Subordinate groups historically reversed self-derogation into positive in-group identity and militancy

Evidence

Status differences between groups often do not remain unilaterally associated with low levels of intergroup conflict. For example, the generalization made above—that certain forms of political, economic, and social subordination of a social group tend to eliminate or even reverse its ethnocentrism—is already dated. Research conducted over the last two decades reveals a changing pattern in intergroup relations. American Blacks (Brigham, 1971; Friedman, 1969; Harris & Braun, 1971; Hraba & Grant, 1970), French Canadians (Berry, Kalin & Taylor, 1977), New Zealand Maoris (Vaughan, 1978) and the Welsh (Bourhis, Giles & Tajfel, 1973; Giles & Powesland, 1975), for instance, now seem to be rejecting (or have already rejected) their previously negative ingroup evaluations and developing a positive ethnocentric group identity. (Milner, 1981, and Tajfel, 1982b, argue that these new data are likely to be a genuine reflection of social change.) This construction of positive in-group attitudes has often been accompanied by a new militancy over political and economic objectives (see Tomlinson, 1970). — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2695

Categorization

• XREF: Empirical cases where internalized inferiority was collectively reversed into positive essentialist group identity — precisely the reader’s target of ‘cases where the bind was loosened without collapse.’ This is the closest the social psychology literature gets to a documented collective phase-shift in identity stance. — connects to: Subordinate groups often internalize dominant-group evaluations and derogate their own group — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 2691; Subordinate groups strategically deploy difference to resist dominant control and revalue themselves — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 115; Negative self-definition against an enemy precedes group violence — Andrew L. Whitehead, American Idolatry, 196 (+3 more)
• SEED: The temporal arc — subordinate group shifts from consensual self-derogation (identity problem) to positive ethnocentrism + militancy — supplies an empirical backbone for an essay on when group identity claims become collectively assertable, versus when they remain only individually ironic.

Broader Connections

• Subordinate groups often internalize dominant-group evaluations and derogate their own group #corroborates (0.90) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2691
• Subordinate groups strategically deploy difference to resist dominant control and revalue themselves #corroborates (0.90) — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 115