Search

In times of conflict, the meaning of words tends to fluctuate. For example, the word "violence" traditionally refers to physical force against people or property. However, some have expanded the term "violence" to include non-force (e.g., speech). Conversely, others have actively avoided the "violence" label to describe clear instances of force (e.g., property destruction). When the definitions of concepts expand and contract, semantic divergence – the degree of disagreement over the meaning of words – increases. Drawing on the work of Donald Black, we derive a partial explanation for the semantic divergence of "violence" labeling in cultural conflicts. First, at the macro-level, as social intimacy and inequality have declined over the past few hundred years, violence has become increasingly stigmatized, rendering an allegation of "violence" a potentially powerful weapon for deployment against cultural opponents. Second, at the case-level, social distance and partisanship, fostered by the internet, combine to produce social polarization – factions internally close but externally distant – of which a predictable result is the semantic divergence of "violence." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2009.01258.x Byline: Mark Cooney (1) Author Affiliation: (1)Department of Sociology, University of Georgia Article History: (Date accepted: May 2009) Article note: email: mcooney@uga.edu

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2009.01252.x Byline: Mark Cooney (1) Keywords: Ethnic conflict; immigration; Ireland; conflict management; pure sociology Abstract: Abstract Despite growing awareness of the limitations of group-level analyses in ethnic studies, research on ethnic conflict has paid virtually no systematic attention to variation at the individual or micro level. Addressing that gap, the present paper draws upon data from interviews conducted with members of two broadly-defined categories recently arrived in the Republic of Ireland, Muslims and Nigerians. Results indicate that while members of both immigrant categories experience a good deal of ethnic conflict or hostility, such conflict is rarely collective and invariably varies across individuals. The research data are consistent with Donald Black's theory of moralism. Black's theory, based on his theoretical system known as pure sociology, predicts that ethnic hostility increases with the social inferiority and cultural distance of the immigrant, and that higher status immigrants are more assertive in responding to hostility, though they experience less of it (the status paradox). Author Affiliation: (1)Department of Sociology, University of Georgia Article History: (Date accepted: May 2009) Article note: email: mcooney@uga.edu