Social Identity

Throughout history, humanity has done some horrible things to each other. Things like mass executions, genocide, torture, and infanticide to name a few. With most governments and religions strictly prohibiting acts such as murder, rape, theft and arson. How, then, do governments justify such barbarism on a mass scale, and how do they maintain stability while supporting such a double standard? According to one prominent theory, the Social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner 1985),
a main enabler of such atrocities is a strong social identity.

To build a social identity, people are put into groups like American, Muslim, Catholic, Aryan, or even tall, short, popular, freak, goth, or nerd. Once a persons identity is tied to one of these groups, they are identified by the characteristics of the group. For example, if I were to say “Bill is a nerd” the first thing that would come to mind if Bill's name were to be brought up would probably be thick glasses, goofy clothes and a pocket protector. We thought of Bill as a nerd, rather than Bill as a person.

Once these social groups are formed, competition begins between groups. People compare the other groups, we desire to be part of a group that makes us different (special) and better than the other groups. Such desires, combined with the stereotyping of members of outsider groups, generates a great excuse to abuse outsiders.

Lets take a look at the crusades, a series of military campaigns instigated by the roman catholic church. Well, how can a church that preaches “THOU SHALL NOT KILL” sanction a series of wars that lasted for hundreds of years and resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people? Even if the leaders sought personal gain, they still had to convince the thousands of people under their command to support the campaigns and give their lives for the cause. So how did they do it? With a strong social identity, the church said “we are Christains what we are doing is right, they are Muslims, mongols, cathors, hussites”... terms that all ended up meaning heretic, evil, inhuman. They were allowed to be murdered without sin, because they were enemies of the holy roman empire and therefore not human.




Citations

Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1985) The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Segregation and War

The causes of war can vary; but often, it is for protection or defense. Whether it was the struggle against the communist threat of the 20th century or the current fight against terrorism in the Middle East, our nation is in a constant battle to protect its people. The same concept applies around the world to all countries, concerning a wide array of threats.

However, where does this need of protection arise from and why are we always convinced that our side of the struggle is worth defending? Without realizing it, every individual seeks to establish an identity within social realms because of the need to belong. “The result is that societies are patterned into numerous groups and associations that may or may not play a big role in social life. In the majority of cases these groups are defined by professions, interests, political convictions, leisure time activities, etc.” (Wagner et al, 2009) Furthermore, a national identity can also be established and feel threatened by other groups or nations. Ultimately, this can lead to segregation and war.

The Second World War was not just a war of conquest as it is often viewed. For many German Nazis, it was a struggle to protect their own; the threat was the Jewish race. Hitler’s police state believed that Jews were a threat to their society, economy, and government structure. In fact, they were considered parasites sucking out the life of the “Aryan” Germanic people. (Engel, 2000) Before he possessed any political significance, Hitler was already declaring that Jews “meant first of all to destroy the inner fabric of their countries”. (Hitler, 1925) Thus, Hitler launched the systematic campaign to rid his nation of what he was convinced was this terrible threat that challenged the fabric of society and life itself.

This ideology, of course, is one full of racism and segregation. Because Hitler and the Germans had categorized themselves as “Aryans”, they proceeded to discriminate against other social groups. Throughout history and across the globe, nations have dealt with similar issues often resulting in civil war, genocide, or legislative actions supporting segregation. In America, we fought the Civil War to end slavery. Nonetheless, the Jim Crow Laws were established to put forth a legal segregated state, with the hopes of creating a separate but equal society. However, the separated Black society was far from equal to that of the Whites.

In America, the social identity forced segregation and in Germany, racism and war were the result. I think both societies had the best motives in mind for their own people. However, would desegregating the American society or integrating Jews harm or benefit the general population in either situation? The Germans were convinced that any interaction with the Jews would result in hurting their nation. Through the 1935 Nuremburg Race Laws, the Jews were stripped of all their basic rights and could no longer work, attend school or social events, and intermarry with the Germans. (Engel, 2000) Similar treatment was mirrored towards Blacks in the South. However, instead of upholding the Jim Crow Laws, the Civil Rights activists in America fought for the opposite, so that all people would have the same rights and opportunities in the workplace, education and social life. For example, in 1964 only 2 percent of Black children living in the states of the former Confederacy attended school with White children. With the programs that President Johnson and the Supreme Court instituted, 32 percent of Black children began attending desegregated schools by 1968. (CEA, 1969) Time soon revealed that “desegregation also improved the achievement of Blacks without hurting the achievement of Whites”. (Matusow, 1984) Because the Blacks were improving without a cost to the white students, the society was actually benefitting as a whole.

Could this have been true in Nazi Germany? Does segregation make a nation stronger or is it weakened? Instead of segregating their society and attempting to wipe out an entire race, the Germans could have continued giving Jews equal and integrated opportunities; the results could have been similar to that of the U.S. where the society benefitted as a whole without segregation. Not only would the general population have had a chance at prospering, but 6 million Jewish lives would have been spared.

References:
CEA, 1969 Annual Report, 310.
Engel, David. (2000). The Holocaust: The Third Reich and the Jews. London: Pearson Education.
Hitler, Adolf. (1925). Mein Kamph.
Matusow, Allen J. (1984). The Unraveling of America: A History of Liberalism in the 1960s. New York: Harper and Row Publishers.

Social Identity and World War I

As nationalism grew in Europe in the 19^th century, spreading through mainly the middle class but also into the lower economic class, it brought with it some major problems.

Social identity and Nationalism were major causes of WWI. Social identity is when people “classify themselves and others into various social categories” (Ashworth and Mael 20). Typically people within these categories tend to think more positively of their categories over others. Citizens of the nations of Western Europe and of Russia certainly fell under this definition as they classified themselves, along with each other, by which nation they lived in; hence the term nationalism.

With nationalism came the extremists. The extremists were the ones who took everything one step farther. They saw their nation as being better than all others. The extremists made sure to rally the people. They went above and beyond what the average citizen would do to prove that their nation was the best and that everyone knew it. “Governments were willing to go to the brink of war or beyond” (Lyons 1) to protect their ideologies. The citizens were ready to fight for their nation. The citizens were encouraged by the extremists to encourage the government to stand up for what were the nation’s ideals. With this nationalistic view, of needing to prove one’s nation is indeed better, comes competition, because what better way to prove one’s superiority than in a display of strength?

With the governments’ will to protect and the citizens’ will to fight, there was little thinking to be done. It only seemed reasonable at the time to each nation to build up defenses in case of an invasion by another nation trying to prove its superiority. The nations were in a competition arms race to see who could build and maintain the bigger navy and who had the better army. With this competition came fear that some nations had too much strength and should be brought down to an equal playing field (Lyons 1). This mentality brought about the idea that a nation had to strike first or be quickly overtaken. Unfortunately for Europe, this was the mentality of a majority of the nations. They formed alliances to better protect themselves; Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary in the Triple Alliance and Britain, France, and Russia forming the Triple Entente. These alliances caused major tension as both sides feared attack and didn’t want to be the first to fall.

And so World War I began; the result of something as harmless as citizens and governments feeling connected by their nationality growing into something monstrous. If only the nationalism could’ve been directed towards a more positive purpose.

Even now in world conflicts, social identity is still a major cause. People are still more than willing to fight for what their social identification group feels is right. The only difference is what the conflicts are about and how they are fought. We could still stand to learn from our mistakes. We all need to look for better alternatives to war. There has to be a better way to prove that one nation has better ideas than everyone else and forcing other nations to take on these ideas. That is, if one nation truly is better than everyone else.

Potential possibilities for expenditure of nationalist energies without resorting to war are numerous. A few ideas include the Olympics, helping less developed nations to prosper, or finding cures for diseases. It not only sounds more pleasant but it is more pleasant to say my nation won the Olympic gold medal for such and such event versus my country took over and destroyed this country.

Citations

Ashworth, Blake, and Fred Mael. Social Identity Theory and the Organization.
1989. Print. http://www.jstor.org/pss/258189

Lyons, Michael. World war II: A Short history. 5. Prentice Hall, 2009. Print.