Religion as a Tool in Social Dominance Theory
“Social dominance theory was put forth by two researchers, Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto, in 1999. Specifically, Sidanius and Pratto attempted to explain how, and why, social structures seemed to be supported by an unspoken hierarchy of groups based on a number of different traits. These multiple hierarchies may be based on gender, race, age, economic status, and other characteristics – either naturally recurring or obtained.
According to social dominance theory, these hierarchies influence how equitable the allocation of resources is and how the distribution of undesirable work and/or roles are assigned.”
Source: Social Dominance Theory: Definition & Examples
A small (3 page) outline of the theory is available here.
From the outline: ” … Moreover, societies
recognize the legal rights of dominants and
portray their ways of living as virtuous and
characteristic of the whole society, whereas
subordinates receive little social recognition
and are even stigmatized. Group dominance
societies also feature an intersecting kind
of group oppression, namely sexism,
men holding disproportionate power and
freedoms compared with women, and
heterosexism being privileged over other
kinds of sexuality”
This is very interesting in the context of the current political climate. Particularly in how religious groups jockey for privileged status in everything from opposing non-discrimination statutes (when they regard other groups), to extraordinary tax benefits.
This can be seen in a rather shocking way when you create a comparative scale of priorities where values are assigned to events which affect the in-group vs. the out-group. Consider the War on Christmas, or the bakers who might suffer the heinous fate of having to write Happy Wedding! on a cake for a gay couple. This mindset allows for writing on a cake to be classed as utterly intolerable while at the same time excusing egregious acts suffered by other groups. And by egregious I mean things like the defence of apartheid in South Africa, the support for the death penalty or life imprisonment for gays in Uganda and so forth.
My Mazamet 
As you probably know, I believe that a religion cannot thrive or even survive unless it coerces the labor of the masses to serve the interests of the secular and religious elites. I suspect this fits quite well in the aforementioned theory. I will read the summary you provide.
This idea has been mentioned for a very long time but not much attention has been paid to it (probably because it does not serve the interests of the secular and religious elites to do so.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Yes, that does fit perfectly with SDT. What they’ve done is formulate it with some care as to not allow for the usual outright dismissal (as some like to do with racism, sexism etc.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fascinating yet simple article. Even the hint of broadened equality represents a threat to religious influence and dominance.
LikeLiked by 4 people
When we put things on a grid, the results are incredible. Kim Davis’ right not to stamp a marriage certificate is of primordial importance. So important in the religious group’s mindset it overrides the right to basic civil protections for a member of people in the out-group.
Another interesting example is the kneeling during the anthem at football games. The racism suffered by African Americans is dismissed or ignored while an act of protest is treated as an incredibly grave offence.
An Irish activist put it brilliantly a few years ago by calling it a Neat Orwellian Trick.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Great points Pink! The Kim Davis debacle clearly demonstrated the lack of jurisdiction of our federal documents, protection and enforcements on the state levels. I get more and more annoyed with just how much leverage our state’s have over Washington D.C. — until it is gravely needed with the baffoon we now have in our White House.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, but imagine how much worst things can get depending on the next supreme court pick
LikeLiked by 4 people
Yes, exactly. Most all reports are that it will happen in favor of a tRump selection. It does not look good at all. 😖
LikeLiked by 5 people
And they’ll be one more after that, as RBG can’t last 6+ or – years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Depressing!
LikeLike
It’s incredible how quickly Russia went from communist dogma to religious dogma almost overnight. I guess it’s easy to control people when you give them something to believe in.
LikeLiked by 4 people
And of course how a Tsar was substituted by someone with powers very very similar to a Tsar. Lenin is still treated as someone with the divine right to rule.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t get it. I don’t feel anyone’s life or opinion for that matter, are more important than my own. People need to stop putting people down n pedestals. Work towards common goals with your neighbours but live your own life. You only get one shot at this
LikeLiked by 3 people
We are our own worst enemy
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on The Secular Jurist and commented:
This is very relevant to my recent post on the pretense of judicial impartiality.
LikeLiked by 4 people
There has to be a way for the U.S. to incorporate SDT into our Constitution — attempting to incorporate it into State’s Constitutions is likely a wild pipe-dream right now 🙄 — or within or complimentary to Separation of Church and State? That said, I’ve always thought that SoC&S was explicitly and implicitly pretty clear. HAH! What do I know. 😛
Great share and info Pink. Thank you Sir!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Unfortunately it’s already part of the system – in the worst possible way. Have a look at this: https://thesecularjurist.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/iustitia-interruptus-the-failure-of-americas-judicial-system/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, thank you Pink. I am way behind on all the blogs I follow… sadly that includes Robert’s too. I’m getting there! Be patient you guys! 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Yes, exactly. Most all reports are that it will happen in favor of a tRump selection. It does not look good at all. 😖” Can’t wait for the first groups of women who’ve had abortions to be arrested and jailed. I wonder how important Hillary’s emails will be then?
LikeLiked by 3 people
The emails “scandal” is actually another fantastic example of improper attribution of value. It falls within the domain of zero tolerance doctrines. And have you noticed how zero tolerance never applies to cases of white collar crime?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yes. Yes I have. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
As disparity grows, I’d imagine dominant theist groups that offer succor in exchange for obedience will grow more and more powerful. If you have nearly nothing, and some powerful group gives you food and shelter… I’d wager that the 1/2 of the population who are IQ challenged would gladly surrender their intellectual freedom for a marginally better life.
LikeLiked by 5 people
And most frighteningly is that a mere delusion can make for a marginally better life.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I see social pacification (read, conservatism) as the true utility of religion. Can’t have too many revolutions, after all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Speaking of which, what are your thoughts on Pacification Theory?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is there such a thing?
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_theory
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s real, but only actually *real* in the heads of people like the Kochs. What happens in reality is more accidental. Humans don’t have the capacity to effect grand conspiracies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lizard brain at work. I don’t think homo sapiens will last as long as the dinosaurs.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’m beginning to agree, acflory. Maybe it’s all encoded in evolution to eventually bring the earth back to its pristine and balanced condition before man was on the scene. We are definitely a vehicle for destruction of each other and the earth”s resources.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This starts a discussion we should all be having.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do hope so. People are often inclined to take things at face value without investigating the causes.
LikeLike
Under this theory, isn’t religion or politics just a consequence of groups seeking social dominance? Taking the thought to its extreme, it should describe a natural process by which humans form social structures. It’s like a more complicated form of dogs establishing a hierarchy within a pack.
What it also means is that this is going to happen regardless of belief in cosmic beings. So long as an in-crowd exists, you’re going to have that crowd fighting for resources and special treatment. I’m not sure how that squares with treating people equally.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Primarily yes, but we’re not talking about one system that exists to the exclusion of all others. I imagine it’s more layered. There’s undoubtedly a category of people who use religion and politics for social dominance. Especially those in leadership positions.
There are also “true believers” in both equality and inequality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Although I still have a religion I can see where the U.S. tries to use it as a tool. I say often something along the lines–I can see where the anti-christ could sneak into a believed Christian belief system by pretending to love God because everyone wants someone to follow–and some don’t want to question authority.
LikeLiked by 1 person