Taking sides and constructing identities: reflections on conflict theory
Conflicts are often explained in terms of the interests of the groups involved, especially their competition for resources or gains. There is much merit in this approach. Theories of this type appear more realistic than those which take the legitimizing accounts of participants at face value. What p...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2004-03, Vol.10 (1), p.135-156 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 156 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 135 |
container_title | The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute |
container_volume | 10 |
creator | Schlee, Günther |
description | Conflicts are often explained in terms of the interests of the groups involved, especially their competition for resources or gains. There is much merit in this approach. Theories of this type appear more realistic than those which take the legitimizing accounts of participants at face value. What people are fighting about is a fundamental question in conflict analysis, but there is another equally fundamental question that remains poorly understood, namely, who is fighting whom and why? How and why do people draw the distinction between friend and foe precisely where they do? / On explique volontiers les conflits en termes d'intérêts des groupes impliqués et notamment de la concurrence à laquelle ils se livrent pour des ressources ou des profits. Cette approche a quelque mérite. Les théories de ce type paraissent souvent plus réalistes que celles qui prennent pour argent comptant les discours de légitimation des belligérants. La question de l'enjeu est fondamentale pour l'analyse des conflits, mais il y en a une autre, tout aussi importante et mal comprise jusqu'à présent : qui lutte contre qui, et pourquoi ? Comment et pourquoi trace-t-on la ligne de démarcation entre ami et ennemi là plutôt qu'ailleurs ? |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1467-9655.2004.00183.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60487835</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A115906891</galeid><jstor_id>3804101</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A115906891</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5683-e38de8eb2aa5b01c8b094742e62e6a7dfb34b8489043d6cbc26a6e40eadc2b213</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkW1rFDEQxxdRsFa_gS8WQd_tNs8Pgi-OYnstRUEqBd-EbHb2zHUv2yZ7ePftzbrlClLQJJBh5vefTGaKosSoxnmdrGvMhKy04LwmCLEaIaxovXtWHB0Cz7NNua6QVvJl8SqlNUJIc6aPiuW1vfVhVSbfQiptaEs3hDTGrRsnd_aG0Y8e0scyQtdDdud4OYSJ63rvxnL8CUPcvy5edLZP8ObhPi6-n32-Pl1WV1_PL04XV5XjQtEKqGpBQUOs5Q3CTjVIM8kIiHysbLuGskYxpRGjrXCNI8IKYAhs60hDMD0uPsx57-Jwv4U0mo1PDvreBhi2yQjElFSU_xOkUumpYRl89xe4HrYx5E8YQgjWhEuZoWqGVrYH40M3jNG6FQSIth8CdD67FxhzjYTSU5n1E3zeLWy8e1KgZoGLQ0q51-Yu-o2Ne4ORmSZt1mYaqJkGaqbCzZ9Jm12Wvn_4gE3O9l20wfn0qOeCaMlV5j7N3K_89v6_85vLb4uLbGX921m_TuMQD3qqEMMIP7bIpxF2h7CNt0ZIKrm5-XJulgTfnP1gwkj6Gx-401o</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>222192577</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Taking sides and constructing identities: reflections on conflict theory</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Schlee, Günther</creator><creatorcontrib>Schlee, Günther</creatorcontrib><description>Conflicts are often explained in terms of the interests of the groups involved, especially their competition for resources or gains. There is much merit in this approach. Theories of this type appear more realistic than those which take the legitimizing accounts of participants at face value. What people are fighting about is a fundamental question in conflict analysis, but there is another equally fundamental question that remains poorly understood, namely, who is fighting whom and why? How and why do people draw the distinction between friend and foe precisely where they do? / On explique volontiers les conflits en termes d'intérêts des groupes impliqués et notamment de la concurrence à laquelle ils se livrent pour des ressources ou des profits. Cette approche a quelque mérite. Les théories de ce type paraissent souvent plus réalistes que celles qui prennent pour argent comptant les discours de légitimation des belligérants. La question de l'enjeu est fondamentale pour l'analyse des conflits, mais il y en a une autre, tout aussi importante et mal comprise jusqu'à présent : qui lutte contre qui, et pourquoi ? Comment et pourquoi trace-t-on la ligne de démarcation entre ami et ennemi là plutôt qu'ailleurs ?</description><identifier>ISSN: 1359-0987</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-9655</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9655.2004.00183.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Alliances ; Analysis ; Anthropology ; Camels ; Causality ; Clans ; Conflict ; Conflict resolution ; Conflict Theory ; Ethnic groups ; Ethnology ; Genocide ; Group analysis ; Group membership ; Identification ; Identity ; Identity formation ; Intergroup Relations ; Interpersonal conflict ; Interpersonal Relations ; Inventions ; Natural resources ; Social psychology ; Social relations ; Social structures ; Sources and methods ; Theoretical and systematic contributions ; Theory ; Violence ; War</subject><ispartof>The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2004-03, Vol.10 (1), p.135-156</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2004 Royal Anthropological Institute</rights><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishers Mar 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5683-e38de8eb2aa5b01c8b094742e62e6a7dfb34b8489043d6cbc26a6e40eadc2b213</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5683-e38de8eb2aa5b01c8b094742e62e6a7dfb34b8489043d6cbc26a6e40eadc2b213</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3804101$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3804101$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1417,27924,27925,33774,33775,45574,45575,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=15629758$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schlee, Günther</creatorcontrib><title>Taking sides and constructing identities: reflections on conflict theory</title><title>The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute</title><description>Conflicts are often explained in terms of the interests of the groups involved, especially their competition for resources or gains. There is much merit in this approach. Theories of this type appear more realistic than those which take the legitimizing accounts of participants at face value. What people are fighting about is a fundamental question in conflict analysis, but there is another equally fundamental question that remains poorly understood, namely, who is fighting whom and why? How and why do people draw the distinction between friend and foe precisely where they do? / On explique volontiers les conflits en termes d'intérêts des groupes impliqués et notamment de la concurrence à laquelle ils se livrent pour des ressources ou des profits. Cette approche a quelque mérite. Les théories de ce type paraissent souvent plus réalistes que celles qui prennent pour argent comptant les discours de légitimation des belligérants. La question de l'enjeu est fondamentale pour l'analyse des conflits, mais il y en a une autre, tout aussi importante et mal comprise jusqu'à présent : qui lutte contre qui, et pourquoi ? Comment et pourquoi trace-t-on la ligne de démarcation entre ami et ennemi là plutôt qu'ailleurs ?</description><subject>Alliances</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Anthropology</subject><subject>Camels</subject><subject>Causality</subject><subject>Clans</subject><subject>Conflict</subject><subject>Conflict resolution</subject><subject>Conflict Theory</subject><subject>Ethnic groups</subject><subject>Ethnology</subject><subject>Genocide</subject><subject>Group analysis</subject><subject>Group membership</subject><subject>Identification</subject><subject>Identity</subject><subject>Identity formation</subject><subject>Intergroup Relations</subject><subject>Interpersonal conflict</subject><subject>Interpersonal Relations</subject><subject>Inventions</subject><subject>Natural resources</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><subject>Social relations</subject><subject>Social structures</subject><subject>Sources and methods</subject><subject>Theoretical and systematic contributions</subject><subject>Theory</subject><subject>Violence</subject><subject>War</subject><issn>1359-0987</issn><issn>1467-9655</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkW1rFDEQxxdRsFa_gS8WQd_tNs8Pgi-OYnstRUEqBd-EbHb2zHUv2yZ7ePftzbrlClLQJJBh5vefTGaKosSoxnmdrGvMhKy04LwmCLEaIaxovXtWHB0Cz7NNua6QVvJl8SqlNUJIc6aPiuW1vfVhVSbfQiptaEs3hDTGrRsnd_aG0Y8e0scyQtdDdud4OYSJ63rvxnL8CUPcvy5edLZP8ObhPi6-n32-Pl1WV1_PL04XV5XjQtEKqGpBQUOs5Q3CTjVIM8kIiHysbLuGskYxpRGjrXCNI8IKYAhs60hDMD0uPsx57-Jwv4U0mo1PDvreBhi2yQjElFSU_xOkUumpYRl89xe4HrYx5E8YQgjWhEuZoWqGVrYH40M3jNG6FQSIth8CdD67FxhzjYTSU5n1E3zeLWy8e1KgZoGLQ0q51-Yu-o2Ne4ORmSZt1mYaqJkGaqbCzZ9Jm12Wvn_4gE3O9l20wfn0qOeCaMlV5j7N3K_89v6_85vLb4uLbGX921m_TuMQD3qqEMMIP7bIpxF2h7CNt0ZIKrm5-XJulgTfnP1gwkj6Gx-401o</recordid><startdate>200403</startdate><enddate>200403</enddate><creator>Schlee, Günther</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishers</general><general>Blackwell Publishing</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200403</creationdate><title>Taking sides and constructing identities: reflections on conflict theory</title><author>Schlee, Günther</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5683-e38de8eb2aa5b01c8b094742e62e6a7dfb34b8489043d6cbc26a6e40eadc2b213</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Alliances</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Anthropology</topic><topic>Camels</topic><topic>Causality</topic><topic>Clans</topic><topic>Conflict</topic><topic>Conflict resolution</topic><topic>Conflict Theory</topic><topic>Ethnic groups</topic><topic>Ethnology</topic><topic>Genocide</topic><topic>Group analysis</topic><topic>Group membership</topic><topic>Identification</topic><topic>Identity</topic><topic>Identity formation</topic><topic>Intergroup Relations</topic><topic>Interpersonal conflict</topic><topic>Interpersonal Relations</topic><topic>Inventions</topic><topic>Natural resources</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><topic>Social relations</topic><topic>Social structures</topic><topic>Sources and methods</topic><topic>Theoretical and systematic contributions</topic><topic>Theory</topic><topic>Violence</topic><topic>War</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schlee, Günther</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schlee, Günther</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Taking sides and constructing identities: reflections on conflict theory</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute</jtitle><date>2004-03</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>135</spage><epage>156</epage><pages>135-156</pages><issn>1359-0987</issn><eissn>1467-9655</eissn><abstract>Conflicts are often explained in terms of the interests of the groups involved, especially their competition for resources or gains. There is much merit in this approach. Theories of this type appear more realistic than those which take the legitimizing accounts of participants at face value. What people are fighting about is a fundamental question in conflict analysis, but there is another equally fundamental question that remains poorly understood, namely, who is fighting whom and why? How and why do people draw the distinction between friend and foe precisely where they do? / On explique volontiers les conflits en termes d'intérêts des groupes impliqués et notamment de la concurrence à laquelle ils se livrent pour des ressources ou des profits. Cette approche a quelque mérite. Les théories de ce type paraissent souvent plus réalistes que celles qui prennent pour argent comptant les discours de légitimation des belligérants. La question de l'enjeu est fondamentale pour l'analyse des conflits, mais il y en a une autre, tout aussi importante et mal comprise jusqu'à présent : qui lutte contre qui, et pourquoi ? Comment et pourquoi trace-t-on la ligne de démarcation entre ami et ennemi là plutôt qu'ailleurs ?</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1467-9655.2004.00183.x</doi><tpages>22</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1359-0987 |
ispartof | The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2004-03, Vol.10 (1), p.135-156 |
issn | 1359-0987 1467-9655 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60487835 |
source | Sociological Abstracts; Access via Wiley Online Library; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
subjects | Alliances Analysis Anthropology Camels Causality Clans Conflict Conflict resolution Conflict Theory Ethnic groups Ethnology Genocide Group analysis Group membership Identification Identity Identity formation Intergroup Relations Interpersonal conflict Interpersonal Relations Inventions Natural resources Social psychology Social relations Social structures Sources and methods Theoretical and systematic contributions Theory Violence War |
title | Taking sides and constructing identities: reflections on conflict theory |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T20%3A02%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Taking%20sides%20and%20constructing%20identities:%20reflections%20on%20conflict%20theory&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20the%20Royal%20Anthropological%20Institute&rft.au=Schlee,%20G%C3%BCnther&rft.date=2004-03&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=135&rft.epage=156&rft.pages=135-156&rft.issn=1359-0987&rft.eissn=1467-9655&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1467-9655.2004.00183.x&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA115906891%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=222192577&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A115906891&rft_jstor_id=3804101&rfr_iscdi=true |