Negative self-definition against an enemy precedes group violence

Evidence

The key factor is clearly highlighting who “we” are not. This is the quickest and easiest way to define who “we” are without having to make any definitive declarations concerning what “we” are for or what features define “us.” Christian nationalist rhetoric consistently resorts to demonizing an “other.” The other might be those of a different race, nationality, political ideology, or religion. This rhetoric claims there are people or forces we should all be very afraid of, as these people or forces are intent on diminishing us. Moreover, when Christian nationalism stokes the fires of fear because “they” are out to take our rightful power, violence is a natural result. — Andrew L. Whitehead, American Idolatry, 196

Categorization

• APHORISMS: The mechanism — defining ourselves by what we are not rather than what we are for — is a broadly instructive observation about in-group formation beyond Christian nationalism.
• XREF: connects to: Group identity formation requires the existence of enemies to define the self against — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 33; Resolving one conflict merely produces a fresh enemy to define oneself against — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 353; Subordinate groups historically reversed self-derogation into positive in-group identity and militancy — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 2695 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Group identity formation requires the existence of enemies to define the self against #expands (0.95) — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 33
• Hate of the out-group can arise from mere self-definition by contrast, no competition needed #expands (0.90) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1113
• Resolving one conflict merely produces a fresh enemy to define oneself against #exemplifies (0.82) — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 353
• Subordinate groups historically reversed self-derogation into positive in-group identity and militancy #complicates (0.78) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2695
• Threats to a person’s ingroup are experienced as threats to the self itself #expands (0.75) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 338
• Being murderous without restraint is inherently self-destructive #qualifies (0.72)