Glorifying one’s own group drives dehumanization of victims and lowered justice demands.

Evidence

When the perpetrator is the in-group, however, a coherent and meaningful model representing the psychological process emerges, which supports the mediating role of moral disengagement strategies in the relationship between in-group glorification and support for retributive and restorative justice. Even when controlling for in-group attachment and political affiliation, in-group glorification affects the use of two moral disengagement strategies, that is, the higher the glorification, the greater the explicit dehumanization of the victims and the downplaying of the suffering of the victims’ family members. In turn, explicit dehumanization and emotional minimization predict justice negatively (punishment of the perpetrators and reparation for the victims). — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2118

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Bandura’s moral disengagement theory and to Haidt’s moral foundations work on in-group loyalty as a distinct moral channel. — connects to: Group glorification suppresses demands for justice for ingroup violence — Bernhard Leidner et al., Ingroup Glorification, Moral…, 49; Ingroup glorification, not attachment, triggers moral disengagement and reduced justice demands. — Bernhard Leidner et al., Ingroup Glorification, Moral…, 113; Dehumanization of targeted groups makes violence against them seem reasonable. (+7 more)
• ADDENDUM: Directly supports the thesis of the sacrifice article — when harm is committed by one’s own group, loyalty mechanisms suppress acknowledgment of victims’ suffering.