When criticism is ineffective: The case of historical trauma and unsupportive allies

Abstract

Three studies examined the effect of historical trauma reminders and criticism from international allies on attitudes toward current conflicts. In Study 1, Israeli participants (N = 116) were primed with the Holocaust, and read either that the U.S. President Obama supports Israel's right to defend itself and attack Iran, or that he opposes such action. Then, support for preemptive violence was assessed. Study 2 (N = 133) replicated this design, comparing inclusive and exclusive framings of the Holocaust. Study 3 (N = 478), examined the effect of Holocaust reminders and criticism from the European Union on attitudes toward militant policies against Palestinians. All three studies found that Holocaust primes juxtaposed with international criticism increased support for aggression, especially under exclusive framings of the Holocaust. Study 3, however, found this effect only among left‐wing participants. These findings indicate that when historical trauma is salient, international criticism may be ineffective and may even backfire.

How Is Existential Threat Related to Intergroup Conflict? Introducing the Multidimensional Existential Threat (MET) Model

“…The findings on past victimization are in keeping with previous research on exclusive framings of victimization (Vollhardt, 2012, 2015), and on the impact of the Holocaust on contemporary Jews, which shows that primes of the Holocaust increase hawkish political attitudes among Canadian Jews (Wohl and Branscombe, 2008), and that the Holocaust has become a central tenant of Israeli identity that influences the way Israelis perceive the conflict with the Palestinians (e.g., Klar et al, 2013; Canetti et al, in press; Hirschberger et al, in press). …”

“…Historical victimization is considered a fundamental level of collective victimhood (Schori-Eyal et al, 2014) in contexts in which there is a history of collective trauma. Historical victimization is relevant to understanding intergroup conflict because often the pains and woes of past events are conflated with contemporary conflict (Lifton, 2005); instill a sense of siege among victims (Bar-Tal and Antebi, 1992; Hirschberger et al, in press); and foster a belief in perpetual ingroup victimization (Schori et al, 2009), which may ironically increase as time from the historical trauma passes (Klar et al, 2013). …”

“…Research demonstrates that priming a group’s past victimization (PV) elicits in-group protective behaviors (Wohl and Branscombe, 2008), greater adherence with the group’s ideology and narrative (Canetti et al, in press), and more belligerence toward out-groups (Hirschberger et al, in press). This effect of victimization on conflict is not uniform, however, with exclusive victim beliefs usually associated with negative attitudes toward out-groups, and inclusive beliefs with more forgiveness and reconciliation motivations (Vollhardt, 2013, 2015; Vollhardt et al, 2016; but see Cohrs et al, 2015 for a more nuanced understanding of inclusive beliefs).…”

Collective Trauma From the Lab to the Real World: The Effects of the Holocaust on Contemporary Israeli Political Cognitions

“…For Israeli Jews, the Holocaust constitutes a collective national trauma that plays a key role in shaping identity, politics, and culture. It stands as a symbol of the past powerlessness of the Jewish people, promotes a siege mentality in which the world is viewed as inherently hostile to Jews (Bar‐Tal & Antebbi, 1992; Hirschberger, Lifshin, Seeman, Ein‐Dor, & Pyszczynski, in press), and serves as a constant reminder to be vigilant and take every possible precaution to ensure that genocide against the Jewish people never happens again. Thus, the memory of the Holocaust serves as a reference point for understanding Israelis' relationships with other groups (Imhoff et al, ) and reactivates the age‐old Jewish mindset of being “an expiring people, forever on the verge of ceasing to be” (Rawidowitz, 1967, p. 423).…”

“…This perception of the Holocaust may exert a profound influence on Israeli policy, in ways that do not necessarily serve the best interests of its people. For example, research indicates that when Israeli participants were exposed to reminders of the Holocaust juxtaposed with criticism from international allies, even left‐wing participants who typically support peaceful policies increased their support for aggressive and militant policies (Hirschberger et al, in press). The current research begins with two experiments that replicate the effect of priming thoughts of the Holocaust on political militancy, but it goes further by revealing the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon and showing that the effects of the Holocaust on contemporary political attitudes extend beyond momentary responses to laboratory manipulations and are chronically and continuously evident in the real world.…”