Dominant groups frame subordinate challenges as illegitimate pushiness

Evidence

The connection between the white public sentiment in these riot-torn cities of the early twentieth century and today’s prevailing racial attitudes is the presence of some pressure or demand for change presented by blacks. The concern with black “pushiness,” then, could plausibly be viewed as part of a dominant group’s attempt to interpret subordinate group challenges as illegitimate, and yet to do so in a manner that offers an ostensibly principled defense of a privileged group position (Jackman & Muha, 1984). — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3415

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to modern accusations of minority groups being ‘too demanding’ or ‘aggressive’ in political discourse — echoes the ‘complaints about immodesty’ moral-panic pattern where the privileged frame subordinate behavior as violating universal norms. — connects to: Subordinate self-determination is read as a threat to dominant rule — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race: Reflections on…, 1504; The distinctive new prejudice is interpreting subordinate demands as illegitimate pushiness — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 3415; Hegemonic managerial power shows its coercive face only when challenged — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk: The Collected and Unpublished…, 2348 (+3 more)