Recently, Hammack and Pilecki (2012) have made the claim that narrative represents an ideal „root metaphor‰ for political psychology that transcends disciplinary boundaries to link mind and society in a way that offers solutions to political dilemmas (see Sarbin, 1986, more generally). Consistent with BrunerÊs (1986) classic formulation, they define narrative as a story that involves sense-making for minds in society with one another. Hammack and Pilecki (2012) argue that narrative is useful for political psychology because it provides an analytical frame that speaks to peopleÊs need for personal coherence and identity as they work for collective solidarity and shared meaning. Liu and Hilton (2005) similarly drew on Bruner (1990), fusing his ideas with those of Moscovici (1961/2008, 1988) to describe social representations of history as a source of „narratives that tell us who we are, where we came from and where we should be going. It defines a trajectory which helps construct the essence of a groupÊs identity, how it relates to other groups, and ascertains what its options are for facing present challenges‰ (Liu & Hilton, 2005, p. 537). Narratives can link the individual to collectives in a fluid manner through structures that enable analysis of how communication of shared beliefs mediates and motivates political action (see László, 2008).