Regional stereotypes as opportunities for the growth of dissident organizational identity

How do organizations identifying with minor political ideologies thrive when they are
considered threats to the dominant ideology? The current literature is less able to explain how
actors adhering to minor ideologies grow, especially when there is one predominant ideology in
society. Organizations that are identified with minor ideologies have little chance of survival,
much less growth. Due to the lack of organizational legitimacy, they are less able to mobilize
resources, garner support from external audiences, and in turn, are likely to die out. Also,
proponents of the dominant ideology are likely to weed out those who are suspected of opposing
their ideology. In addition to proponents’ coercive measures upon suspicious actors, it becomes
difficult to display divergent views and convince others to join a cause that challenges the
proponents. Although a person may privately dislike the ruling logic, they believe that others
support it. Because of this, most people continue to publicly uphold the dominant ideology.
Potential challengers, such as organizations identifying with alternative ideologies to the
predominant one, are likely to remain isolated and gradually diminish.