Collective identity can have unintended political repercussions without becoming politicized

Evidence

Politics is typically defined as the constrained use of power by people over other people (Goodin & Klingemann, 1996, p. 7; see also M.Weber, 1919). The struggle between social groups for power within society can therefore be understood as political group activity. Accordingly, we suggest that politicized collective identity can be understood as a form of collective identity that underlies group members’ explicit motivations to engage in such a power struggle. At this point, it may be helpful to distinguish between political repercussions of collective identity and politicized collective identity proper. In many cases, behavior or action in terms of collective identity might have political repercussions in that it also affects the power structure within society. However, these political repercussions may or may not be intended by the collective actors. Take, for example, a religious group that “simply” wants its children to be taught in its own schools. It is not difficult to imagine that this acting out of a specific collective identity may have wider political repercussions in that it may challenge the educational system of society at large and, more generally, the power relations between church and state, although such challenges were not intended by the religious group in the first place. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4416 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Identity-framed party items built for two-party systems misfire in multiparty systems. — Sabrina J. Mayer and Luana Russo, What one is not: a new scale to measure…, 13; Identity-based actions can reshape political power structures without being intended as political — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4416; Collective identity politicizes only when a confrontation is widened into a society-wide power struggle (+1 more)

Broader Connections