3–24.Google Scholar
  11. Culic, M. (1999). Tuđman. Anatomija neprosvijećenog apsolutizma. Feral Tribune, Split.Google Scholar
  12. Cuckovic N. (2002). Siva ekonomija i proces privatizacije u Hrvatskoj, 1997–2001. Financijska teorija i praksa, 26(1), 245–271.Google Scholar
  13. Dollard, J., Doob, L. W., Miller, N. E., Mowrer, O. H., & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustration and aggression. New Haven: Yale Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Doosje, B., Ellemers, N., & Spears, R. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 31, 410–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doosje, B., Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., & Manstead, S. R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one’s group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Druzic, I. (2007). Progress and regress symmetry of the Croatian economy, Ekonomski pregled, 58(3–4), 131–157.Google Scholar
  17. Elcheroth, G. (2006). Individual-level and community-level effects of war trauma on social representations related to humanitarian law. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(6), 907–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elcheroth, G., & Spini, D. (2007). Classes sociales et jugements normatifs de jeunes français: la justification du système par les défavorisés revisitée. Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 75–76, 117–131.Google Scholar
  19. Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D. (2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12(2), 121–138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gagnon, V. P. Jr. (2006). The myth of ethnic war: Serbia and Croatia in the 1990s. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Green, D. P., Glaser, J., & Rich, A. (1998). From lynching to gay-bashing: The elusive connection between economic conditions and hate crime. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 82–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gregurek M. (2001). Stupanj i učinci privatizacije u Hrvatskoj. Ekonomski pregled, 52(1–2), 155–188.Google Scholar
  23. Grubisa, D. (2005). Political corruption in transitional Croatia: The pecularities of a model. Politička misao, 5, 55–74.Google Scholar
  24. Halloran, M. (2007). Indigenous reconciliation in Australia: Do values, identity and collective guilt matter? Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harmon-Jones, E., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., & Simon, L. (1996). The effects of mortality salience on intergroup discrimination between minimal groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 677–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Henjak, A. (2005). Determinante ideološke samoidentifikacije hrvatskih birača na parlamentarnim izborima 2003. godine. Politička misao, 42(2), 81–110.Google Scholar
  27. Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic groups in conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel analyses. Techniques and applications. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  29. Hovland, C. I., & Sears, R. R. (1940). Minor studies of aggression: VI. Correlation of lynchings with economic indices. The Journal of Psychology, 9, 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ivancic, V. (2000). Točka na u. Slučaj Šakić: anatomija jednog skandala. Feral Tribune, Split.Google Scholar
  31. Japec, L., & Sucur, Z. (2007). Kvaliteta zivota u Hrvatskoj. Regionalne nejednakosti. Program Ujedinjenih naroda za razvoj: (UNDP) u Hrvatskoj, LDK, Zagreb.Google Scholar
  32. Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kernell, S. (1978). Explaining presidential popularity. How ad hoc theorizing, misplaced emphasis, and insufficient care in measuring one’s variables refuted common sense and led conventional wisdom down the path of anomalies. The American Political Science Review, 72(2), 506–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kramer, G. H. (1971). Short-term fluctuations in U.S. voting behavior, 1896–1964. American Political Science Review, 65, 131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Krull, J. L., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2001). Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 249–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lewis-Beck, M. S. (1990). Economics and elections: The major western democracies. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  37. McGarty, C. & Bliuc, A. (2004). Refining the meaning of the “collective” in collective guilt: Harm, guilt and apology in Australia. In N. R., Branscombe & B. Doosje. (Eds.), Collective Guilt. International perspectives (str. 112–129). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. McGregor, I., Zanna, M. P., Holmes, J. G., & Spencer, S. J. (2001). Compensatory conviction in the face of personal uncertainty: Going to extremes and being oneself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 472–488.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Miller, N. E. (1941). The frustration-aggression hypothesis. Psychological Review, 48, 337–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moore D., & Vamvakidis A. (2008). Ekonomski rast u Hrvatskoj: mogucnosti i ogranicenja. Financijska teorija i praksa, 32(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
  41. Muller, E. N., Jukam, T. O., & Seligson, M. A. (1982). Diffuse political support and antisystem political behaviour: A comparative analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 26, 240–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nadler, A., & Liviatan, I. (2004). Intergroup reconciliation process in Israel: Theoretical analysis and empirical findings. In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 216–235). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Olzak S. (1990). The political context of competition: Lynching and urban racial violence, 1882–1914. Social forces, 69(2), 395–421.Google Scholar
  44. Petricevic, D. (2000). Kriminal u hrvatskoj pretvorbi: tko, kako, zašto. Zagreb: Abakus.Google Scholar
  45. Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. (2004). HLM6. Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
  46. Roccas, S., Klar, Y., & Liviatan, I. (2004). Exonerating cognitions, group identification, and personal values as predictors of collective guilt among Jewish-Israelis. In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 130–147). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Brehm, J. W. (2004). Gender inequality and the intensity of men's collective guilt. In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 75–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Sekulic, D. (1992). Nationalism versus democracy: Legacies of Marxism. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 6(1), 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sekulic, D. (1997). The creation and dissolution of the multinational state: The case of Yugoslavia. Nations and Nationalism, 3(2), 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sekulic, D. (2001) Je li nacionalizam hrvatska sudbina? Revija za sociologiju, 3–4, 32, 57–174.Google Scholar
  51. Sekulic D., Sporer Z., Hodson R., Massey G. & Zupanov, J. (2004). Sukobi i tolerancija. O društvenoj uvjetovanosti nacionalizma i demokracija. Naklada Jesenski i Turk. Hrvatsko sociolosko drustvo, Zagreb.Google Scholar
  52. Siber, I. (1997). War and the changes in social distance toward the ethnic minorities in Croatia. Politicka misao, 34(5), 3–26.Google Scholar
  53. Siber, I. (1998). Povijesni i etnički rascjepi u hrvatskom društvu. In M. Kasapovic, I. Siber, & N. Zakosek (Eds.), Birači i demokracija: utjecaj ideoloških rascjepa na politički život (51-94). Zagreb: Alinea.Google Scholar
  54. Spini, D., Elcheroth, G., & Fasel, R. (2007). The TRACES survey data. Methodological and technical report. Lausanne: University of Lausanne.Google Scholar
  55. Staub, E., & Bar-Tal, D. (2003). Genocide, mass killing, and intractable conflict: Roots, evolution, prevention, and reconciliation. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.),Oxford handbook of political psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Uzelac G. (1998). Franjo Tudjman’s nationalist ideology. East European Quarterly, 13(4), 449–472.Google Scholar
  57. Wohl, M. J. A., & Branscombe, N. R. (2005). Forgiveness and collective guilt assignment to historical perpetrator groups depend on level of social category inclusiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 288–303.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zakosek, N. (1998). Ideološki rascjepi i stranačke preferencije hrvatskih birača. In M. Kasapovic, I. Siber & N. Zakosek (Eds.), Birači i demokracija. Zagreb: Alinea.Google Scholar
  59. Zakosek, N. & Cular G. (2004). Croatia. In F. H. Aarebrot, S. Berglund & J. Ekman (Eds.), The Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe. 451–492. Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  60. Zakosek N. (2007) The heavy burden of history: Political uses of the past in the Yugoslav successor states. Politicka misao, 5, 29–43.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sandra Penic
    • 1
  • Dinka Corkalo Biruski
    • 2
  • Guy Elcheroth
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research LIVESUniversity of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Faculty of Humanities and Social SciencesUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations