Search

Much research in intergroup relations concerns the potential for interventions (e.g. intergroup contact) to reduce majorities' discrimination against minorities. In this paper we focus on how minority group members construe such interventions, especially as they affect their abilities to act in terms of their collective identity to realize social change. In addressing this issue, we focus on a minority's beliefs and theories concerning the intergroup dynamics lying behind their marginalization. Our data are qualitative and concern British Muslims' analyses of the dynamics of Islamophobia. Specifically, we explore two theorizations of Muslims' marginalization. Both share a concern with improving Muslims' collective position in Britain. However, they construe the dynamics to Islamophobia in very different ways, and this shapes their approach to intergroup contact and dialogue. Our analysis is informed by, and seeks to complement, social psychological theorizing on social change and intergroup contact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much psychological research employs the categories of extremism and moderation as categories of analysis (e.g. to identify the psychological bases for, and consequences of, holding certain positions). This paper argues these categorizations inevitably reflect one's values and taken-for-granted assumptions about social reality and that their use as analytic categories limits our ability to explore what is really important: social actors' own constructions of social reality. In turn we argue that if we are to focus on this latter, there may be merit in exploring how social actors themselves use the categories of moderation and extremism to construct their own terms of reference. That is we propose to re-conceptualize the categories of moderation and extremism as categories of practice rather than analysis. The utility of this approach is illustrated with qualitative data. We argue that these data illustrate the importance of respecting social actors' own constructions of social reality (rather than imposing our own). Moreover, we argue that categories of moderation and extremism may be employed by social actors in diverse ways to construct different terms of reference and so recruit support for different identity-related projects.

Political activity is often addressed in terms of rational actor theory (RAT). We review RAT's psychological assumptions and highlight the neglect of collective identity. In turn, we view the perception of 'interest' as contingent upon constructions of identity and explore how different characterizations of collective identity are organized strategically so as to shape people's understandings of their interests and how they should act to realize them. Using examples taken from a study of British Muslims' political activity we emphasize the contested and strategic dimension to identity construction and analyse how activists addressing the same constituency construe Muslim identity in different ways so as to promote different conceptions of collective interest. Specifically, we explore the contested invocations of Prophetic example in the definition of Muslim identity. The broader thrust behind this work is a critique of the sharp dichotomization of Muslim and non-Muslim political activity. We maintain that essentially similar processes of identity construction underlie all attempts to organize collective sentiment and political action (including that comprising so-called 'conventional' electoralist politics in the West), and that conceiving of identity as a site of political struggle underscores the inadequacy of Orientalist characterizations of Muslim identity in terms of a singular, transhistorical essence.

This paper takes as its focus the perception of community. This is analysed through reference to the literature concerning the adoption of more inclusive, superordinate social categories. Whilst most research tends to focus on the consequences of these social categories for self and other perception, we focus on their antecedents. These are typically hypothesized to include such issues as the perception of the subordinate groups' common fate and factors affecting their perceptual differentiation (e.g. their similarity and entitativity). However, rather than conceiving of such issues as pre-given antecedent variables, we explore how these issues (and others) are actively constructed in and through discourse. More specifically, we explore how such issues are sites of contestation as activists with different political projects seek to construct quite different versions of the relevant superordinate community identity. Our data are qualitative and are drawn from contemporary debates amongst British Muslims concerning their relations with non-Muslim Britons and non-British Muslims across the globe. A key issue in these deliberations concerns the nature of British Muslims' identity and the superordinate identifications that best facilitate its expression and realization. We suggest that constructions of common fate, similarity, entitativity etc., far from being 'givens', are the means through which different definitions of Muslim identity are constructed and different forms of collective action mobilized.