Constructing
the Enemy as Scapegoat Previous | TOC | Print | Next
Scapegoats are often selected on the basis
of pre-existing prejudices in a society.~33
Allport
observed how prejudiced people constantly search for "members of
the disliked out-group....It is important to the prejudiced person to
learn the cues" whereby the enemy can be identified.~34
Visibility
is an issue--obvious visible factors such as skin color make identification
of the out-group easier--but it is not the only factor. When the out-group
lacks an obvious physical characteristic, there is still a need to identify
the out-group member for the in-group member. If "illegal" immigrants
are the scapegoat, then the scapegoaters must have a mechanism to locate
and label them so they can be scapegoated. Thus scapegoating promotes
tracking and investigation. It is the label, not the actual behavior
or physical attribute that counts the most for the prejudiced person
engaged in scapegoating.
How scapegoats are selected is a complicated
process that deserves much more research attention. While scapegoats
are often chosen from groups experiencing prejudice, and prejudiced persons
who scapegoat tend to chose their scapegoats from those they are prejudiced
against, scapegoating as a tendency occurs among both persons high in
prejudice and persons low in prejudice.~35
Prejudice
does seem to appear often among persons with less education, but there
are significant numbers of persons with high educational achievement
who display alarming prejudices. Some early discussions of prejudice
and scapegoating erroneously suggested they were primarily a problem
of unsophistication, a primitive cognitive style,~36
or
a "low level of social and intellectual culture"~37
Later
studies, however, demonstrated that scapegoating respects no boundaries
of education, power, or wealth. The scapegoating of immigrants and welfare
recipients by mainstream politicians in both the Republican and Democratic
parties in the mid 1990s is a good example.~38
Previous | TOC | Print | Next |