100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Summary Keyready for rejecting minorities $7.88
Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Universiteit Utrecht (UU)
  4.  
  5. Rejecting Minorities

Summary

Summary Keyready for rejecting minorities

1 review
 12 purchases
  • Course
  • Rejecting Minorities
  • Institution
  • Universiteit Utrecht (UU)

This document contains an extensive summary of most texts we had to read for this subject. The summaries are extensive, so might still take a while to look through, do not start the day before the exam! I am missing one or two texts, but these were discussed in the lectures/seminars so this sho...

[Show more]

Preview 4 out of 54  pages

Document information

  • January 5, 2021
  • 54
  • 2020/2021
  • Summary

Subjects

  • minorities
  • discrimination
  • racism
  • social studies

Written for

  • Universiteit Utrecht (UU)
  • Algemene Sociale Wetenschappen
  • Rejecting Minorities
All documents for this subject (7)

1  review

review-writer-avatar

By: breugemvera • 2 year ago

Seller

avatar-seller
mjkouwenhoven

Reviews received

Content preview

Week 2 - Realistic conflict theory
The functions of social conflict
L.A. Coser

Realistic and nonrealistic conflict
If the conflict is caused by an object, by the will to have or control something and by rage or
revenge, it can be attained by more than one means. When conflict is a means to obtain
something else, this thing can be obtained through multiple possible measures other than
fighting. But when there are subjective feelings that can only be satisfied through fighting,
other measures to solve the conflict are impossible. This is because fighting is then a
purpose instead of a means.
With conflict where the struggle is a means toward an end; the desired result can be
reached with many means: conflict is only one of the several functional alternatives. But
there are cases where conflict arises from aggressive impulses no matter the object. There
is no trying to attain a result, expression of aggression is the ultimate goal. Here the object is
changeable not the means. This differentiation between conflict as a means and conflict as
an end distinguishes realistic conflict from nonrealistic conflict. Conflicts which arise from
frustration because you want to obtain a specific demand, and which are directed at the
frustrating object can be called realistic conflict. Then the conflict is used as a means to
obtain the specific demand. Nonrealistic conflicts arise because of the need for tension
release of at least one of the objects involved. Nonrealistic conflicts are primarily a response
to frustrations in which the object appears suitable for the release of aggressiveness.
Then the choice of the object is not directly related to a specific issue and not meant to attain
specific results.

Nonrealistic conflict is less stable than realistic conflict, because the aggression is not
directly bound to the object. It is more likely to manifest itself in different ways when the
object is no longer available as well. Realistic conflict will stop if the actor can find alternative
ways to achieve the goal. There are functional alternatives as to means, while in nonrealistic
conflict there are functional alternatives as to objects.
A realistic conflict is thus not merely a tension release, while nonrealistic conflict is.
When you fight your boss to increase your wages this is a realistic conflict, because you fight
for a reason and you could get higher wages in different ways. When you fight your boss
because you perceive him as an oedipal figure this is a nonrealistic conflict, because this
displaced father hatred could be directed at every male figure in your life.

This distinction will help in the discussion of social control and social deviance. A social
deviant is not irrational or devoid of reality, but tries to reach culturally described goals
through culturally tabooed means. This is a variant of a realistic conflict. Deviance is more
instrumental than it is expressive, so when legitimate means are found to reach the goal
instead of through deviance, the other means will be used instead.
Other types of deviance serve to release tension obtained through the socialization
process and through frustration/deprivation. Then deviance does not serve as a means to
obtain a certain goal, but as an outlet of this frustration. Since deviance is more expressive

,instead of instrumental (and the aggression provides the satisfaction), it is less likely that it
will turn into a more peaceful way of acting.

Nonrealistic and realistic conflicts are often mistaken for the same type of conflict.
International relations have realistic conflicts of power and values. Non-realistic elements are
visible but have a mere reinforcing role. It could also be said that nonrealistic conflict is a
result, rather than the cause of intergroup conflict. The target of the aggression is then often
accidental/misplaced, the person having a prejudiced personality already. But when studying
interactions between groups, the researcher must look at realistic conflict and the values or
interests that are pursued.
In earlier research, behaviour which is the outcome of a conflict situation is almost
always seen as non-realistic behaviour. They suggest that in conflict, one party acts on logic
and the other on feelings and emotions. This emphasis on sentiment almost denies the
existence of realistic conflict: there is a lack of sensitivity to struggles over power or other
resources between two groups. Because it is believed that the source of conflict lies in the
sentiments (which are believed to distort the view of relations), instead of investigating the
conflict itself further, they see conflict as social disease and a lack of conflict as social health.
This means that they do not look at the source of frustration but the effect of frustration on
the individual. The actual problem remains ignored.

The division of non-realistic vs realistic conflict might be an abstraction from reality, where
both types of conflict are often merged. Realistic conflict situations are often accompanied by
unrealistic sentiments which are then also reflected on the outgroup. An example of this is
the scapegoat mechanism: it would be wrong to express antagonism towards members of
the in-group, so it is psychologically easier to displace this onto an out-group to which there
already exists some basis of antagonism.

The term realistic conflict does not mean that the means that are adopted are actually
adequate for reaching the end goal; the means seem adequate to the participants, if only for
the reason that they are culturally approved. Each social system contains sources of realistic
conflict as people raise conflicting claims to scarce status, power and resources. Nonrealistic
conflicts arise from deprivations and frustrations stemming from the socialization process
and from adult role obligations, or they result from a conversion or originally realistic
antagonism which was not allowed expression.


Race Prejudice as a Sense of Group Position
H. Blumer

Race prejudice exists in a sense of group position rather than in a set of feelings which
members of one racial group have towards the members of another racial group. So not
feelings of individuals but of racial groups as a whole. We should shift away from individual
lines of experience and focus on the collective process by which a racial group comes to
define and redefine another racial group.
The dominant idea is that prejudice exists as a set of feelings lodged in the individual.
While ideas on how feelings and other psychological elements result in prejudice differ, it is
mostly believed that it lies within the individual feeling. This however, overlooks the fact that
race prejudice lies within the relationship between racial groups.

, 1. A scheme of racial identification is necessary as a framework for racial prejudice
(determining to which racial groups you belong or not). People always identify
themselves as belonging to a racial group.
2. Such identification involves the formation of a conception of all racial groups involved
and their relationship. These conceptions are based on experiences and thus
variable. Prejudice is then the result of the way in which racial groups conceive
themselves and others.
The process by which groups form images of themselves and others, which is a collective
process, results in prejudice. It is the sense of social position emerging from
characterization which provides the basis of prejudice.

Racial feelings depend on the positional arrangement of racial groups. The dominant group
is not concerned with the other group as such, but with its position vis-a-vis the subordinate
group. There are four basic type of feelings that seem to be present in race prejudice in the
dominant group, and result in the positional arrangement of social groups:
1) superiority → being naturally superior or better. This is shown in a
disparagement (degradering) of the qualities of the subordinate group,
placing them below the dominant group
2) the subordinate race is different and alien → it is this feeling that justifies
and promotes the social exclusion of the subordinate racial group, placing
them beyond the dominant group
3) a feeling of entitlement to certain areas of privilege and advantage
→These three types of feelings are present in society without prejudice as
well. The fourth feeling is thus needed to result in prejudice.
4) a fear and suspicion that the subordinate group is threatening the
dominant position of the ingroup → suspected acts are interpreted as an
attack on the natural superiority of the dominant group.
Remember that these feelings are at group level, feelings of individuals about the
subordinate group can differ greatly. The only commonality is the sense of the social position
of their group. This is a general feeling without a set of specific beliefs. It is not a reflection of
the objective relations between racial groups, but a sense of where the two racial groups
should belong.
The sense of group position is very powerful: it stands for and involves a
fundamental kind of group affiliation for the members of the dominant racial group. When
someone feels they belong to a certain group they will automatically become under the
influence of the sense of position held by that group. This is something different than
individual status: someone with low status in the dominant group can still feel that members
of the subordinate group are inferior. He forms his conception as a representative of the
dominant group and treats individuals of the subordinate group as representative of that
group.

The source of prejudice lies in a felt challenge to this sense of group position.
Race prejudice is a defensive reaction to such challenging of the sense of group
position. It consists of the disturbed feelings, usually of marked hostility, that are
aroused → race prejudice is a protective device to preserve the integrity and
position of the dominant group.

, Sense of group position is an historical product, based on the original conditions of initial
contact. Further experiences with social relations between the two groups mould the sense
of group position further, in many possible ways. The sense of group position is thus very
variable. The dominant racial group continuously defines and redefines the subordinate
group and the relations between them.
1. The process of denition occurs through complex interaction and communication
between the members of the dominant group. In this usually vast and complex
interaction separate views run against one another, influence one another, modify
each other and fuse together in new forms. Dominant views keep changing. If the
interaction becomes increasingly circular and reinforcing, devoid of serious inner
opposition, a collective image of the subordinate group is formed and a sense of
group position is set.
2. Group definition is based on an abstract image of the subordinate group. The
subordinate racial group is defined as if it were an entity or whole, with little eye for
the individuals of that group.The implications of the fact that the col- lective image is
of an abstract group are of crucial significance:
a. It is not the experience with individuals in daily association that gives rise to
the definitions of the extended, abstract group. The collective image of the
abstract group grows up not by generalizing from experiences gained in close
contacts but through the characterizations that are made of the group as an
entity.
b. Conceptions of the subordinate group are developed during “big events” that
seem to raise fundamental questions about relations and awaken strong
feelings of identification with one's racial group. It is the events seemingly
loaded with great collective significance that are the focal points of the public
discussion. The defini- tion of these events is chiefly responsible for the
develop- ment of a racial image and of the sense of group position.
c. The major influence in public discussion is exercised by individuals and
groups who have the public ear and who are felt to have authority and power.
They are key figures in the formation of the sense of group position and
characterization of the subordinate group.
d. A strong opportunity is given to interest groups in directing the discussion and
setting the interpretations that arise in such discussion. These interest groups
try to reach a position which the dominant group would enjoy, due to greater
advantages. The role of strongly organized groups seeking to further special
interest is usually central in the formation of collective images of abstract
groups
The sense of group position dissolves and race prejudice declines when the process of
running definition does not keep abreast of major shifts in the social order. When events
touching on relations are not treated as big events, and a big discussion does not arise, the
sense of group position recedes and prejudice declines.


Privilege on the precipice: perceived racial status threats
lead white Americans to oppose welfare programs.
R. Wetts & R. Willer

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller mjkouwenhoven. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $7.88. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

69052 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 15 years now

Start selling
$7.88  12x  sold
  • (1)
Add to cart
Added