Description
In my piece ‘The Other Side’ I explore aspects of social dichotomisation through the publication of a tabloid size newspaper that highlights a series of comments I received online. One side of the paper explores the extreme negative comments received and the other side explores the extreme positive comments I received. Both sides explore a narrow idea of who I am and in many cases what was said did not need to be said at all. Name-calling, demeaning behaviour and derogatory remarks, have become prevalent within online discussions and this behaviour begins a process of social dichotomisation.
This piece has been created as part of my phd exploring unidentified deaths.
Social Identity can be described as our individual sense of who we are in relation to others around us. Psychologist Henri Tajfel introduced the concept that categorising people in relation to ourselves is a natural cognitive process. The notion of “Us versus Them,” in its most basic form, is a common occurrence in daily life. However, when taken to an extreme, this theory can lead to significantly more prejudiced attitudes between cultures, social groups, minority groups, and ethnic groups, among others. In his paper titled “Us and Them: Identity and Genocide” (Moshman 2007), David Moshman argues that genocide represents an extreme consequence of these typical identity processes.
Moshman’s argument aims to explore the path of thought from a normal self-perception to an extreme social dichotomisation “Us vs. Them” mindset, and his perception of the stages of this are as follows:
Social Identity: The initial understanding of oneself in relation to a diverse array of people and groups.
Dichotomisation: This involves a narrowing of an individual’s self-understanding while placing more emphasis on one aspect of differentiation.
Dehumanisation: Taking the narrowing of differentiation to actively stigmatise or, in extreme cases, dehumanise individuals or groups.
Destruction: This stage entails the complete annihilation of individuals based on their identities and the perception of the “other” as less than human.
Denial: Denial is a routine element of genocide, as it serves as a continuation of dehumanising victims. Inaction can also be considered a form of denial, where society avoids investigating what it prefers not to know.
These stages can be observed in the trajectory of genocide and atrocities. However, it is equally intriguing to consider how these stages manifest in cases of unacknowledged domestic deaths. For instance, asylum seekers denied asylum, undocumented migrants, the homeless, and the destitute all commence their lives with a broad social identity. However, as time passes, they often become dichotomised, reduced to a narrow niche identity by the broader community, only focusing on one aspect of their existence. This subsequently leads to dehumanisation, exclusion from society, and precarious living situations, such as sleeping rough. These individuals become “othered” by society and estranged from their families and friends, rendering them vulnerable and at risk of dying alone. Due to such extreme social exclusion, it may not always be possible to identify these individuals in death.
