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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2004-03, Vol.10 (1), p.135-156
1. Verfasser: Schlee, Günther
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 &amp; 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&amp;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 &amp; 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