Despite numerous efforts of Roma inclusion from various State and non-governmental organisations, segregation and socioeconomic marginalisation of the Roma is still widespread in Slovakia. In this paper, we show what social-psychological factors intervene into the process of intergroup relations change and how they can influence the effectiveness of interventions to reduce antigypsyism. We contend that establishing intergroup harmony between majority and minority may, by creating false assumptions about the absence of structural inequalities, weaken the potential for social change and minority collective action. Based on the theoretical analysis as well as the content analysis of anti-discrimination interventions carried out in the year 2018 and the thematic analysis of interviews with selected stakeholders (NGO representatives, intervention participants, sponsors) we identified four challenges that need to be tackled if the interventions are to succeed in reducing antigypsyism. These are: 1) essentializing vs. empowerment of minorities; 2) tension between the colour blind and multiculturalism approaches; 3) problem of intergroup boundaries and their consequences for generalization of positive intergroup attitudes to the whole outgroup; and 4) societal norms defining the nature of intergroup relations. We discuss how these challenges ought to be addressed in successful anti-discrimination interventions.
The aim of the study was to explore the motivations of solidarity with Ukrainian refugees in Slovakia. In particular, it aimed to examine the motivations of people who had engaged in helping immigrants and refugees in the past as well as those who started only after the invasion of Ukraine. The first theme was based on the events the participants described as triggers or significant moments that had elicited their need to support refugees. These moments were often accompanied by moral shock, leading to solidarity based actions. The second theme presented a broader perspective on helping a disadvantaged group. This was based on participants’ constructions of their social identity that contributes to the level of inclusiveness of the moral circle. The extent to which different disadvantaged groups are morally excluded or included also shapes which experiences or events trigger moral shock, and lead to selective solidarity on behalf of Ukrainian refugees vs. refugees from other countries. As well as providing a basis for further research, the findings also invite us to reflect on how public discourse can shape the level of inclusiveness of the moral circle in society and subsequently facilitate or hinder solidarity-based collective action.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.