A second set of theories which help explain the Dagbon conflict are theories of social emotions. These theories help us understand the way individuals and social groups perceive, interpret, and react emotionally to experiences. The appraisal theory states that an individual appraises an event or situation on the basis of; how it positively or negatively affects him/her (goal significance), level of control over the event (coping potential) and whether or not the situation violates a norm or expectation, (legitimacy), before determining how to react emotionally to the situation (Brewer 2003, p.12). Emotions therefore “have an inherent cognitive component that involves judgment about what actions are appropriate to the stimulus, about the acceptability or unacceptability of the emotional expression, and about the extent to which it can be indulged” (Harre & Sterns 1995, p.37). In the group, people experience emotions on behalf of their group. Where the group is threatened, fear and anger beseech the individual even if there is no evidence of a personal threat (1995, p.37). Group based anger and fear are activated when there is a perception that the well being of the in-group is threatened.
The king of Dagbon is the head and the soul of the tribe. His power and invincibility is mythologized. The position of king of Dagbon is a coveted one. Belonging to one of the families became a more salient identity over and above the Dagomba identity. The refusal to allow the Abudu’s to celebrate the funeral of Naa Abudulai constituted a threat to the very existence of the Abudu family, which created fear, anxiety and anger as Naa Andani stayed on the throne for twenty 27 years and there were no signs of his early demise. The sale of dagbon lands and appointment of Andanis to chieftaincies traditionally reserved for the Abudu family, constitute a threat to the very existence of the Abudu Family creating fear and anger leading to violent skirmishes. For the Andanis, the brutal murder of the king constitutes a threat to the entire family. If the invincible can die in this manner, who is safe? Herein lies the anger, fear and frustration of the Andanis which often turns into violence every now and them.
The above indicates a logic in the dagbon conflict. Rather than a senseless phenomenon, it has an internal logic deriving from human cognitive and emotive processes. Events that would go wthout notice in one area of the region, will generate conflict in Dagbon. The meaning we attach to the events and our reaction to our perception, and interpretation of the event the drives conflict. In this dynastic struggle for power, we see a house divided against itself, categorizing itself into two distinct groups. Events and situations are processed based on this categorization and either accentuate or diminish the categorization as people struggle to give meaning to events. This process is loaded with biases which can lead to serious errors in attributing causes. Depending on the goal significance, coping potential and legitimacy, specific emotions are conjured with corresponding behavior. Such an understanding is important for any resolution processes.
References: Brewer M. (2003) Intergroup Relations. Philadelphia, Open University Press
Harre, R. and Stearns P. (1995). Discussive psychology in practice. London Sage.
Comments