“Are You One of Us?” Points of Social Exclusion amongst Youths of Diverse Religious Groups in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v12i3.7036Keywords:
social exclusion, religious groups, Indonesian youthsAbstract
Deriving from basis of the social identity theory and its development, the research aimed to explore the points of exclusion and how individuals and groups perceived themselves as experiencing victimhood of social injustice. The rise of intolerance in Indonesia was alarming and threatened the diversity and inclusivity of the nation. Throughout several political milestones such as gubernatorial and presidential elections, identity had been used as one of the most efficient ways to segregate and discriminate against people belonging to different groups. Applying a qualitative approach, data were mined from two focus group discussions of university student respondents with various religious and ethnic backgrounds representing the majority and minority groups in Indonesia. Groups sessions were strictly differentiated between majority and minority representatives to minimize the risk of potential conflict. The findings suggest that both groups’ initial perceptions towards members of outgroups are heavily influenced by transferred stereotypes and prejudices from the older generations. While the majority group struggles to counter the prejudices and perceived victimhood through direct exposure, the minority group, on the other hand, takes language into account as a subtle gesture of exclusion.
Plum Analytics
References
Bahns, A. (2017). Threat as justification of prejudice. Group Procesesses & Intergroup Relations, 20(1), 52-74. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1368430215591042.
Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. A., & Bonneau, R. (2015). Tweeting from left to right : Is online political communication more than an echo chamber ? Psychological Science, 26(10), 1531-1542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615594620.
Bos, K. V. D., Poortvliet, P. M., Maas, M., Miedema, J., & Ham, E. V. D. (2005). An enquiry concerning the principles of cultural norms and values: The impact of uncertainty and mortality salience on reactions to violations and bolstering of cultural worldviews. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(2), 91-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.06.001.
Brandt, M. J. (2017). Predicting ideological prejudice. Psychological Science, 28(6), 713-722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617693004.
Brandt, M. J., & Reyna, C. (2010). The role of prejudice and the need for closure in religious fundamentalism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(5), 715-725. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210366306.
Brandt, M. J., & Van Tongeren, D. R. (2017). People both high and low on religious fundamentalism are prejudiced toward dissimilar groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(1), 76-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000076.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). (2017). Ada apa dengan milenial? Orientasi sosial, ekonomi, dan politik. Retrieved from https://www.csis.or.id/uploaded_file/event/ada_apa_dengan_milenial____paparan_survei_nasional_csis_mengenai_orientasi_ekonomi__sosial_dan_politik_generasi_milenial_indonesia__notulen.pdf.
Chowdhury, S. M., Jeon, J. Y., & Ramalingam, A. (2016). Identity and group conflict. European Economic Review, 90, 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2016.02.003.
Fleischmann, F., Phalet, K., & Swyngedouw, M. (2013). Dual identity under threat: When and how do turkish and moroccan minorities engage in politics? Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 221(4), 214-222. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000151.
Ginges, J., Hansen, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2009). Religion and support for suicide attacks. Psychological Science, 20(2), 224-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02270.x.
Halperin, E., & Bar-Tal, D. (2011). Socio-psychological barriers peace making: An empirical examination within the Israeli Jewish society. Journal of Peace Research, 48(5), 637-651. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343311412642.
Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., & Brewer, M. B. (2017). Social identity: The role of self in group processes and intergroup relations. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 20(5), 570-581. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217690909.
Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., Otten, S., & Hinkle, S. (2004). The social identity perspective. Small Group Research, 35(3), 246-276. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496404263424.
Hogg, M. A., Kruglanski, A., & Bos, K. (2013). Uncertainty and the roots of extremism. Journal of Social Issues, 69(3), 407-418. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12021.
Hornsey, M. J. (2008). Social identity theory and self-categorization theory: A historical review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 204-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00066.x.
Huddy, L. (2015). Group identity and political cohesion. In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0155.
Hunsberger, B., & Jackson, L. M. (2005). Religion, meaning, and prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 807-826. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00433.x.
Jacks, J. Z., & Cameron, K. A. (2003). Strategies for resisting persuasion. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(2), 145-161. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2502_5.
Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61(7), 651-670. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339-375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339.
Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., De Grada, E. (2006). Groups as epistemic providers: Need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psychological Review, 113(1), 84-100. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.84.
McCoy, M. E. (2013). Purifying Islam in post-authoritarian Indonesia: Corporatist metaphors and the rise of religious intolerance. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 16(2), 275-315.
Menchik, J. (2014). Productive intolerance: Godly nationalism in Indonesia. Comperative Studies in Society and History, 56(3), 591-621. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417514000267.
Merrilees, C. E., Cairns, E., Taylor, L. K., Goeke-Morey, M. C., Shirlow, P., & Cummings, E. M. (2013). Social identity and youth aggressive and delinquent behaviors in a context of political violence. Political Psychology, 34(5), 695-711. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12030.
Onorato, R. S., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Fluidity in the self-concept: The shift from personal to social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34(3), 257-278. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.195.
PPIM-UIN (Pusat Pengkajian Islam dan Masyarakat-UIN Syarif Hidayatullah). (2017). ‘Api dalam Sekam’ keberagaman Muslim gen z: Survei nasional tentang Keberagamaan di Sekolah dan Universitas di Indonesia. Retrieved from https://conveyindonesia.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Survey-Nasional-Keberagamaan-GenZ.pdf.
Saucier, D. A., & Webster, R. J. (2010). Social vigilantism: Measuring individual differences in belief superiority and resistance to persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209346170.
Scheufele, D. A., Corley, E. A., Shih, T. J., Dalrymple, K. E., & Ho, S. S. (2009). Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States. Nature Nanotechnology, 4, 91-94. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2008.361.
Skitka, L. J. (2010). The Psychology of Moral Conviction. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(4), 267-281. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00254.x.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1985). Intergroup Anxiety. Journal of Social Issues, 41(3), 157-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1985.tb01134.x.
Stephan, W. G., Stephan, C. W., & Gudykunst, W. B. (1999). Anxiety in intergroup relations: A comparison of anxiety/uncertainty management theory and integrated threat theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4), 613-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(99)00012-7.
Stoeckel, F. (2016). Contact and community: The role of social interactions for a political identity. Political Psychology, 37(3), 431-442. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12295.
Voci, A., Hewstone, M., Swart, H., & Veneziani, C. A. (2015). Refining the association between intergroup contact and intergroup forgiveness in Northern Ireland: Type of contact, prior conflict experience, and group identification. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 18(5), 589-608. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215577001.
Wright, S. C., Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., & Ropp, S. A. (1997). The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.73.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Roosalina Wulandari, E. Kristi Poerwandari
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
USER RIGHTS
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC BY-SA)
