Home | Who we are | Evelin G. Lindner | Summary of Humiliation Theory by Lindner (Table)
Theory of Humiliation by Lindner
Summary (as table)
see also as very short summary, short narrative, executive summary, and as longer paper
Evelin G. Lindner, 2004
Summary without references, see a comprehensive overview over references in Lindner, 2003.
Please ask the author for permission when you wish to quote her.
Adapted from
Lindner, Evelin G. (2004). Humiliation in a Globalizing World: Does Humiliation Become the Most Disruptive Force? New York, NY: Paper prepared for the "Workshop on Humiliation and Violent Conflict," November 18-19, 2004, at Columbia University.
Keywords: circumscription, new technologies of communication and mobility, new visions of the world, ingathering of humankind (globalization, global village), shift to a more relational global life world, weakening of Security Dilemma, shift from fear to humiliation, Human Rights ideals, in-group ethics, continuous liberation of underlings (egalization), ranked worthiness of human beings, equal dignity for all, phenomenon and dynamics of humiliation (expressed in acts, feelings and institutions), honor-humiliation, dignity-humiliation, unequal human worthiness, humility of equal dignity, depression and apathy, genocide, terrorism, constructive social change (Mandela), new public policy, new decent institutions, attention to maintaining relationships of equal dignity, new social skills for maintaining relations of equal dignity and healing and preventing dynamics of humiliation, new leaders, paradigm of policing, social control, male and female role descriptions, liberation efforts, third parties, resolution and transformation of necessary conflict, celebrate humanity, unparalleled window of opportunity, dignism
In order to understand a globalizing world, we need "global" research, as well as the participation of researchers who have a global outlook and global experience. In my case, a specific biography made me acquire a profoundly global perspective and identity. This experiential background has led me to conceptualize psychology in a specific way, first, as being embedded within broader historical and philosophical contexts, second, as being profoundly intertwined with global changes, and third, as currently gaining significance. I avoid single interest scholarship, work transdisciplinary, and probe how even local micro-changes may be embedded within larger global changes.
New technological means (technology of communication and mobility, internet, airplanes, etc.) that allow for a) new visions of the world, b) the ingathering of humankind (anthropological term for the coming-together of tribes, Ury, 1999) and c) for a continuous uprising of underlings |
> |
To summarize Ury (1999), the first ninety five percent of humankind's history went by relatively peacefully, with small bands of migratory hunter-gatherers cooperating within noticeably egalitarian societal structures. The available abundance of wild food provided hunter-gatherers with an expandable pie of resources and a win-win frame (this view is not to be confused with any "noble savage" approach). Roughly 10,000 years ago, agriculturalism began to emerge, giving rise to hierarchical societies, framing life within a win-lose logic, and fuelling war. In the wake of the most recent transition, technological innovations enable humans to relate to their home, planet Earth, in profoundly new ways. People around the globe communicate and meet as never before. At present Homo sapiens is about to create a global knowledge society, says Ury, thus returning to the win-win frame of migratory hunter-gatherers, and thereby regaining the potential for relatively peaceful egalitarian societal structures for the global "tribe" of humankind. |
|
New visions of the world |
> |
Planet Earth has finally become visible as what it always was, a tiny planet in a vast universe, and home to all humankind. Television news programs around the world nowadays begin with the image of a turning globe, a view that no human being in the past had access to. |
|
Ingathering of humankind (we could also label it globalization, or the coming-into-being of One single global village, which represents the coming-into-being of One single in-group of humanity) |
> |
The ingathering of humankind turns formerly separate communities into one single community, where relationships play a role that is more important than before. No longer have separate communities merely separate "interests." The quality of their relationships with others gains significance. In short, the decisive element for potential conflict moves from separate interests to the quality of relationships. |
|
Shift to a more |
> |
The term global village signifies that at the global level One single in-group is currently emerging and that the notion of out-groups disappears; what emerges is One single family of humankind. As long as the separateness of communities characterized the global theatre, the Security Dilemma was strong. It left no other option to people than to live in continuous fear of unexpected attacks from outsiders. The coming-into being of One single in-group is new; it brings people into mutual relations. No longer do they belong to separate communities that appear mutually opaque and incomprehensible to each other. People world-wide now enter into relationships with each other, and relationships have many potential outcomes, from forming friendships to feeling humiliated when respect and recognition are felt lacking. In the wake of the weakening of the Security Dilemma, fear of the unknown outsider, as dominant emotion, is increasingly replaced by the desire to be recognized and appreciated by fellow human beings. This will lead to feelings of humiliation when respect, recognition and appreciation are perceived to be wanting. |
|
Human Rights ideals |
> |
Human Rights ideals in many ways resemble the ethical norms that people usually apply within what they regard their ingroup. In resonance with the ingathering (anthropological term for coming-together) of humankind, ingroup ethics apply to the entire world, and out-group ethics lose their basis. |
|
Dynamics of humiliation (from honor-humiliation to dignity-humiliation; the phenomenon of humiliation gains significance through, a) the emergence of Human Rights ideals, and b) as a result of the new, more relational reality of the world)
|
> |
As soon as Human Rights ideals have entered the hearts and minds of people, the notion of humiliation profoundly changes as compared to pre-Human Rights contexts, and it gains significance. Formerly it was seen as the duty of subalterns to accept being put down. They had no right to invoke feelings of humiliation. Only masters were permitted to label their privileged position as "honorable" and defend their honor against attempts to humiliate it. In Human Rights context the situation is turned on its head. Underlings are empowered, which means that they are permitted to use words such as oppression or humiliation to label their lowly state, while masters are told that they ought to descend from arrogating superiority and adopt the new proud humility of equal dignity, together with now empowered underlings.
Brigid Donelan kindly commented this model as follows (personal message, December 20, 2004), "This is a model with twin features: one a historical trend and the other a contemporary potential/choice. We may think of humanity evolving through stages of pride, honor and dignity. We can also see that each stage is 'alive and well' within each contemporary individual, as a choice/potential. The value of the model lies in clarifying the choice, and suggesting a trend towards emergence of a 'global knowledge society,' for which there is certainly evidence, and benefits for all." |
|
Consequences of dynamics of humiliation |
> |
Feelings of humiliation may lead to, among others: |
|
New public policies |
> |
New decent institutions have to be built, both locally and globally, that prevent and avoid dynamics of humiliation (Decent Society, Margalit, 1996). This can be manifested through subsidiarity, so that unity in diversity can flourish (instead of contemporary manifestations of uniformity without diversity and division without unity), and dignism can become reality (rather than oppressive "communism" or predatory "capitalism") through globegalization. This can be brought about by a multi-layered effort of all committed world citizens (Margaret Mead's adage) to create global and local systemic imperatives (Ellen Meiksins Wood) that have the common good of humanity at heart. |
|
Resolution of violent conflict | > | Both at the global and local level, the paradigm of good quality policing of neighborhoods needs to replace the paradigm of war on enemies. The global village, as any village, needs to maintain its inner security by good quality policing. War is typically waged with neighboring "villages." In the case of the global village, there is no "neighboring village" left. Thus the paradigm of war loses its anchoring in reality, and the paradigm of policing is what is left. And good quality policing connects coercion with respect. |
|
Male and female role descriptions | > | This approach, incidentally, combines elements of coercion and respect that also can be mapped onto traditional male and female role descriptions. What is combined is "female" talking, understanding, empathy, perspective-taking and healing on one side, and a "male" potential for overpowering, coercion, and force on the other. "Male" strength and well-dosed counter-aggression are required to hold the clashing opponents. "Female" awareness of the cohesion of the social fabric is needed to take the quarrelers seriously. To combine the "male" aspect of force with "female" empathy could be described as the modern recipe of conflict resolution. UNESCO's Culture of Peace Programme, for instance, urges precisely the strengthening of the "female" aspect in conflict resolution efforts. The list is a long one: using multi-track, "track II" and citizen-based diplomacy; installing early warning institutions; rethinking the notion of state sovereignty; setting up projects to better study and understand the history of potential conflict areas, collect this information and make it available to decision makers; using psychology not only on a micro-level, but also on a macro-level, taking identity as a bridge; keeping communication going with warring parties; talking behind the scenes; including more than just the warlords in peace negotiations; developing conflict-resolution teams with less hierarchy and more creativity; setting up mediation teams; installing "truth commissions;" allowing warring parties to feel the world community's care, respect and concern; taking opponents in a conflict out of their usual environment; taking the adversaries' personal feelings and emotions seriously; recognizing the importance of human dignity; introducing sustainable long-term approaches on the social and ecological level; progressing from spending aid-money after a disaster to allocating resources to prevent it; and so on. |
|
Uprisings | > | For the downtrodden around the world, be it women or discriminated minorities of any kind, who wish to carry out a successful and constructive uprising and change their lowly lot, a Mandela would have another threefold advice. He himself implemented this strategy most wisely: |
|
Third parties wishing to ensure peace | > | For third parties who are trying to secure peace around the world, yet another threefold approach seems significant: |
|
Celebrate humanity | > | Sultan Somjee, Kenyan ethnographer honored by the UN for his efforts to preserve indigenous people's peace traditions, said in response to the Iraqi Prisoner Abuse of 2004, "Humiliation does not have nationality, religion, color or gender. Humiliation of one human being humiliates humanity and our dignity of being." I would add, only if we avoid institutions, attitudes, and behavior with humiliating effects will we create a future for our world in the spirit of Kofi Annan's promotion for the Olympic Games of 2004, namely "celebrate humanity." |