Antidominance as a Motive of Low-Power Groups in Conflict

  • P. J. Henry


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.


Social Dominance Orientation Power Group Islamic World Arab Student Intergroup Threat 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arreguin-Toft, Ivan (2001). How the Weak Win Wars: a Theory of Asymmetric Conflict. International Security 26: 93–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blumer, Herbert (1958). Race Prejudice as a Sense of Group Position. Pacific Sociological Review 1: 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bobo, Lawrence D. (1999). Prejudice as Group Position: Microfoundations of a Sociological Approach to Racism and Race Relations. Journal of Social Issues 55: 445–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, Yolande (ed.) (1996). Women and Counterpower. Montreal, Quebec: Black Rose Books.Google Scholar
  5. Gee, Tim (2011). Counterpower: Making Change Happen. Oxford, UK: New Internationalist.Google Scholar
  6. Green, Eva G. T. and Fanja Auer (2013). How Social Dominance Orientation Affects Union Participation: the Role of Union Identification and Perceived Union Instrumentality. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 23: 143–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Henry, P. J., James Sidanius, Shana Levin and Felicia Pratto (2005). Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence between the Middle East and America. Political Psychology 26: 569–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hitler, Adolf (1925/2009). My Struggle [Mein Kampf]. Translator unspecified. Mumbai, India: Jaico.Google Scholar
  9. Huntington, Samuel P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  10. Ibrahim, Raymond (ed.) (2007). TheAl-Qaeda Reader. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  11. Lawrence, Bruce (2005). Messages to the World: the Statements of Osama Bin Laden (James Howarth). New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  12. Lenin, Vladimir (1917/2009). State and Revolution. (Richard Pipes trans.). Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. Levin, Shana, Felicia Pratto, M. Matthews, James Sidanius and Nour Kteily (2013). A Dual Process Approach to Understanding Prejudice toward Americans in Lebanon: an Extension to Intergroup Threat Perceptions and Emotions. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 16: 139–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Levin, Shana, Stacey Sinclair, James Sidanius and Colette van Laar (2009). Ethnic and University Identities across the College Years: a Common In-Group Identity Perspective. Journal of Social Issues 65: 287–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Newman, Matthew L., Carla J. Groom, Lori D. Handelman and James W. Pennebaker (2008). Gender Differences in Language Use: an Analysis of 14,000 Text Samples. Discourse Processes 45: 211–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pratto, Felicia, James Sidanius, Lisa M. Stallworth and Bertram F. Malle (1994). Social Dominance Orientation: a Personality Variable Predicting Social and Political Attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67: 741–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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
  18. Sidanius, James, P. J. Henry, Felicia Pratto and Shana Levin (2004). Arab Attributions for the Attack on America: the Case of Lebanese Sub-Elites. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 35 (4): 403–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sidanius, James and Felicia Pratto (1999). Social Dominance: an Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stephan, Walter G. and Cookie W. Stephan (1996). Predicting Prejudice. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 20: 409–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Winter, David G. (2004). Motivation and the Escalation of Conflict: Case Studies of Individual Leaders. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 10: 381–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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

Copyright information

© P. J. Henry 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. J. Henry

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations