Antidominance as a Motive of Low-Power Groups in Conflict
- 241 Downloads
Groups that are more powerful in a conflict will often characterize less powerful groups as trying to gain power for the purposes of domination. But it is not clear that these are the motives of the less powerful. Through the analysis of texts of representatives of high- and low-power groups in conflict, we show that while higher-power groups in a conflict consistently characterize the lower-power group as trying to dominate, no such evidence can be found in the writings and speeches of low-power groups. Instead, lower-power groups use language of resisting domination. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and political implications of these findings.
KeywordsSocial Dominance Orientation Power Group Islamic World Arab Student Intergroup Threat
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Cohen, Yolande (ed.) (1996). Women and Counterpower. Montreal, Quebec: Black Rose Books.Google Scholar
- Gee, Tim (2011). Counterpower: Making Change Happen. Oxford, UK: New Internationalist.Google Scholar
- Hitler, Adolf (1925/2009). My Struggle [Mein Kampf]. Translator unspecified. Mumbai, India: Jaico.Google Scholar
- Huntington, Samuel P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
- Ibrahim, Raymond (ed.) (2007). TheAl-Qaeda Reader. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
- Lawrence, Bruce (2005). Messages to the World: the Statements of Osama Bin Laden (James Howarth). New York: Verso.Google Scholar
- Lenin, Vladimir (1917/2009). State and Revolution. (Richard Pipes trans.). Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing.Google Scholar
- Pratto, Felicia, James Sidanius, Fouad Bou Zeineddine, Nour Kteily and Shana Levin (in press). When Domestic Politics and International Relations Intermesh: Subordinated Publics’ Factional Support within Layered Power Structures. Foreign Policy Analysis.Google Scholar
- Winter, David G. (2005). Measuring the Motives of Political Actors at a Distance. In Jerrold M. Post (ed.), The Psychological Assessment of Political Leaders: With Profiles of Saddam Hussein and Bill Clinton (pp. 153–77). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar