{"title":"当受害者声称自己是受害者时:多数派的怨恨与赔偿要求的倒置","authors":"Nandini Sundar","doi":"10.1111/dech.12822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>From the mid-20th century onwards, diverse groups — whether formerly enslaved populations or victims of mass atrocities — have demanded reparations as part of a wider struggle for justice. However, in the current global climate of right-wing resurgence, both the recognition of victimhood and demands for justice are in danger of being subverted and hijacked. These developments create additional obstacles to addressing genuine reparations demands. This manifests in at least three ways. First, there is a selective application of victimhood status and recognition, often along old fault lines of race or religion. In this way, the oppression of some groups is no longer recognized as a legitimate object of reparations; indeed, their claims to justice are seen as unfair demands against dominant groups. Second, we see the blatant continuation of the very practices that the reparations movement has sought to establish as wrongs. Third, not content with negating existing demands for reparations from below, powerful groups are going a step further and, as part of supremacist projects, asserting their own right to reparations. In doing this, they use the language and moral claims of reparations and decolonization that have emerged through the global reparations movement. This article seeks to illustrate these developments through the examples of India and Israel, including the demand for ‘restoration’ of sacred sites to Hindus and Jews.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48194,"journal":{"name":"Development and Change","volume":"55 4","pages":"855-877"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dech.12822","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When Victors Claim Victimhood: Majoritarian Resentment and the Inversion of Reparations Claims\",\"authors\":\"Nandini Sundar\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dech.12822\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>From the mid-20th century onwards, diverse groups — whether formerly enslaved populations or victims of mass atrocities — have demanded reparations as part of a wider struggle for justice. However, in the current global climate of right-wing resurgence, both the recognition of victimhood and demands for justice are in danger of being subverted and hijacked. These developments create additional obstacles to addressing genuine reparations demands. This manifests in at least three ways. First, there is a selective application of victimhood status and recognition, often along old fault lines of race or religion. In this way, the oppression of some groups is no longer recognized as a legitimate object of reparations; indeed, their claims to justice are seen as unfair demands against dominant groups. Second, we see the blatant continuation of the very practices that the reparations movement has sought to establish as wrongs. Third, not content with negating existing demands for reparations from below, powerful groups are going a step further and, as part of supremacist projects, asserting their own right to reparations. In doing this, they use the language and moral claims of reparations and decolonization that have emerged through the global reparations movement. This article seeks to illustrate these developments through the examples of India and Israel, including the demand for ‘restoration’ of sacred sites to Hindus and Jews.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development and Change\",\"volume\":\"55 4\",\"pages\":\"855-877\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dech.12822\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development and Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dech.12822\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development and Change","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dech.12822","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
When Victors Claim Victimhood: Majoritarian Resentment and the Inversion of Reparations Claims
From the mid-20th century onwards, diverse groups — whether formerly enslaved populations or victims of mass atrocities — have demanded reparations as part of a wider struggle for justice. However, in the current global climate of right-wing resurgence, both the recognition of victimhood and demands for justice are in danger of being subverted and hijacked. These developments create additional obstacles to addressing genuine reparations demands. This manifests in at least three ways. First, there is a selective application of victimhood status and recognition, often along old fault lines of race or religion. In this way, the oppression of some groups is no longer recognized as a legitimate object of reparations; indeed, their claims to justice are seen as unfair demands against dominant groups. Second, we see the blatant continuation of the very practices that the reparations movement has sought to establish as wrongs. Third, not content with negating existing demands for reparations from below, powerful groups are going a step further and, as part of supremacist projects, asserting their own right to reparations. In doing this, they use the language and moral claims of reparations and decolonization that have emerged through the global reparations movement. This article seeks to illustrate these developments through the examples of India and Israel, including the demand for ‘restoration’ of sacred sites to Hindus and Jews.
期刊介绍:
Development and Change is essential reading for anyone interested in development studies and social change. It publishes articles from a wide range of authors, both well-established specialists and young scholars, and is an important resource for: - social science faculties and research institutions - international development agencies and NGOs - graduate teachers and researchers - all those with a serious interest in the dynamics of development, from reflective activists to analytical practitioners