What are some motivating factors that prompt an individual to activate an identity and take action?

    In the article “Group Entitlement, Anger and Participation in Intergroup Violence,” author Christopher Claassen discusses the relationship between emotion and intergroup violence. He concludes that emotion is a very crucial, often ignored element in intergroup violence, and that anger towards an outgroup can be a reason for civilians to engage in violence against fellow civilians. Furthermore, he details that it is not necessarily the allotment of resources themselves that causes people to become angry at outgroups, but an “incongruence” between the real allocation of resources and the allocation perceived to be desirable by the individual or the group as a whole. Claassen believes his findings complicate existing theories on the role of material resources and emotion in intergroup violence.

I think there are numerous factors that can cause a person to “activate” an identity or take action. For one, it does seem likely that the allocation of material resources plays a key role in orchestrating identity-based action. This being said, I think it is frequently the case that a lack of rights or political representation can be an even stronger reason for people to coalesce and pursue a common objective. Claassen touches on a key point when he discusses the role of perception in regards to entitlement. As individuals, we feel that we are entitled to certain rights and resources in society. If we feel that we are being deprived of those rights and resources based on some characteristic or our placement in a given identity group, it seems like we would be more likely to “activate” this identity to connect with others that are experiencing a similar deprivation. This helps to create relationships with other potential participants in social or political movements, and gives us more power not only as individuals, but as members of a whole. I like that this article addressed the possible discord between intent to take action and realistically taking action. It seems like it would be very difficult to predict which people are likely to “activate” an identity and take action on it, especially in a violent manner, because there are so many factors at play. Although I am somewhat skeptical that studies such as this one can produce reliable predictive models on any sort of individual level, it seems plausible that they could be successful at a group level if large amounts of data are incorporated. In a way, I don’t feel like Claassen’s study reveals anything shocking—when people feel angry or perceive injustice, they are more likely to “activate” part of their identity and take action with other members of the group to obtain what they perceive to be fair and just.

This article was a good example of a researcher attempting to fill in a gap in existing literature. Claassen mentions that usually violence between governments or between governments and citizens is studied, but civilian on civilian violence can be overlooked. I think this article continues our discussions of political relevance, and suggests conditions under which it is more likely to see an identity become active. It is interesting to observe the identities that are being activated around the world now, and to consider the relationship between perceptions of power and justice, and action or violent action against specific outgroups.