prioritized by Black and Latino Americans. These groups are not equally engaged in giving testimony across all issue priorities, though, with Black advocacy groups devoting most of their participation in committee hearings to civil rights issues, while Latino advocacy groups focus on immigration, education, and economic policy. Minta argues, however, that this specialization does not constitute a representational deficit. Instead, civil rights organizations are supplemented in their advocacy by Black and Latino members of Congress, often testifying themselves on a much broader range of issues impacting Black and Latino Americans. A repeated caveat throughout the book is the negative impact that political polarization has on legislative advocacy opportunities. The corresponding trends of increasing polarization and increasing incorporation of Black and Latino advocacy organizations into the Democratic Party agenda raises real questions about the future effectiveness of these groups if their access is contingent upon single-party control. The book gives some brief thoughts on these developments and the future of civil rights advocacy in the age of hashtags and Internet activism but is generally noncommittal on predicting what their effects will be. This leaves a tantalizing assortment of loose ends for future researchers to explore, to carry the thesis into the present and beyond. This surprising thin volume accomplishes a great deal and should be read not just by scholars with an interest in racial and ethnic politics or interest groups but by anyone seeking a better understanding of legislative advocacy and civil rights history. Minta offers a creative exploration of the nonlinear path that effective legislative advocacy can take, with an impressive richness of historical detail. His book moves beyond the common wisdom and makes an innovative contribution to our understanding of how successful organizations can change and adapt to achieve their goals.
{"title":"The Comparative Politics of Immigration. Policy Choices in Germany, Canada, Switzerland, and the United States By Antje Ellermann . Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics Series. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2021. 435 pp., $39.99 Paper.","authors":"J. Money","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.3","url":null,"abstract":"prioritized by Black and Latino Americans. These groups are not equally engaged in giving testimony across all issue priorities, though, with Black advocacy groups devoting most of their participation in committee hearings to civil rights issues, while Latino advocacy groups focus on immigration, education, and economic policy. Minta argues, however, that this specialization does not constitute a representational deficit. Instead, civil rights organizations are supplemented in their advocacy by Black and Latino members of Congress, often testifying themselves on a much broader range of issues impacting Black and Latino Americans. A repeated caveat throughout the book is the negative impact that political polarization has on legislative advocacy opportunities. The corresponding trends of increasing polarization and increasing incorporation of Black and Latino advocacy organizations into the Democratic Party agenda raises real questions about the future effectiveness of these groups if their access is contingent upon single-party control. The book gives some brief thoughts on these developments and the future of civil rights advocacy in the age of hashtags and Internet activism but is generally noncommittal on predicting what their effects will be. This leaves a tantalizing assortment of loose ends for future researchers to explore, to carry the thesis into the present and beyond. This surprising thin volume accomplishes a great deal and should be read not just by scholars with an interest in racial and ethnic politics or interest groups but by anyone seeking a better understanding of legislative advocacy and civil rights history. Minta offers a creative exploration of the nonlinear path that effective legislative advocacy can take, with an impressive richness of historical detail. His book moves beyond the common wisdom and makes an innovative contribution to our understanding of how successful organizations can change and adapt to achieve their goals.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"83 1","pages":"597 - 599"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73447093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The story of the legal and policy transformations of the “ Second Reconstruction ” often focuses on dramatic events in legislatures, courts, and protests. In The Civil Rights Lobby , Shamira Gelbman shifts our attention to an understudied group of actors: the lobbyists who connected advocacy organizations to policymakers in Washington. The book examines the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), the most prominent civil rights-focused interest group coalition in national politics, from its early status as a “ permanent ad hoc committee ” in the 1950s to its central coordinating role in the lobbying campaign for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Gelbman traces these developments through a close analysis of the LCCR ’ s archives, supplemented by records of member organizations and leaders and interviews with two participants in the coalition ’ s 1960s lobbying campaigns. The book ’ s core argument is that interest group coalitions ’ organizational structures and procedures affect its coordination capacity , defined as “ the facility with which they can identify coalition positions and mobilize the resources of their member organizations for concerted action in pursuit of shared objectives ” (14). Building on a literature that views interest group coalitions as having the potential to send robust policy signals to policymakers, Gelbman argues that this potential is contingent on their capacity to coordinate the interests, goals, and resources of diverse member organizations.
{"title":"The Civil Rights Lobby: The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and the Second Reconstruction By Shamira Gelbman . Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2021. 203 pp., $29.95 Cloth.","authors":"K. Ramanathan","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.43","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.43","url":null,"abstract":"The story of the legal and policy transformations of the “ Second Reconstruction ” often focuses on dramatic events in legislatures, courts, and protests. In The Civil Rights Lobby , Shamira Gelbman shifts our attention to an understudied group of actors: the lobbyists who connected advocacy organizations to policymakers in Washington. The book examines the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), the most prominent civil rights-focused interest group coalition in national politics, from its early status as a “ permanent ad hoc committee ” in the 1950s to its central coordinating role in the lobbying campaign for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Gelbman traces these developments through a close analysis of the LCCR ’ s archives, supplemented by records of member organizations and leaders and interviews with two participants in the coalition ’ s 1960s lobbying campaigns. The book ’ s core argument is that interest group coalitions ’ organizational structures and procedures affect its coordination capacity , defined as “ the facility with which they can identify coalition positions and mobilize the resources of their member organizations for concerted action in pursuit of shared objectives ” (14). Building on a literature that views interest group coalitions as having the potential to send robust policy signals to policymakers, Gelbman argues that this potential is contingent on their capacity to coordinate the interests, goals, and resources of diverse member organizations.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"48 1","pages":"589 - 591"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76705578","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
At its core, Indigenous politics reflects the adaptability and resilience of Native governments, people, and nations, and the failure of powerful states to assimilate Indigenous people into broader society. In the United States and around the world, democratic and non-democratic regimes of settler-colonial states were predicated on the assimilation of Native people and the disappearance of Indigenous governments through political, legal or extralegal means. Yet contrary to predictions, and indeed expectations among many non-Indigenous leaders that Native people would cease to exist or simply meld into mainstream society, Native peoples have not just survived, but thrived in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The articles in this special issue show how Indigenous peoples and political leaders around the world are engaged in politics and policymaking, and negotiating power, at the local, regional, national, and international levels. For scholars of Indigenous politics, the research presented in this special issue is further confirmation of the quality and scope of the work already underway. For those less familiar with Indigenous research, this special issue provides a first look at the depth and breadth of an often underexamined area of political research. It also serves as an invitation to include Indigenous politics in all areas of political science. The study of Indigenous politics is the study of power and survivance. Indigenous peoples have long faced powerful political actors who would benefit from their eradication, either from their very presence in society or as actors in the political process. Yet there is far more to Indigenous peoples and Indigenous politics than bare survival. Indigenous politics is creative and unsettling, embodying the power of resistance. It is in line with Gerald Vizenor’s definition of Native survivance where he sees “native presence and actuality over absence, nihility and victimry” (2008, 1). The fusion of survival and resistance generates politics that are dynamic, not merely historic or reactive. Native survivance includes active defiance of “absence, deracination, and oblivion” (2008, 85). Survivance also entails a healthy “mockery of dogged academics” and other outsiders who let their expectations get in the way of actual observation (2008, 2). To borrow from Philip Deloria’s phrasing, Native peoples are in unexpected places, doing unexpected politics. As a result, non-Indigenous
{"title":"Introduction to the special issue on indigenous politics","authors":"R. Witmer, K. Carlson, Laura E. Evans","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.10","url":null,"abstract":"At its core, Indigenous politics reflects the adaptability and resilience of Native governments, people, and nations, and the failure of powerful states to assimilate Indigenous people into broader society. In the United States and around the world, democratic and non-democratic regimes of settler-colonial states were predicated on the assimilation of Native people and the disappearance of Indigenous governments through political, legal or extralegal means. Yet contrary to predictions, and indeed expectations among many non-Indigenous leaders that Native people would cease to exist or simply meld into mainstream society, Native peoples have not just survived, but thrived in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The articles in this special issue show how Indigenous peoples and political leaders around the world are engaged in politics and policymaking, and negotiating power, at the local, regional, national, and international levels. For scholars of Indigenous politics, the research presented in this special issue is further confirmation of the quality and scope of the work already underway. For those less familiar with Indigenous research, this special issue provides a first look at the depth and breadth of an often underexamined area of political research. It also serves as an invitation to include Indigenous politics in all areas of political science. The study of Indigenous politics is the study of power and survivance. Indigenous peoples have long faced powerful political actors who would benefit from their eradication, either from their very presence in society or as actors in the political process. Yet there is far more to Indigenous peoples and Indigenous politics than bare survival. Indigenous politics is creative and unsettling, embodying the power of resistance. It is in line with Gerald Vizenor’s definition of Native survivance where he sees “native presence and actuality over absence, nihility and victimry” (2008, 1). The fusion of survival and resistance generates politics that are dynamic, not merely historic or reactive. Native survivance includes active defiance of “absence, deracination, and oblivion” (2008, 85). Survivance also entails a healthy “mockery of dogged academics” and other outsiders who let their expectations get in the way of actual observation (2008, 2). To borrow from Philip Deloria’s phrasing, Native peoples are in unexpected places, doing unexpected politics. As a result, non-Indigenous","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"66 1","pages":"1 - 8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83149938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Indigenous scholars have much to teach political scientists about recognizing and addressing the ways in which power, politics, and colonialism irrevocably shape the data-generating process. In this article, we present a methodological framework for a decolonial quantitative political science, outlining how it was operationalized in the design and execution of the 2019 Native Hawaiian Survey. We demonstrate the utility of this methodological framework through a descriptive analysis of Native Hawaiian respondents' self-identification. Aligned with the theoretical insights of kanaka (Native Hawaiian) scholars, we provide empirical support for the intertwined political relationship between Native Hawaiian identity and national identity––a finding that demands further empirical study among all Indigenous populations. This article offers two main contributions. First, it provides a methodological framework to guide quantitative political science research on Indigenous populations. Second, it adds empirically to the growing literature on Indigenous self-identification.
{"title":"Toward a decolonial quantitative political science: Indigenous self-identification in the 2019 Native Hawaiian Survey","authors":"Ngoc T. Phan, K. Lee","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.39","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Indigenous scholars have much to teach political scientists about recognizing and addressing the ways in which power, politics, and colonialism irrevocably shape the data-generating process. In this article, we present a methodological framework for a decolonial quantitative political science, outlining how it was operationalized in the design and execution of the 2019 Native Hawaiian Survey. We demonstrate the utility of this methodological framework through a descriptive analysis of Native Hawaiian respondents' self-identification. Aligned with the theoretical insights of kanaka (Native Hawaiian) scholars, we provide empirical support for the intertwined political relationship between Native Hawaiian identity and national identity––a finding that demands further empirical study among all Indigenous populations. This article offers two main contributions. First, it provides a methodological framework to guide quantitative political science research on Indigenous populations. Second, it adds empirically to the growing literature on Indigenous self-identification.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":"90 - 118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82189317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"REP volume 7 issue 1 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"114 1","pages":"f1 - f3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79338475","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This study explores how American Indians use interest group strategies to block federal legislation. Unlike other disadvantaged groups, who have influenced public policymaking through descriptive representation, American Indians have turned to interest group strategies to protect their interests in Congress. Using original data collected from American Indian testimony at congressional hearings on 266 bills during five Congresses, this study tests interest group hypotheses about how and when active opposition affects bill enactment. It finds that American Indians can block federal legislation harmful to their interests when they unify against a bill and that members of Congress frequently respond to American Indian opposition by amending bills to alleviate American Indian concerns.
{"title":"Beyond descriptive representation: American Indian opposition to federal legislation","authors":"K. Carlson","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.38","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.38","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study explores how American Indians use interest group strategies to block federal legislation. Unlike other disadvantaged groups, who have influenced public policymaking through descriptive representation, American Indians have turned to interest group strategies to protect their interests in Congress. Using original data collected from American Indian testimony at congressional hearings on 266 bills during five Congresses, this study tests interest group hypotheses about how and when active opposition affects bill enactment. It finds that American Indians can block federal legislation harmful to their interests when they unify against a bill and that members of Congress frequently respond to American Indian opposition by amending bills to alleviate American Indian concerns.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"93 1","pages":"65 - 89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86975357","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Minority voters have experienced a renewed effort to curtail their access to the ballot box in recent years. Although a host of research has examined the impact of election changes on Black and Latino voters, scholars have dedicated much less attention to the rights of Native Americans, even as they face challenges to voting in states where they comprise a significant portion of the population. Many of these states are likewise increasingly important to national elections. Such laws may impact Native Americans when they intersect with the political geography of living on a reservation, and voting rights advocates have challenged them in places like Montana, Nevada and North Dakota. This paper empirically evaluates how such laws might uniquely impact Native American voters. We draw on North Dakota's voter identification law as a case study, but our analysis has wider implications, since residency is the primary means by which election administration uniquely impacts this group. Drawing on two rich survey datasets collected in 2015 and 2017, we offer descriptive evidence of the barriers individuals may encounter while trying to obtain an ID under North Dakota's law, and find that Native Americans are statistically less likely to have access to an ID than are whites. This gap is largely due to the requirement that an ID has a physical address and attendant difficulties in obtaining such an ID, given the remote nature of reservations. We bring needed attention to the impact of carefully crafted electoral rules on this often-overlooked group.
{"title":"Battling the Hydra: the disparate impact of voter ID requirements in North Dakota","authors":"M. Barreto, Gabriel R. Sanchez, Hannah L. Walker","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.1","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Minority voters have experienced a renewed effort to curtail their access to the ballot box in recent years. Although a host of research has examined the impact of election changes on Black and Latino voters, scholars have dedicated much less attention to the rights of Native Americans, even as they face challenges to voting in states where they comprise a significant portion of the population. Many of these states are likewise increasingly important to national elections. Such laws may impact Native Americans when they intersect with the political geography of living on a reservation, and voting rights advocates have challenged them in places like Montana, Nevada and North Dakota. This paper empirically evaluates how such laws might uniquely impact Native American voters. We draw on North Dakota's voter identification law as a case study, but our analysis has wider implications, since residency is the primary means by which election administration uniquely impacts this group. Drawing on two rich survey datasets collected in 2015 and 2017, we offer descriptive evidence of the barriers individuals may encounter while trying to obtain an ID under North Dakota's law, and find that Native Americans are statistically less likely to have access to an ID than are whites. This gap is largely due to the requirement that an ID has a physical address and attendant difficulties in obtaining such an ID, given the remote nature of reservations. We bring needed attention to the impact of carefully crafted electoral rules on this often-overlooked group.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"20 1","pages":"119 - 140"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84652084","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Why, despite the fact that income inequality has increased over the last 40 years, do Americans not support the US government ’ s efforts to reduce income disparities between the rich and poor? In The Economic Other , Megan Condon and Amber Wichowsky examine how cross-class comparison influences status perception and political attitudes, as well as why Americans do not engage in the type of cross-class comparison that could increase support for redistribution. As Democrats have long debated how to tax the rich and whether to increase social spending on the poor and the middle class to advance President Biden ’ s agenda, the book offers insights into understanding public opinion about these issues. are
{"title":"The Economic Other: Inequality in the American Political Imagination By Meghan Condon and Amber Wichowsky. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2020. 240 pp., $30.00 Paperback","authors":"John Kuk","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.37","url":null,"abstract":"Why, despite the fact that income inequality has increased over the last 40 years, do Americans not support the US government ’ s efforts to reduce income disparities between the rich and poor? In The Economic Other , Megan Condon and Amber Wichowsky examine how cross-class comparison influences status perception and political attitudes, as well as why Americans do not engage in the type of cross-class comparison that could increase support for redistribution. As Democrats have long debated how to tax the rich and whether to increase social spending on the poor and the middle class to advance President Biden ’ s agenda, the book offers insights into understanding public opinion about these issues. are","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":"348 - 350"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90262986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Diversity's Child: People of Color and the Politics of Identity By Efren Perez. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2021. 232 pages. $30 paperback.","authors":"Nicole Yadon","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.34","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"56 1","pages":"353 - 354"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90872120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
topic (Sands, 2017). Overall, The Economic Other provides a new social-psychological and innovative understanding of Americans’ subdued reaction to inequality. It employs rigorous survey experiments as well as an in-depth review of the literature, open-ended responses, and media coverage of the wealthy. In fact, the detailed, qualitative analysis of how Americans describe their imagined relationship with the economic other in Chapters 4 and 5 is one of the most fascinating parts to read. In America, economic inequality has always been inextricably linked to racial inequality. The book will motivate race, ethnicity, and politics scholars to better understand the intersection of class, race, and gender.
{"title":"Race, Gender, and Political Representation: Toward a More Intersectional Approach By Beth Reingold, Kerry L. Haynie, and Kirsten Widner. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2021. 232p. $39.95 cloth","authors":"Evelyn M. Simien","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.31","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.31","url":null,"abstract":"topic (Sands, 2017). Overall, The Economic Other provides a new social-psychological and innovative understanding of Americans’ subdued reaction to inequality. It employs rigorous survey experiments as well as an in-depth review of the literature, open-ended responses, and media coverage of the wealthy. In fact, the detailed, qualitative analysis of how Americans describe their imagined relationship with the economic other in Chapters 4 and 5 is one of the most fascinating parts to read. In America, economic inequality has always been inextricably linked to racial inequality. The book will motivate race, ethnicity, and politics scholars to better understand the intersection of class, race, and gender.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"30 1","pages":"350 - 352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83380878","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：