Divine legitimization of group advantage removes accountability for causing harm.

Evidence

Bandura (1999) systematically analyzed the multiple ways in which such mechanisms can lead to justification of wrongdoings. People can dispute the accuracy of the reports of harm done to the out-group, displace the responsibility for the harm done and attribute the offending behaviors to extenuating external circumstances rather than volition, or even interpret the event in a manner that assigns ultimate blame to the victims themselves (see Herbert & Dunkel-Schetter, 1992, for an example of the latter mechanism). All these mechanisms enable moral disengagement and have been related to support for military intervention against an enemy (Grussendorf, McAlister, Sandstrom, Udd, & Morrison, 2002; McAlister, 2001). — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 47 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Individual charity cannot substitute for systemic justice. — Andrew L. Whitehead, American Idolatry, 317; Moral disengagement mechanisms enable justification of in-group harm. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 47; Individualist citizenship logic hides group-based harm and privilege. (+4 more)

Related

• Moral disengagement mechanisms enable justification of in-group harm. (similarity 0.88)
• Group responsibility itself weakens moral control over harmful acts (similarity 0.83)
• Moral disengagement mediates glorification’s suppression of justice demands (similarity 0.82)
• Moral disengagement from in-group wrongdoing can be countered through awareness-raising communications. (similarity 0.82)
• Glorifying one’s own group drives dehumanization of victims and lowered justice demands. (similarity 0.82)
• Perceived in-group moral violations trigger defensive cognitive distortions. (similarity 0.82)
• Ingroup glorification, not attachment, triggers moral disengagement and reduced justice demands. (similarity 0.81)
• Glorification enables moral disengagement while attachment resists in-group wrongdoing justification. (similarity 0.80)
• Institutional evil requires a social psychology of how settings override members’ moral scruples (similarity 0.80)
• Group decision making lets members discount their share of collective harm (similarity 0.79)
• Compassion directed through collectives secretly threatens those it claims to help (similarity 0.79)
• Group glorification suppresses demands for justice for ingroup violence (similarity 0.79)
• Collective decision-making lets participants minimize personal responsibility for harm. (similarity 0.79)
• In-group perpetrated misdeeds ironically heighten victim dehumanization (similarity 0.79)
• Loyalty and authority crowd out harm and fairness after in-group atrocities (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Moral disengagement mechanisms enable justification of in-group harm. #expands (0.82) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 47
• Individualist citizenship logic hides group-based harm and privilege. #corroborates (0.80)
• Sanctifying harmful means as worthy removes guilt and even elicits pride #corroborates (0.80)
• Organizations hide harm by denying consequences, then by denying responsibility for them. #expands (0.78) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4012
• Group decision making lets members discount their share of collective harm #expands (0.78) — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 429
• Peoples cut off from common action turn inward to claim collective divinity #exemplifies (0.75)