ABSTRACT
It is a commonplace both of sociological theory and of everyday experience that a human group often perceives and defines itself partly in terms of that which it is not-the Other. The Other is usually conceived not as a heterogeneous melange of different groups whose only common characteristic is that they are not Us. It is more often seen as a single group which is the antithesis of Us, marked by weakness where We display strength, by vice where We show virtue. In fact it may be a kind of mirror-image of ourselves rather than an entity belonging to the world of reality. The rhetoric of contemporary international relations illustrates the need to postulate an Other in order to define and legitimate what one is oneself.
