Indigenous superordination
Indigenous superordination is a concept that describes the dynamics of intergroup relations in which a dominant Indigenous group exerts power over incoming immigrant populations within a specific geographical area. This relationship leads to a societal stratification where the Indigenous group holds a disproportionate share of resources, prestige, and influence across economic, political, and cultural domains. The prevailing power dynamics are often justified through belief systems that promote the Indigenous group's perceived superiority while blaming immigrants for various societal issues.
For instance, in the United States, many voluntary immigrants find themselves occupying lower strata of the social hierarchy due to these dynamics. Indigenous superordination tends to manifest in situations where established social structures are already in place, making it more likely for the Indigenous population to maintain dominance. This form of hierarchical relationship is generally less confrontational compared to migrant superordination, where a more technologically advanced group may impose itself on Indigenous peoples, often leading to significant socio-economic repercussions for the latter. Understanding Indigenous superordination provides insight into the complexities of social stratification and intergroup relations, particularly in contexts of immigration and cultural integration.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Indigenous superordination
Indigenous superordination refers to a particular type of intergroup relations whereby a “Native” dominant group within a geographical area subordinates incoming immigrant groups. This process results in a form of stratification within the society in which the resident dominant group enjoys a disproportionate share of the resources, prestige, and power. This differential can be manifested in economic, political, or cultural realms interactively. The power relationship is then justified by a system of beliefs that rationalizes the superiority of the Indigenous group concerning the incoming groups, and that often scapegoats the immigrants as the cause of various societal problems.
An example of indigenous superordination occurs in the United States, where most voluntary immigrants occupy lower levels of the stratification system. When a group of individuals immigrates into a well-established social structure, Indigenous superordination is more likely to occur. This type of superordinate-subordinate group relationship is less overtly conflictual than migrant superordination, which occurs when a highly structured and often technologically advanced group establishes itself in a geographical area to the extent that the Indigenous peoples are politically and economically influenced, usually against their will.
Bibliography
De Genova, Nicholas. “Spectacles of Migrant ‘Illegality’: The Scene of Exclusion, the Obscene of Inclusion.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 36, no. 7, 2013, pp. 1180–98, doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2013.783710.
Desjarlais, Cerynn Dawn. An Exploration of Indigenous Spiritual Microaggressions. The University of North Dakota, 2020.
Lieberson, Stanley. "A Societal Theory of Race and Ethnic Relations." Pressbooks, pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu/ethnicity/chapter/a-societal-theory-of-race-and-ethnic-relations. Accessed 1 Oct. 2024.
Mack-Williams, Kibibi, and Michael Shally-Jensen. Racial & Ethnic Relations in America, Vol. 2. 2nd ed., Grey House Publishing, 2017.
Mähönen, Tuuli Anna, and Inga Jasinskaja-Lahti. “The Ironic Effect of National Identification on Support for Collective Action.” European Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 45, no. 5, 2015, pp. 567–74, doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2118.
Noort, Gerrit, and Mark C. Noort. “The “Other” Contributes Equally: Some Theological and Psychological Perspectives on Constructing Inclusive Christian Identity.” The Ecumenical Review, vol. 64, no. 4, 2012, pp. 500–18, doi.org/10.1111/erev.12007.
Robertson, Dwanna L. “Invisibility in the Color-Blind Era: Examining Legitimized Racism against Indigenous Peoples.” American Indian Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 2, 2015, pp. 113–53, doi.org/10.5250/amerindiquar.39.2.0113.