BLOG TWO: Ethnocentrism

What is ethnocentrism? Why does it occur? Under what conditions is ethnocentrism likely to be maximised?

Introduction

Ethnocentrism is the extreme view that one’s own way of living, their values, patterns and beliefs are superior and correct compared to those of others (AllAboutPhilosophy.org, 2007). Human beings generally favour their own groups which builds solidarity and peace within the in-group (Brauer, 2000; Le Vine & Campbell, 1972). Ethnocentrism creates negative evaluations about out-groups (Cunningham et al. 2004), and they are usually made prematurely and no time is taken out to actually learn about the out-group (Barton, 2001, para. 3). Ethnocentric behaviour can be hostile, derogative and at times violent towards an out-group (Brauer, 2000). Everyone is ethnocentric, it is an innate characteristic and it cannot be avoided because human beings unconsciously make assumptions about other people based on our own limited experiences and understanding of life (Barger, 2004, para. 2; Cunningham et al. 2004). Our experiences influence the way in which we interpret new people and new situations (Barger, 2004, para. 2). Ethnocentrism can distort communication between groups, which can increase hostility and tension in interactions (Culbertson, 2001, para. 1). There are a number of theories within social psychology which explain how ethnocentrism can be maximised. These theories include frustration-aggression, realistic conflict, relative deprivation and social identity. Within this essay I will look at these four theories and how they relate to three events within Australia’s history; the Cronulla Riots, the Australian Gold Rush and the implementation of the Victorian Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001, and how each of these events has increased in ethnocentrism.


Frustration-Aggression Theory

The Frustration-Aggression theory suggests that anger arises when people feel they are being unfairly treated, causing intergroup conflict and increasing ethnocentrism (Grant & Brown, 1995).
In 2005, approximately 5000 people gathered in Cronulla for a protest against a number of confrontations between groups of white Australians and groups of people of Middle Eastern appearance. The weekend before the protest three off-duty lifeguards had been assaulted by a group of men of Middle Eastern appearance. The protest began peacefully, however became violent after a group of white Australians chased a man of Middle Eastern appearance into a hotel and a number of youths of Middle Eastern appearance were assaulted on a train. These incidences were followed up by a series of violent attacks in retaliation near Cronulla and Maroubra.
This story is a prime example of the Frustration-Aggression theory. Le Vine and Campbell (1972) suggest that frustration from an act of aggression generates further aggression. This is evident in the acts of white Australians chasing the man into the hotel and assault of the youths on the train, in retaliation to the assault on the lifeguards. Le Vine and Campbell (1972) also state that aggression can build up over repeated frustrations. The purpose of the initial protest was to bring awareness to a number of confrontations between these groups of peoples. Evidently, aggression had culminated from the repeated attacks between the two groups. The large crowd in protest gave way to diffusion of responsibly along with deindividuation which saw the occurrence of aggressive outbursts by the crowd (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).
Ethnocentrism was maximised in this situation as each group made negative evaluations and stereotypes regarding the other group (Cunningham et al. 2004). Each group built up their own pride and vanity by judging themselves with superior morality, by looking at the other group with contempt and behaving with hostility and violence (Le Vine & Campbell, 1972).


Realistic Conflict Theory

The Realistic Conflict theory proposes that when there is a threat to valued resources ethnocentrism will build between groups (Grant & Brown, 1995).
During he Australian Gold Rush in the 1850s and 1860s thousands of people travelled from Ireland, the United Kingdom, Europe, China and North America to mine gold and by 1854 there were approximately 25,000 people camping throughout the Ballart fields and the surrounding regions. With a large influx of Chinese immigrants there was a lot of curiosity from Australian and European diggers, however, as areas for mining became scarce conflicts arose between the different nationalities. The Chinese were often brutally attacked, many being murdered or dying from subsequent injuries (Jayaraman, 2000).
Le Vine and Campbell (1972) stated that intergroup conflict increases when the resources are greatly valued and the conflicting parties have the most to gain by victory. The Realistic Conflict theory suggests that with the lack of mining resources, which were extremely valued, conflict arose (Le Vine & Campbell, 1972). Ethnocentrism also increased as the Australian and European diggers believed themselves to be superior to the Chinese (Jayaraman, 2000) and possibly thought that they had more right to the land and gold. The threat of the Chinese would have increased the Australian and European diggers’ solidarity within their groups and their personal dislike for the Chinese (Le Vine & Campbell, 1972) which in turn increased ethnocentrism.


Relative Deprivation Theory

The concept of Relative Deprivation explains that we can feel we are worse off than others with whom we compare ourselves (Myers, 2007)
In looking again at the Australian Gold Rush the theory of Relative Deprivation would suggest that the groups could have felt deprived of the opportunity to find gold because of the massive influx of immigrants, especially if those immigrants were finding a lot of gold in their land plots. For this reason ethnocentrism between the groups would have been maximised and their interactions with the immigrants would have become hostile and evidently, violent (Grant & Brown, 1995).




Social Identity Theory

The Social Identity theory suggests that if an out-group threatens the identification of an in-group, conflict and ethnocentrism will increase (Grant & Brown, 1995).
In 2001, Steven Bracks, the premier for Victoria, introduced a Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, otherwise known as a Vilification Law. In theory the act was supposed to promote tolerance between groups, prohibiting vilification of any race or religion, and providing compensation for victims of vilification. Instead the law made freedom of speech and rights to personal belief and opinions illegal, and it promoted tension between racial and religious groups. Countries such as France are a prime example of how the Vilification law encourages ethnocentrism and discrimination between groups. Since the law was implemented in France it has created “mini nations” within the country (Nahllia, 2007). The law has brought about the formation of ethnic territories where people cannot enter if they do not belong to the ethnic group. The Vilification law has, ultimately, created division between the different ethnic groups within France (Nahllia, 2007). In Australia, the introduction of the law into Victoria promoted an increase in the divide between many religious groups, including the well-known case between the Christian church and the Islamic Council of Victoria.
Under the Racial and Religious Tolernace Act 2001, if any group felt that they were being socially threatened they could claim victimisation to vilification and take the ‘threatening’ group to court. The Law maximised ethnocentrism as it increased in-group feelings of superiority, but also victimisation, and therefore their hostility towards out-groups. The Act also provided a legal or ‘socially acceptable’ approach of attacking any out-group that the in-group did not like. There was a lot of criticism to the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act and in 2006 it was nullified in the Australian High Court.


Conclusion

Ethnocentrism is the view that one’s own culture is superior to any other way of living (Le Vine & Campbell, 1972). Ethnocentrism creates tension and hostility between groups and at times can be the cause of violent acts towards an out-group. Ethnocentrism is a characteristic within all people and it cannot be avoided (Barger, 2004, para. 2). As explained throughout this essay, four social psychology theories, frustration-aggression, realistic conflict, relative deprivation and social identity, support the concept of ethnocentrism and how it can be maximised. Throughout the history of Australia there have been a number of events, the Cronulla riots, the Australian Gold Rush and the implementation of the Victorian Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001, which have maximised ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism is destructive and causes division between groups. It is a psychological concept that needs to be further understood in order help empathize with groups in which interaction occurs and so to reduce hostility and tension that may arise.




References

AllAboutPhilosophy.org (2007). Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism - is there a biblical alternative to these two extremes? http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/common/printable-ethnocentrism-faq.htm
Date accessed: 25/10/2007

Barton, J. (2001). Ethnocentrism. http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/Speech/rccs/theory36.htm,
Date accessed: 25/10/2007

Barger, K. (2004). Ethnocentrism. What is it? Why are people ethnocentric? What is the problem? What can we do about it? http://www.iupui.edu/~anthkb/ethnocen.htm
Date accessed: 25/10/2007

Baumeister, R.F. & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth

Brauer, M. (2001). Intergroup perception in the social context: The effects of social status and group membership on perceived out-group homogeneity and ethnocentrism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 15-31

Culbertson, H. (2001) Why is ethnocentrism bad? http://home.snu.edu/~HCULBERT/ethno.htm
Date accessed: 25/10/2007

Cunningham, W.A., Nezlek, J.B. & Banaji, M.R. (2004). Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: Revisiting the ideologies of prejudice. The Society for Personality and Social Psychology Inc., 30(10), 1332-1346

Grant, P.R. & Brown, R. (1995). From ethnocentrism to collective protest: Responses to relative deprivation and threats to social identity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(3), 195-212

Jayaraman, R. (2000). Inclusion and exclusion: An analysis of the Australian immigration history and ethnic relations. Journal of Popular Culture, 34(1), 135-155

Le Vine, R.A. & Campbell, D.T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group behaviour. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Myer, D.G. (2007). Psychology (8th Edition). New York, NY: Worth Publishers

Nahllia, D. (2007). Sermon. Unpublished Recording. The Anglican Church of the Good Shepherd. Curtin, ACT

Perreault, S. & Bourhis, R.Y. (1999). Ethnocentrism, social identification, and discrimination [Electronic version]. The Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc., 25 (1), 92-103