{"id":753,"date":"2017-03-27T15:10:35","date_gmt":"2017-03-27T15:10:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cccupsychology.com\/?p=753"},"modified":"2017-08-31T16:38:10","modified_gmt":"2017-08-31T15:38:10","slug":"10-german-bombers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/10-german-bombers\/","title":{"rendered":"The social psychology of \u201c10 German bombers\u201d: Why a tasteless football chant about the Battle of Britain is more offensive to the English than the Germans"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dr. Dennis Nigbur, Senior Lecturer at CCCU, takes the opportunity to discuss the interplay between two of his favourite topics, namely football and national identity. <\/em><\/p>\n

They\u2019ve been at it again: English football supporters have treated the world to yet another rendition of \u201c10 German bombers\u201d, and there appears to be a sense of wonder why the Germans didn\u2019t take more offence (Herbert, 2017).<\/p>\n

The simple answer is that they don\u2019t feel targeted by the song. They will recognise it as a chant in poor taste (most Germans speak good English after all \u2013 we have an education system that takes languages seriously), but there\u2019s no reason to feel personally or collectively offended by it. Not only does today\u2019s Federal Republic have few similarities with the Nazi state of 75-odd years ago in terms of territory, politics, population, and role on the world stage; the national identity of today\u2019s Germans is also decoupled from the past in a way that the label \u201cGerman\u201d fails to capture.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve been lucky enough to have erudite social identity scholars as lecturers, supervisors, examiners and bosses: Rupert Brown, Susan Condor, Marco Cinnirella and Evanthia Lyons (and others whose work I have read but with whom I haven\u2019t worked as closely) have all, in their own and often quite different ways, encouraged me to look at social identity beyond the \u201csocial identity theory\u201d (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) usually cited as the principal source about the topic. I now encourage my students to do the same. Social identity is about much more than group membership and ingroup bias, and an awareness of the wider literature will help in understanding why \u201c10 German bombers\u201d is in fact more problematic for the English than for the Germans.<\/p>\n

All students of social psychology know that social identity has to do with group identification and intergroup comparisons. Temporal comparisons \u2013 obviously, comparisons across time points rather than between groups \u2013 are an old idea (Albert, 1977) but have only emerged in research on social identity in the past 20 years or so. Am\u00e9lie Mummendey\u2019s work (Mummendey, Klink, & Brown, 2001; Mummendey & Simon, 1997) is especially relevant here, since it shows how today\u2019s Germans differentiate themselves from the Germans of the Nazi era and derive a positive sense of self from this comparison \u2013 an effect more commonly attributed to intergroup comparison.<\/p>\n

Admittedly I\u2019m extrapolating from these findings here, but I think I have reason to do so: If the Germans of today see themselves as fundamentally different from the Germans under the Nazi regime and also feel good about that, then why should they feel provoked by a football chant about RAF pilots shooting down German bombers during the Nazi era? The song is obviously in poor taste and intended<\/em> to offend \u2013 but it fails to do so, because of the false assumption that German football fans in 2017 should identify with German bomber pilots in 1940.<\/p>\n

Of course, that\u2019s not the whole reason. One other aspect is that, precisely because of historical trauma and self-conscious differentiation from its Nazi past, Germany has a well-documented disturbed relationship with patriotism and national pride, which may make Germans less sensitive to insults directed at their nationality than, say, an English fan would be \u2013 the \u201creformed alcoholic avoiding the wine cellar\u201d (Weidenfeld, 2002, my translation). Second, what may cause offence in everyday life or the proverbial opera house is not governed by the same rules in the milieu of a football match (see Cialdini et al., 1976; Ropeik, 2011): The mismatch between what people are told to do by civil society and what people see as normal practice in the stadium is a good example of the distinction between injunctive and descriptive social norms (Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren, 1990). (There are chants that I, personally, refuse to sing regardless of the setting; but as a Schalke fan I may have been occasionally complicit in questioning the parentage of our unspeakable black-and-yellow local rivals.)<\/p>\n

So why is the England supporters\u2019 chant a newsworthy problem? As The Independent<\/em> article (Herbert, 2017) suggests, it may be less about the Germans taking offence than about the English being embarrassed. Norms and identity are, again, the central concepts here: By using expressions such as \u201cdragged through the mud\u201d, \u201cthe behaviour of scum\u201d or \u201cembarrassment to be English\u201d, the author doesn\u2019t just signal disapproval. He also makes clear that the behavioural norms that should, in his view, be associated with being English are not compatible with the England fans\u2019 actions. Referring to the wartime soldiers of the song, he asks \u201cWhat would they think to see these people now?\u201d As a wealth of social-psychological research on subjective group dynamics (Marques, Yzerbyt, & Leyens, 1988; Pinto, Marques, Levine, & Abrams, 2010) now shows, the greatest rejection is reserved not for outgroup members, but for ingroup members who break the norms and let their side down. Again, social identity and the world \u2013 including the world of football \u2013 are more complex than simple ingroup bias.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Key References<\/h1>\n

Albert, S. (1977). Temporal comparison theory. Psychological Review, 84<\/em>(6), 485\u2013503. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/0033-295X.84.6.485<\/a><\/p>\n

Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34<\/em>(3), 366\u2013375. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/0022-3514.34.3.366<\/a><\/p>\n

Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58<\/em>(6), 1015\u20131026. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/0022-3514.58.6.1015<\/a><\/p>\n

Herbert, I. (2017, March 23). English football dragged through the mud again by the braying, beer-fuelled scum who sing anti-German war songs. The Independent<\/em>. Retrieved from http:\/\/www.independent.co.uk\/sport\/football\/international\/england-fans-10-german-bombers-braying-beer-fuelled-scum-songs-dragged-through-the-mud-a7645321.html<\/a><\/p>\n

Marques, J. M., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Leyens, J.-P. (1988). The \u201cBlack Sheep Effect\u201d: Extremity of judgments towards ingroup members as a function of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18<\/em>(1), 1\u201316. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ejsp.2420180102<\/a><\/p>\n

Mummendey, A., Klink, A., & Brown, R. (2001). Nationalism and patriotism: National identification and out-group rejection. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40<\/em>(2), 159\u2013172. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1348\/014466601164740<\/a><\/p>\n

Mummendey, A., & Simon, B. (1997). Nationale Identifikation und die Abwertung von Fremdgruppen. In A. Mummendey & B. Simon (Eds.), Identit\u00e4t und Verschiedenheit: Zur Sozialpsychologie der Identit\u00e4t in komplexen Gesellschaften<\/em> (pp. 175\u2013193). G\u00f6ttingen, Germany: Huber.<\/p>\n

Pinto, I. R., Marques, J. M., Levine, J. M., & Abrams, D. (2010). Membership status and subjective group dynamics: Who triggers the black sheep effect? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99<\/em>(1), 107\u2013119. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/a0018187<\/a><\/p>\n

Ropeik, D. (2011, October 13). The tribal roots of team spirit. Retrieved March 24, 2017, from http:\/\/www.psychologytoday.com\/blog\/how-risky-is-it-really\/201110\/the-tribal-roots-team-spirit<\/a><\/p>\n

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations<\/em> (pp. 33\u201347). Monterey, CA: Brooks\/Cole.<\/p>\n

Weidenfeld, G. (2002, September 23). Deutschlands neuer Weg. Die Welt<\/em>. Retrieved from https:\/\/www.welt.de\/print-welt\/article412728\/Deutschlands-neuer-Weg.html<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dr. Dennis Nigbur, Senior Lecturer at CCCU, takes the opportunity to discuss the interplay between two of his favourite topics, namely football and national identity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":118593,"featured_media":761,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[69,105],"tags":[221,265,309,345,349,425,493],"class_list":["post-753","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-group-behaviour","category-social-psychology","tag-chant","tag-dennis-nigbur","tag-football","tag-identity","tag-ingroup","tag-outgroup","tag-sit"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"authorName":"Marcus Roberts","featuredImage":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/562\/2017\/03\/EnglandFans.jpg","postExcerpt":"Dr. Dennis Nigbur, Senior Lecturer at CCCU, takes the opportunity to discuss the interplay between two of his favourite topics, namely football and national identity.","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/753","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/118593"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=753"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/753\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1006,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/753\/revisions\/1006"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/761"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=753"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=753"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/psychology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=753"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}