Tensions between collective‐self forgiveness and political repair

Abstract

AbstractFaced with collective guilt, perpetrator groups may seek collective‐self forgiveness. However, does this diminish their support for political repair? Advancing the concept of collective‐self forgiveness, we distinguish between end‐state collective‐self forgiveness as restored moral identity and two processes: pseudo collective‐self forgiveness as defensive downplaying and genuine collective‐self forgiveness as ‘working through’ the ingroup's guilt. In three studies, non‐Indigenous Australians (N = 369, 800 and 785) were surveyed about currently debated constitutional changes for the recognition and empowerment of Indigenous Australians. Pseudo and genuine collective‐self forgiveness were positively related to end‐state collective‐self forgiveness. Pseudo and end‐state were negative, but genuine collective‐self forgiveness positively, related to support for repair and truth telling. Participants identifying with both Australians and Indigenous Australians more strongly endorsed genuine collective‐self forgiveness. The results suggest a pathway for perpetrator group members to balance identity needs with commitment to repair, but highlight drawbacks of seeing collective‐self forgiveness as an end‐state objective.