Social Dominance Theory

On the surface, social dominance theory paints a bleak picture of the nature of human social behavior. It takes as a given that inequality necessarily arises from society’s tendency to categorize people into their social groups and perpetuate hierarchies on which the power relations between these groups are founded. While other theories would explain intergroup biases and discriminatory behavior as a consequence of subjective misattribution, resource competition, or ingroup positive distinctiveness, social dominance takes group hierarchies as a preexisting default mode in human social behavior. We discriminate not for any other motive but to retain the high status of our groups through the legitimized inequalities present in society.
Social dominance theory demonstrates how the proponents’ personal narratives play a significant role in determining the conceptions and formulations that eventually …show more content…
At first glance, it appears to accept the futility of action as group-based hierarchies serve as a heuristic for social categorization. However, the theory makes room for people and institutions who have transformative power: Much like social identity theory’s belief in the power of low status groups to take collective action, social dominance theory looks forward to those who act in ways to attenuate the hierarchy and inequality. Of course, it is a different thing altogether to act in ways that these theories hope as to achieve social change. In this case, the theory does not give very concrete guidelines or suggestions, only a hint that positive change is indeed possible. In the end, such movements would naturally be difficult, given the counter-violence and destabilization that can be brought about by an upset of the status quo. Still, social dominance theory paves the way for such social transformation if only for the sake of liberation and