Protesting to challenge or defend the system? A system justification perspective on collective action

Abstract

Social identity, shared grievances, and group efficacy beliefs are well-known antecedents to collective action, but existing research overlooks the fact that collective action often involves a confrontation between those who are motivated to defend the status quo and those who seek to challenge it. Using nationally representative data from New Zealand (Study 1; N = 16,147) and a large online sample from the United States (Study 2; N = 1,513), we address this oversight and demonstrate that system justification is negatively associated with system-challenging collective action, but positively associated with system-supporting collective action, for members of both low-status and high-status groups. Group identification, group-based injustice, group-based anger, and system-based dissatisfaction/ anger mediated these relationships. These findings constitute the first empirical integration of system justification theory into a model of collective action that explains when people will act collectively to challengeand, just as importantly, defend-the status quo.

Too great to act in solidarity: The negative relationship between collective narcissism and solidarity‐based collective action

“…Most importantly, it extends collective action research by elucidating the relationship between identification with one’s privileged in‐group and engagement in solidarity with a disadvantaged out‐group. Although prominent theoretical traditions in social psychology such as SIT or RDT suggest that members of high‐status groups should be in principle unwilling to act in solidarity with disadvantaged out‐groups (see Iyer & Leach, for a review) and that this tendency may be especially strong among high identifiers (Ellemers et al, ), past research provided inconsistent results, pointing either to negative (Selvanathan et al, ), positive (Osborne et al, ), or no relationship (e.g., Mallett et al, ) between in‐group positivity and solidarity‐based engagement. As demonstrated by the present research, this variability may be attributed to overlooking the heterogeneous character of in‐group positivity.…”

“…The history of emancipation movements provides various examples of high‐status group members acting in solidarity with a low‐status group. For instance, Whites used to march alongside African Americans in the struggle for Civil Rights (Brown, ) and currently some of them engage in the Black Lives Matter movement (Osborne, Jost, Becker, Badaan, & Sibley, ; Selvanathan, Techakesari, Tropp, & Barlow, ). Similarly, feminist protests are attended not only by women, but also by men who wish to challenge gender inequality (Iyer & Ryan, ; Stewart, ).…”

“…Acting in solidarity with the disadvantaged was shown to follow from positive intergroup contact (e.g., Reimer et al, ; Selvanathan et al, ), perceived injustice (e.g., Saab, Tausch, Spears, & Cheung, ), moral convictions (e.g., van Zomeren, Postmes, Spears, & Bettache, ), or anger (e.g., Leach, Iyer, & Pedersen, ). Less attention was paid to the factors that inhibit high‐status group members’ engagement in solidarity with low‐status groups (for the few exceptions see: Osborne et al, ; Reimer et al, ; Stewart, ). The current research zooms in on the role of in‐group positivity as a potential inhibitor of solidarity‐based collective action.…”

“…However, evidence for the demobilizing effect of identification with one’s privileged in‐group on solidarity‐based collective action is rather mixed. While some studies show a negative correlation between solidarity‐based collective action and in‐group identification of high‐status group members (Osborne et al, , Study 2; Selvanathan et al, ), others suggest that these two variables bear no relationship (Mallett, Huntsinger, Sinclair, & Swim, ; Stewart, ; van Zomeren et al, ), and still others demonstrate a positive association between them (Osborne et al, , Study 1). We propose that the reason for this variability lies in the failure to distinguish between distinct shades of in‐group positivity.…”

Right‐Wing Ideology as a Predictor of Collective Action: A Test Across Four Political Issue Domains

“…According to their model, system justification predicts participation in “system‐supporting protests” and hinders participation in “system‐challenging protests” via the traditional collective action motivators (group identity, perceived injustice, group anger) and system‐level anger. Using data from New Zealand and the United States, Osborne, Jost, Becker, Badaan, and Sibley () found support for the model. In a historical analysis, Varaine () studied social movements in France between 1882 and 1980.…”