Premium
Discourses about ethnic group (de‐)essentialism: Oppressive and progressive aspects
Author(s) -
Verkuyten Maykel
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
british journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.855
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 2044-8309
pISSN - 0144-6665
DOI - 10.1348/014466603322438215
Subject(s) - essentialism , sociology , ethnic group , context (archaeology) , social psychology , epistemology , hegemony , gender studies , social group , racism , conversation , psychology , political science , philosophy , anthropology , politics , law , paleontology , communication , biology
Social psychologists studying intergroup perceptions have shown an increasing interest in essentialist thinking. Essentialist beliefs about social groups are examined as cognitive processes and these beliefs would serve to rationalize and justify the existing social system. Discourse analyses on racism have emphasized that problems of racism are to a large extent problems of essentialism. Anti‐essentialism has emerged as an emancipatory discourse in the challenge of hegemonic representations and oppressive relations. The present study examines how, in group discussions, ethnic Dutch and ethnic minority people define and use essentialist notions about social groups. Both Dutch and ethnic minority participants engaged in an essentialist discourse in which an intrinsic link between culture and ethnicity was made. However, there were also examples where this discourse was criticized and rejected. This variable use of (de‐)essentialism is examined in terms of the conversation's context and issues at hand, such as questions of assimilation, group provisions, cultural rights, and agency. The main conclusion of this paper is that essentialism is not by definition oppressive and that de‐essentialism is not by definition progressive. The discursive power of (de‐)essentialist group beliefs depends on the way they are used and the context in which they appear.