incorporation across the three East Asian countries, Chung identifies selective and nuanced understandings of multiculturalism. Overall, she maintains, “East Asian cases represent variations of models that couple multicultural rhetoric with assimilationist policies as well as cultural monism and cultural pluralism” (p. 164). Some readers may find this juxtaposition of inclusionary and exclusionary approaches difficult to accept in a notion of multiculturalism, but for Chung, this is precisely the point. Although the book’s portrayal of a coexistence of inclusionary and exclusionary approaches challenges a binary approach to citizenship, it captures the realities, for which Chung accounts with a sound theoretical and empirical argument. It also has implications for considering how other newer countries of immigration grappling with choices about temporary and permanent migration may similarly apply limited notions of cultural pluralism and inclusion. It should be stressed, however, that Chung’s agenda here is to engage scholarly literature on comparative immigration, including that outside of the Asian region, by elucidating the pivotal role of civic legacies in promoting incorporation. There is no reason to conclude that she is proposing an “East Asian model” for countries to use as justification for major limits on inclusion and rights for migrants. This is an ambitious book that synthesizes across literatures on immigration, citizenship, and social movements to make an important contribution with original scholarship. Rather than accept a regional demarcation of East Asian countries as inherently different because of history, culture, or ethnic identity, Chung demonstrates that ignoring the experiences of East Asia would be a loss to scholars of other regions for grasping the subtleties of comparative immigrant incorporation.
{"title":"Dreamworlds of Race: Empire and the Utopian Destiny of Anglo-America By Duncan Bell. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2020. 465 pp., $39.95. Cloth.","authors":"D. Gorman","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.22","url":null,"abstract":"incorporation across the three East Asian countries, Chung identifies selective and nuanced understandings of multiculturalism. Overall, she maintains, “East Asian cases represent variations of models that couple multicultural rhetoric with assimilationist policies as well as cultural monism and cultural pluralism” (p. 164). Some readers may find this juxtaposition of inclusionary and exclusionary approaches difficult to accept in a notion of multiculturalism, but for Chung, this is precisely the point. Although the book’s portrayal of a coexistence of inclusionary and exclusionary approaches challenges a binary approach to citizenship, it captures the realities, for which Chung accounts with a sound theoretical and empirical argument. It also has implications for considering how other newer countries of immigration grappling with choices about temporary and permanent migration may similarly apply limited notions of cultural pluralism and inclusion. It should be stressed, however, that Chung’s agenda here is to engage scholarly literature on comparative immigration, including that outside of the Asian region, by elucidating the pivotal role of civic legacies in promoting incorporation. There is no reason to conclude that she is proposing an “East Asian model” for countries to use as justification for major limits on inclusion and rights for migrants. This is an ambitious book that synthesizes across literatures on immigration, citizenship, and social movements to make an important contribution with original scholarship. Rather than accept a regional demarcation of East Asian countries as inherently different because of history, culture, or ethnic identity, Chung demonstrates that ignoring the experiences of East Asia would be a loss to scholars of other regions for grasping the subtleties of comparative immigrant incorporation.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"28 1","pages":"671 - 673"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85382165","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 paper explores the dynamics of presidential attention and rhetoric on Native issues and peoples during the self-determination era. Using data from all public statements and papers of the presidents from 1969 to 2016, the work analyzes the level of attention and rhetorical frames of each president from Nixon to Obama, with additional comments on Trump. The analysis reveals that most presidents have given relatively little attention to Native issues compared to their overall volume of public statements, with Democratic Presidents Clinton and Obama offering the most attention. In addition, presidents have used very different rhetorical frames to address Native issues and peoples in their public statements. Presidential rhetoric has been characterized by fluctuating attention and frames, and presidents have not consistently supported Nixon's “new and coherent strategy” throughout the self-determination era.
{"title":"“A New and Coherent Strategy?” Presidential attention and rhetoric in the era of Indian self-determination","authors":"A. Flaherty","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.17","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper explores the dynamics of presidential attention and rhetoric on Native issues and peoples during the self-determination era. Using data from all public statements and papers of the presidents from 1969 to 2016, the work analyzes the level of attention and rhetorical frames of each president from Nixon to Obama, with additional comments on Trump. The analysis reveals that most presidents have given relatively little attention to Native issues compared to their overall volume of public statements, with Democratic Presidents Clinton and Obama offering the most attention. In addition, presidents have used very different rhetorical frames to address Native issues and peoples in their public statements. Presidential rhetoric has been characterized by fluctuating attention and frames, and presidents have not consistently supported Nixon's “new and coherent strategy” throughout the self-determination era.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"347 9","pages":"478 - 498"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/rep.2021.17","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72391546","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 In April 2019, the Japanese government officially legally recognized the Ainu as Indigenous people. Building on an institutionalist framework, the paper suggests that a phenomenon of institutional layering has taken place, resulting in tensions between the desire to preserve the legitimacy of old institutions and the pressure to develop more progressive policies. To explain this process, policy legacies, and institutional opportunities are relevant. First, the narrative that equality can be attained through assimilation, and the political construction of the “Ainu problem” as a regional one tied to Hokkaido pervade political imaginaries and institutions. Second, institutional opportunities have mediated the ways activists have sought to make their voices heard in the political arena. A focus on key historical segments illuminates the difficulty for activists to penetrate high-level political arenas while indicating the importance of agency, ties and interests in explaining major reforms and their limitations. The ambiguity that characterizes current policy framework points to the potential leverage that this policy configuration represents for the Ainu. At the same time, historical and institutional legacies that have shaped Indigenous politics continue to constrain, to a great extent, the possibilities for meaningful and transformative developments for the Ainu.
{"title":"The Ainu and Indigenous politics in Japan: negotiating agency, institutional stability, and change","authors":"Eléonore Komai","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.16","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In April 2019, the Japanese government officially legally recognized the Ainu as Indigenous people. Building on an institutionalist framework, the paper suggests that a phenomenon of institutional layering has taken place, resulting in tensions between the desire to preserve the legitimacy of old institutions and the pressure to develop more progressive policies. To explain this process, policy legacies, and institutional opportunities are relevant. First, the narrative that equality can be attained through assimilation, and the political construction of the “Ainu problem” as a regional one tied to Hokkaido pervade political imaginaries and institutions. Second, institutional opportunities have mediated the ways activists have sought to make their voices heard in the political arena. A focus on key historical segments illuminates the difficulty for activists to penetrate high-level political arenas while indicating the importance of agency, ties and interests in explaining major reforms and their limitations. The ambiguity that characterizes current policy framework points to the potential leverage that this policy configuration represents for the Ainu. At the same time, historical and institutional legacies that have shaped Indigenous politics continue to constrain, to a great extent, the possibilities for meaningful and transformative developments for the Ainu.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"151 1","pages":"141 - 164"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74265342","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 6 issue 2 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.12","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"16 1","pages":"f1 - f4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77147547","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":"Hometown Inequality: Race, Class and Representation in American Local Politics By Brian Schafferner, Jesse Rhodes, and Raymond La Raja. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2020. 258 pp., $34.99 Paperback.","authors":"Michael J. Palmieri, Ashley E. Nickels","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"17 1","pages":"456 - 458"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83081721","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 erosion of democratic norms and institutions continues to be top-of-mind for scholars of race and ethnic politics. In the United States, we witnessed a contested transition of the presidency from Republican Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden. Challenges to the 2020 election continue unabated. Democracy and inclusion are also the focus of several of the contributions in this issue of JREP. First, Sara W. Goodman and Hannah M. Alarian show that underlying notions of national identity and who should be included as a member of the polity also shape citizens ’ preferences for multiculturalism. Across 35 advanced democracies, the authors show that in places where national identity is defined in aspirational not ascriptive terms, the public supports multiculturalism. asking whether outgroup prejudice dampens the value that white Americans ascribe to democracy and institutions. whites are likely less prejudiced whites to the values of separation of powers and even support military underscore the of democracy when partisan elites notch up nativist and racist appeals a means to win elections.
对种族和民族政治学者来说，民主规范和制度的侵蚀仍然是头等大事。在美国，我们目睹了总统职位从共和党人唐纳德·特朗普到民主党人乔·拜登的有争议的过渡。2020年大选面临的挑战依然有增无减。民主和包容也是本期《人民日报》几篇文章的重点。首先，萨拉·w·古德曼(Sara W. Goodman)和汉娜·m·阿拉利安(Hannah M. Alarian)表明，国家认同和谁应该被纳入政体成员的潜在概念也影响了公民对多元文化主义的偏好。在35个先进的民主国家中，作者表明，在国家认同以志向而非归属的术语定义的地方，公众支持多元文化主义。询问群体外偏见是否会削弱美国白人赋予民主和制度的价值。白人可能对三权分立的价值观不那么有偏见，甚至支持军事，当党派精英们把本土主义者和种族主义者的呼吁作为赢得选举的手段时，这突显了民主的重要性。
{"title":"A critical examination of democracy","authors":"Alexandra Filindra","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.18","url":null,"abstract":"The erosion of democratic norms and institutions continues to be top-of-mind for scholars of race and ethnic politics. In the United States, we witnessed a contested transition of the presidency from Republican Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden. Challenges to the 2020 election continue unabated. Democracy and inclusion are also the focus of several of the contributions in this issue of JREP. First, Sara W. Goodman and Hannah M. Alarian show that underlying notions of national identity and who should be included as a member of the polity also shape citizens ’ preferences for multiculturalism. Across 35 advanced democracies, the authors show that in places where national identity is defined in aspirational not ascriptive terms, the public supports multiculturalism. asking whether outgroup prejudice dampens the value that white Americans ascribe to democracy and institutions. whites are likely less prejudiced whites to the values of separation of powers and even support military underscore the of democracy when partisan elites notch up nativist and racist appeals a means to win elections.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"89 1 1","pages":"303 - 304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84075416","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 We fielded an experiment on a sample of approximately 400 Black state legislators to test whether they would be more responsive to an email that mentioned the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) relative to an email that mentioned Black Lives Matter (BLM). The experiment tested Cohen's theory of secondary marginalization (1999), whereby relatively advantaged members of a marginalized group regulate the behavior, attitudes, and access to resources of less advantaged members of the group. We expected that Black legislators would be less responsive to an email that referenced BLM, an organization that is associated with more marginalized members of the Black community. Contrary to our hypothesis, Black legislators were as responsive to emails referencing inspiration from BLM as they were to emails referencing inspiration from the NAACP. Thus, we do not find any evidence of intragroup discrimination by Black state legislators. To our knowledge, this is the first field experiment to test Cohen's theory of secondary marginalization.1
{"title":"Are Black state legislators more responsive to emails associated with the NAACP versus BLM? A field experiment on Black intragroup politics","authors":"Jeron Fenton, LaFleur Stephens-Dougan","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.13","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We fielded an experiment on a sample of approximately 400 Black state legislators to test whether they would be more responsive to an email that mentioned the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) relative to an email that mentioned Black Lives Matter (BLM). The experiment tested Cohen's theory of secondary marginalization (1999), whereby relatively advantaged members of a marginalized group regulate the behavior, attitudes, and access to resources of less advantaged members of the group. We expected that Black legislators would be less responsive to an email that referenced BLM, an organization that is associated with more marginalized members of the Black community. Contrary to our hypothesis, Black legislators were as responsive to emails referencing inspiration from BLM as they were to emails referencing inspiration from the NAACP. Thus, we do not find any evidence of intragroup discrimination by Black state legislators. To our knowledge, this is the first field experiment to test Cohen's theory of secondary marginalization.1","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"15 1","pages":"203 - 218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79166787","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 Research into the impact of a politician's sociodemographic profile on vote choice in Westminster-style systems has been hindered by the relative sociodemographic homogeneity of party leaders. Past research has focused mainly on the evaluation of local candidates in the American context, but given that elections in plurality systems are far less candidate-oriented , the evaluation of local candidates tells us little about the prevalence of affinity or discrimination in other contexts. This article investigates the effect of political leaders' ethnicity on political behavior by looking at the case of Jagmeet Singh in Canada, the first federal party leader of color in the country's history. While the literature has shown that the gender of leaders in Canada can matter, little is known about the attitudes of Canadians toward party leaders of color specifically. We are interested in the evaluations of Singh and his party, as well as the shifts in voting intentions between elections in 2015 and 2019. We uncover affinity-based behaviors from individuals who identify as Sikh, as well as a negative reception of Singh's candidacy in Quebec.
{"title":"“I think Canadians look like all sorts of people”: ethnicity, political leadership, and the case of Jagmeet Singh","authors":"Joanie Bouchard","doi":"10.1017/rep.2020.51","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2020.51","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Research into the impact of a politician's sociodemographic profile on vote choice in Westminster-style systems has been hindered by the relative sociodemographic homogeneity of party leaders. Past research has focused mainly on the evaluation of local candidates in the American context, but given that elections in plurality systems are far less candidate-oriented , the evaluation of local candidates tells us little about the prevalence of affinity or discrimination in other contexts. This article investigates the effect of political leaders' ethnicity on political behavior by looking at the case of Jagmeet Singh in Canada, the first federal party leader of color in the country's history. While the literature has shown that the gender of leaders in Canada can matter, little is known about the attitudes of Canadians toward party leaders of color specifically. We are interested in the evaluations of Singh and his party, as well as the shifts in voting intentions between elections in 2015 and 2019. We uncover affinity-based behaviors from individuals who identify as Sikh, as well as a negative reception of Singh's candidacy in Quebec.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"21 1","pages":"316 - 347"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82919525","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":"Spectres of Belonging: The Political Life Cycle of Mexican Migrants By Adrián Félix. Studies in Subaltern Latino/a Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. 200pp, $28.95. Paperback","authors":"John Thomas","doi":"10.1017/REP.2021.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/REP.2021.2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"46 1","pages":"465 - 466"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86735464","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":"Campus Diversity: The Hidden Consensus By John M. Carey, Katherine Clayton and Yusaku Horiuchi. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2019","authors":"Natasha Warikoo","doi":"10.1017/REP.2021.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/REP.2021.14","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"146 1","pages":"467 - 469"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82895169","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：