Categorical Inequalities and Canadian Attitudes toward Positive and Negative Rights

Irene Bloemraad, Allison Harell, Nicholas A.R. Fraser
{"title":"Categorical Inequalities and Canadian Attitudes toward Positive and Negative Rights","authors":"Irene Bloemraad, Allison Harell, Nicholas A.R. Fraser","doi":"10.1017/s0008423924000076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Liberal democracies are expected to provide residents with both negative rights, such as limitations against the abuse of police powers, and some range of positive (social) rights, such as access to social benefits. These rights are commonly deemed to apply equally, without respect to individuals’ ascriptive backgrounds. Existing research, often in the US context and focused on social programs, shows both support for abstract rights and group-specific prejudices. We interrogate whether similar patterns exist in Canada and innovate by directly examining negative and positive rights in the same study. Using a series of novel survey experiments, we demonstrate the degree to which categorical inequalities based on race and legal status affect public support for rights provision in Canada. Both rights are more recognized for citizens relative to out-of-status migrants, and legal status at times interacts with racialized minority status. Rights appear far from universal in the minds of Canadians.","PeriodicalId":9491,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Political Science","volume":"71 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008423924000076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Liberal democracies are expected to provide residents with both negative rights, such as limitations against the abuse of police powers, and some range of positive (social) rights, such as access to social benefits. These rights are commonly deemed to apply equally, without respect to individuals’ ascriptive backgrounds. Existing research, often in the US context and focused on social programs, shows both support for abstract rights and group-specific prejudices. We interrogate whether similar patterns exist in Canada and innovate by directly examining negative and positive rights in the same study. Using a series of novel survey experiments, we demonstrate the degree to which categorical inequalities based on race and legal status affect public support for rights provision in Canada. Both rights are more recognized for citizens relative to out-of-status migrants, and legal status at times interacts with racialized minority status. Rights appear far from universal in the minds of Canadians.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
分类不平等与加拿大人对积极权利和消极权利的态度
自由民主国家应为居民提供消极权利(如限制滥用警察权力)和一定范围的积极(社会)权利(如获得社会福利)。这些权利通常被认为是平等适用的,与个人的描述背景无关。现有的研究通常是在美国背景下进行的,重点是社会项目,这些研究既显示了对抽象权利的支持,也显示了对特定群体的偏见。我们探讨了加拿大是否存在类似的模式,并通过在同一研究中直接考察消极权利和积极权利进行了创新。通过一系列新颖的调查实验,我们证明了基于种族和法律地位的分类不平等在多大程度上影响了加拿大公众对权利规定的支持。相对于没有合法身份的移民,公民的这两项权利都得到了更多的认可,而合法身份有时会与种族化的少数群体身份相互影响。在加拿大人的心目中,权利似乎远未普及。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Beyond Rights: The Nisga'a Final Agreement and the Challenges of Modern Treaty Relationships Carole Blackburn, Vancouver: UBC Press, 2021, pp. 184 Categorical Inequalities and Canadian Attitudes toward Positive and Negative Rights Marx on Leisure: An Aristotelian Interpretation Democracy and Exclusion Patti Tamara Lenard, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023, pp. 232 Toward A (Not The) Political Philosophy Of Populism: Democracy, Moral Dualism And Minimalst Theory In Christopher Lasch
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1