-
8 | Understanding Group Identity as Collective Axiology
- University of Michigan Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
8 | Understanding Group Identity as Collective Axiology Why does systematic violence against civilians occur? Why do some identity groups ‹nd in their heritage the values that promote reconciliation and peace, while others engulf large segments of the civilian population in mass devastation? Part of the mystery surrounding the apparent thirst for destruction of civilians arises from the interconnected repercussions that violence engenders—no act of violence stands alone. Again, all violent acts incur consequences—positive and negative, foreseen and unexpected, subtle for some and fatal for others. In this chapter, we examine certain symbolic instruments for civilian denunciation, denigration, and demonization that are routine in the rhetoric of protracted con›ict. We draw particular attention to the impact of narratives of threat that characterize notions of the Other (both civilians and militants), narratives that shift blame from an individual’s faults to denigration of an entire group. “Who committed this crime, this injustice?”“Who aided the work of the criminals?”“Who supported their cause in word or deed?” Threat narratives presumably provide answers to these questions, fostering a collective devaluation of the outgroup and in turn “proving” the immoral, uncivilized, or subhuman character of the Other. Of course, a threat can take the form of a menace, abuse, hazard, intimidation , denunciation, or danger. In the case of armed con›ict, a threat is cast as a danger to ingroup security, a prelude to harm or possible destruction .And signi‹cantly, the source of the threat can be either a state of affairs, such as the enemy’s mobilization of its military forces, or a group, such as the enemy forces themselves. As presented in Part I, examples of 140 this characterization of a threatening Other include Levrentii Beria’s depiction of the Crimean Tatars as collaborators with the enemy during World War II (chapter 3), Hutu extremists’ denigration of all Tutsis as waging a campaign of genocide against the (rightful) Rwandans (chapter 4), some Israeli leaders’ castigation of the Lebanese for supporting Hezbollah (chapter 5), and allied military commanders’technical (and ostensibly amoral) depiction of Iraqi civilians as potential “friction” in the allied military machines (chapter 6). In this chapter, we deepen the analysis through a study of the socialpsychological power that threat narratives can exert on con›ict protagonists . We examine how narratives characterizing the threatening Other are distilled from stories of violence, victimization, and criminality. And we show that such narratives insinuate certain normative commitments that are inextricably linked to notions of ingroup virtue and outgroup vice that can emerge in due course from the storytelling of the enemy’s threats. Threat Narratives Communities living in peace with their neighbors exhibit a multiplicity of social identities in categories as varied as religion, geography (nation, region , city, local community), and profession. Some identities are more salient than others. Some identities are interconnected and mutually strengthened. Even peaceful communities harbor negative images of outsiders, which are conveyed through the discursive practices of derision, degradation , and assumption. When peaceful communities are shattered by the proliferation of violence, the “true purpose” of the destruction often confounds its victims. For survivors of protracted con›ict or relatives of torture victims, simple questions about the meaning of their ordeal quickly become complex. Uncertainties about the perpetrators feed the panic that follows an attack. Who committed this crime? Will it happen again? What will they do next? And what is our standing in the world? We believe that the answers given by con›ict protagonists to these questions offer insight into the perceived intentions, motives, purposes, and character of the unknown Other.Victims form stories about the Other that convert the threat from private episodes confronting individuals to collective events that enshrine a shared public danger. The evolving public discourse makes sense of the violence by conveying certain “truths” about the perpetrators that Understanding Group Identity as Collective Axiology | 141 [44.200.210.43] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 22:18 GMT) explain their actions. These explanations inevitably pass into the realm of moral rather than political or economic discourse, bearing far more cognitive heft than mere practical understanding. The groundwork is thus laid for an unshakable and essentialist view of the enemy. Many threat narratives address at least one of three themes: normative agency, predictability, and global positioning. First, storytellers progress easily from outlining the behavior of criminals to revealing their inherently depraved character. Never limited to the empirical “facts” about the criminal’s actions, threat narratives are infused with moral indictment. The notion...