Pub Date : 2021-11-25DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.2007964
Yalidy Matos, Joshua L. Miller
ABSTRACT Outgroup hostility and racialized language were the most important predictors of support for Trump in the 2016 election season. Some scholarship argues that outgroup hostility outweighs the importance of white ingroup attitudes. Using a mix-methods content analysis of Trump’s campaign speeches, this paper agrees that outgroup hostility was the primary rhetorical device used by Trump in his speeches in both the primary and general elections. This work goes further and examines how Trump’s rhetoric framed and constructed the ingroup using outgroup rhetoric to connect the two. We argue that immigration and refugees, specifically, were used by Trump as part of the identity story he told about the ingroup and what it means to be an ingroup member. Our contribution rests on the correlation between hostile outgroup rhetoric—especially towards immigrants and refugees—to the framing and defining of the ingroup (through first-person plural pronouns). Further, we connect this rhetorical device to questions about what is at stake for the ingroup (i.e., power). We highlight a rhetorical mechanism that helps explain how hostile outgroup rhetoric is linked to ingroup framing, a contribution that adds to the literature on this topic.
{"title":"The politics of pronouns: how Trump framed the ingroup in the 2016 presidential election","authors":"Yalidy Matos, Joshua L. Miller","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.2007964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.2007964","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 Outgroup hostility and racialized language were the most important predictors of support for Trump in the 2016 election season. Some scholarship argues that outgroup hostility outweighs the importance of white ingroup attitudes. Using a mix-methods content analysis of Trump’s campaign speeches, this paper agrees that outgroup hostility was the primary rhetorical device used by Trump in his speeches in both the primary and general elections. This work goes further and examines how Trump’s rhetoric framed and constructed the ingroup using outgroup rhetoric to connect the two. We argue that immigration and refugees, specifically, were used by Trump as part of the identity story he told about the ingroup and what it means to be an ingroup member. Our contribution rests on the correlation between hostile outgroup rhetoric—especially towards immigrants and refugees—to the framing and defining of the ingroup (through first-person plural pronouns). Further, we connect this rhetorical device to questions about what is at stake for the ingroup (i.e., power). We highlight a rhetorical mechanism that helps explain how hostile outgroup rhetoric is linked to ingroup framing, a contribution that adds to the literature on this topic.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"206 1","pages":"507 - 525"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73966911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-17DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1997767
Nadia Y. Kim
ABSTRACT Racial triangulation theory brilliantly conjoins, at once, two different types of racialized hierarchies, thereby allowing more than the metrics of standard anti-African American racism (“the color line”) to be theorized. This is one of the hallmarks of the pathbreaking model. At the same time, this essay chronicles how racial triangulation falls prey to the common social science tendency of US centrism, nation-state singularity, and catch-all models, omitting the influence of (neo)imperialism, (neo/post)colonialism, neoliberalism, and other foundational projects of global and American racism. For instance, U.S. empire – i.e., militarist, capitalist, cultural dominance – means that most Asian ethnic groups experienced racial injustice and a version of racial triangulation in their sending countries before migration; in turn, the pre-migrant context profoundly shapes how the US racializes/positions these groups (often vis-a-vis one another) and how the margins respond. In addition, racial triangulation privileges eastern-descent ethnics, overlooks anti-South Asian American racism in the post-1980s and post-911 era, underappreciates Asian/Asian American resistance, and neglects to theorize those positioned at the intersection of “inferior” and “foreigner” (of which former President Barack Obama is emblematic). In spite of the (constructive) criticism, in this era of Covid-19 racism, the Atlanta Massacre, widespread state murder of Black Americans, anti-Latinx/-Mexican nativist racism, and Muslim Bans, we need to expand racial triangulation theory, not dismiss it.
{"title":"Globalizing racial triangulation: including the people and nations of color on which White supremacy depends","authors":"Nadia Y. Kim","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1997767","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1997767","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Racial triangulation theory brilliantly conjoins, at once, two different types of racialized hierarchies, thereby allowing more than the metrics of standard anti-African American racism (“the color line”) to be theorized. This is one of the hallmarks of the pathbreaking model. At the same time, this essay chronicles how racial triangulation falls prey to the common social science tendency of US centrism, nation-state singularity, and catch-all models, omitting the influence of (neo)imperialism, (neo/post)colonialism, neoliberalism, and other foundational projects of global and American racism. For instance, U.S. empire – i.e., militarist, capitalist, cultural dominance – means that most Asian ethnic groups experienced racial injustice and a version of racial triangulation in their sending countries before migration; in turn, the pre-migrant context profoundly shapes how the US racializes/positions these groups (often vis-a-vis one another) and how the margins respond. In addition, racial triangulation privileges eastern-descent ethnics, overlooks anti-South Asian American racism in the post-1980s and post-911 era, underappreciates Asian/Asian American resistance, and neglects to theorize those positioned at the intersection of “inferior” and “foreigner” (of which former President Barack Obama is emblematic). In spite of the (constructive) criticism, in this era of Covid-19 racism, the Atlanta Massacre, widespread state murder of Black Americans, anti-Latinx/-Mexican nativist racism, and Muslim Bans, we need to expand racial triangulation theory, not dismiss it.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"23 1","pages":"468 - 474"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74054096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-08DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1992287
Eunbin Chung, M. Milkoreit
ABSTRACT Persistent divides among American voters regarding climate change, especially climate skepticism among conservatives, have long been explained with reference to ideology, vested interests, and trends of political polarization. More recently, an alternative set of explanations for the opinion gap between conservatives and liberals has been gaining traction, arguing that these divisions are generated by social identities and their effects on individual beliefs and attitudes. Here, we focus on global citizenship as a specific social identity. Seeking to connect ideology and social identity approaches, we study how the interaction between a person’s ideological leanings and their social identity as a global citizen relates to beliefs and risk perceptions regarding climate change. Analyzing two kinds of survey data, we find that a global citizen identity moderates the relationship between a conservative ideology and a person’s climate-related beliefs and risk perceptions, while it does not seem to have the same effect for liberal individuals. In other words, a global citizen identity is associated with a potential decrease in the ideological divide between conservatives and liberals regarding climate change. We explore the implications of these findings for climate change communication and policy and other issue areas.
{"title":"Who are your people? – The effect of political ideology and social identity on climate-related beliefs and risk perceptions","authors":"Eunbin Chung, M. Milkoreit","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1992287","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1992287","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Persistent divides among American voters regarding climate change, especially climate skepticism among conservatives, have long been explained with reference to ideology, vested interests, and trends of political polarization. More recently, an alternative set of explanations for the opinion gap between conservatives and liberals has been gaining traction, arguing that these divisions are generated by social identities and their effects on individual beliefs and attitudes. Here, we focus on global citizenship as a specific social identity. Seeking to connect ideology and social identity approaches, we study how the interaction between a person’s ideological leanings and their social identity as a global citizen relates to beliefs and risk perceptions regarding climate change. Analyzing two kinds of survey data, we find that a global citizen identity moderates the relationship between a conservative ideology and a person’s climate-related beliefs and risk perceptions, while it does not seem to have the same effect for liberal individuals. In other words, a global citizen identity is associated with a potential decrease in the ideological divide between conservatives and liberals regarding climate change. We explore the implications of these findings for climate change communication and policy and other issue areas.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"9 1","pages":"467 - 487"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79236887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-26DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1992289
S. Bohn
ABSTRACT Despite its illiberal tendencies, the Bolsonaro presidency, particularly the Christian Evangelical head of its women’s policy agency, does have a specific agenda to advance substantive gender claims. The current government’s rejects strongly feminist public policy claims, equating feminism to a radical leftist subversion of the Brazilian family and the country’s societal values. Feminine-centric public policy, in contrast, is portrayed as one of the key paths to restore a nation in which, as Bolsonaro’s campaign slogan epitomizes, “Brazil is above all things, and God is above all”.
{"title":"Advancing gender claims in post-pink tide Brazil: Bolsonaro’s project for women","authors":"S. Bohn","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1992289","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1992289","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite its illiberal tendencies, the Bolsonaro presidency, particularly the Christian Evangelical head of its women’s policy agency, does have a specific agenda to advance substantive gender claims. The current government’s rejects strongly feminist public policy claims, equating feminism to a radical leftist subversion of the Brazilian family and the country’s societal values. Feminine-centric public policy, in contrast, is portrayed as one of the key paths to restore a nation in which, as Bolsonaro’s campaign slogan epitomizes, “Brazil is above all things, and God is above all”.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"35 1","pages":"166 - 170"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72882585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1992286
Franchesca Nestor
ABSTRACT The positive impact of descriptive representation upon congressional committees’ work is well-documented in the literature: more racially diverse chamber membership and leadership increases racially salient committee activity. However, the possible descriptive effects of racially diverse congressional committees remain unexamined. A new dataset records the numbers of Black and Latinx members on all standing committees in the House from the 80th through 114th Congresses. Committees with higher numbers of Black members are more likely to hold racially salient hearings and hold a greater volume of such hearings. The effect remains even after controlling for committee jurisdiction, the race of the committee chair, and House diversity. Though Latinx membership on committees does not have a statistically significant effect upon racially salient hearings by those committees, the new data indicates the comparatively smaller numbers of Latinx members on committees as a likely explanation. The results for Black committee members indicate that representation of racially salient concerns requires not only a racially diverse legislative body but racially diverse committees. A thorough exploration of descriptive representation in legislative action must include consideration of committee diversity as an important piece of the puzzle.
{"title":"Congressional committee demographics and racially salient representation","authors":"Franchesca Nestor","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1992286","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1992286","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The positive impact of descriptive representation upon congressional committees’ work is well-documented in the literature: more racially diverse chamber membership and leadership increases racially salient committee activity. However, the possible descriptive effects of racially diverse congressional committees remain unexamined. A new dataset records the numbers of Black and Latinx members on all standing committees in the House from the 80th through 114th Congresses. Committees with higher numbers of Black members are more likely to hold racially salient hearings and hold a greater volume of such hearings. The effect remains even after controlling for committee jurisdiction, the race of the committee chair, and House diversity. Though Latinx membership on committees does not have a statistically significant effect upon racially salient hearings by those committees, the new data indicates the comparatively smaller numbers of Latinx members on committees as a likely explanation. The results for Black committee members indicate that representation of racially salient concerns requires not only a racially diverse legislative body but racially diverse committees. A thorough exploration of descriptive representation in legislative action must include consideration of committee diversity as an important piece of the puzzle.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"1 1","pages":"445 - 466"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89780631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-20DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1992285
K. Zhirkov
ABSTRACT Recent evidence indicates that anti-immigration attitudes in white-majority societies have a “racial hue” as they at least partially derive from aversion toward prevalent immigrant groups. Building upon this result, I argue that there is variation in the degree to which people think of stereotypically immigrant groups as darker-skinned, and that this variation has implications for attitudes toward immigration. To test these conjectures, I propose an instrument to measure the associations between social groups and light vs. dark skin tone based on the implicit association test architecture. Using original survey studies in the United States and Britain, I demonstrate that respondents in the two countries indeed tend to perceive stereotypically immigrant groups – Hispanics and Muslims – as darker-skinned than stereotypically native ones (Anglos and Christians respectively). Further, individual differences in these perceptions are related to group-specific prejudice, opinions about immigration, and partisan affect.
{"title":"Perceptions of stereotypically immigrant groups as darker-skinned and politics of immigration in the United States and Britain","authors":"K. Zhirkov","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1992285","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1992285","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recent evidence indicates that anti-immigration attitudes in white-majority societies have a “racial hue” as they at least partially derive from aversion toward prevalent immigrant groups. Building upon this result, I argue that there is variation in the degree to which people think of stereotypically immigrant groups as darker-skinned, and that this variation has implications for attitudes toward immigration. To test these conjectures, I propose an instrument to measure the associations between social groups and light vs. dark skin tone based on the implicit association test architecture. Using original survey studies in the United States and Britain, I demonstrate that respondents in the two countries indeed tend to perceive stereotypically immigrant groups – Hispanics and Muslims – as darker-skinned than stereotypically native ones (Anglos and Christians respectively). Further, individual differences in these perceptions are related to group-specific prejudice, opinions about immigration, and partisan affect.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"26 1","pages":"667 - 676"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86123789","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-03DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1979605
Lihi Ben Shitrit
This article explores how purportedly feminist and far-right commitments are at times in alignment with each other and how political bargaining between feminist agendas and racist radical-right age...
{"title":"Radical-right cooptation of feminism in Israel: a case study","authors":"Lihi Ben Shitrit","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1979605","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1979605","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores how purportedly feminist and far-right commitments are at times in alignment with each other and how political bargaining between feminist agendas and racist radical-right age...","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88524485","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-28DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1982737
Diane Wong
ABSTRACT Since Claire Jean Kim’s theory of racial triangulation was first published two decades ago, we have witnessed a new generation of Asian American activist formations emerge. Despite this timelapse, applications of racial triangulation have focused on intergroup conflict and on the specificities of racial positioning without imagination of alternatives. This paper examines the potential of racial resistance to triangulation, an overlooked dimension of Kim’s theory, and charts an emergent area of research that centers Asian American abolitionist counterstories for Black liberation: How have Asian Americans divested from the structures that uphold anti-Blackness – and what does divestment look like in practice? We remain at a crossroads and in need of scholarship that makes legible the political possibilities of cross-racial solidarities and refusals to triangulation. I draw inspiration from the organizing of Freedom Inc., a Black and Southeast Asian grassroots collective working with low-to-no-income communities of color in Madison, Wisconsin. Their transformative work to remove police from schools helps us to conceive of a politics that is not only reactive to existing systems of power but also as fugitive, abundant, and visionary in the sense that they are forging alternate relationalities in the unfinished project of worldmaking post-triangulation.
{"title":"The future is ours to build: Asian American abolitionist counterstories for Black liberation","authors":"Diane Wong","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1982737","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1982737","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Since Claire Jean Kim’s theory of racial triangulation was first published two decades ago, we have witnessed a new generation of Asian American activist formations emerge. Despite this timelapse, applications of racial triangulation have focused on intergroup conflict and on the specificities of racial positioning without imagination of alternatives. This paper examines the potential of racial resistance to triangulation, an overlooked dimension of Kim’s theory, and charts an emergent area of research that centers Asian American abolitionist counterstories for Black liberation: How have Asian Americans divested from the structures that uphold anti-Blackness – and what does divestment look like in practice? We remain at a crossroads and in need of scholarship that makes legible the political possibilities of cross-racial solidarities and refusals to triangulation. I draw inspiration from the organizing of Freedom Inc., a Black and Southeast Asian grassroots collective working with low-to-no-income communities of color in Madison, Wisconsin. Their transformative work to remove police from schools helps us to conceive of a politics that is not only reactive to existing systems of power but also as fugitive, abundant, and visionary in the sense that they are forging alternate relationalities in the unfinished project of worldmaking post-triangulation.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"109 1","pages":"493 - 502"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88558362","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-27DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1980406
Jennifer C. Lucas, Elizabeth P. Ossoff
ABSTRACT While the 2020 Democratic field was touted as one of the most diverse in presidential nomination history, a white, male, heterosexual candidate ultimately won the nomination. This is, on its face, surprising, as we might expect less sexism and more enthusiasm for diverse candidates among Democratic voters. To help explain this outcome, we refocus attention on the “third-person effect” and the anticipated reactions of others to a female candidate, rather than voters own individual beliefs in two ways. First, we demonstrate that attitudes about female presidential candidates still follow third-person effect predictions; individuals attribute socially desirable attitudes to themselves and less so more distant others (i.e. “Americans”). Second, we analyze how voters take into account perceived potential gender bias by others, which in turn influences female candidates’ perceived electability (likely support from other voters). Gendered electability then has measurable impacts on preference for female candidates, as they strategically choose the more electable candidate. Overall, these results demonstrate looking at the anticipated gender bias of others, rather than just an individual’s attitudes, can be helpful in explaining the continued perception of female presidential candidates as less electable and, ultimately, why women have not yet broken the highest glass ceiling.
{"title":"It’s not me, it’s you: perceptions of others and attitudes toward a female nominee in the 2020 New Hampshire democratic primary","authors":"Jennifer C. Lucas, Elizabeth P. Ossoff","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1980406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1980406","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While the 2020 Democratic field was touted as one of the most diverse in presidential nomination history, a white, male, heterosexual candidate ultimately won the nomination. This is, on its face, surprising, as we might expect less sexism and more enthusiasm for diverse candidates among Democratic voters. To help explain this outcome, we refocus attention on the “third-person effect” and the anticipated reactions of others to a female candidate, rather than voters own individual beliefs in two ways. First, we demonstrate that attitudes about female presidential candidates still follow third-person effect predictions; individuals attribute socially desirable attitudes to themselves and less so more distant others (i.e. “Americans”). Second, we analyze how voters take into account perceived potential gender bias by others, which in turn influences female candidates’ perceived electability (likely support from other voters). Gendered electability then has measurable impacts on preference for female candidates, as they strategically choose the more electable candidate. Overall, these results demonstrate looking at the anticipated gender bias of others, rather than just an individual’s attitudes, can be helpful in explaining the continued perception of female presidential candidates as less electable and, ultimately, why women have not yet broken the highest glass ceiling.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"48 1","pages":"425 - 443"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80593053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-27DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2021.1982736
Calvin Cheung-Miaw
ABSTRACT This article places Claire Jean Kim’s racial triangulation theory in the context of Kim’s other writings from the late 1990s and early 2000s. I analyze Kim’s theory not as an analytical framework of relational racialization, but as a guide to thinking through the basis of multiracial solidarity. I contend that the power of racial triangulation theory lay in the way it demonstrated how long-term alignments of interest among racial groups could emerge from differentiated racial positions. However, I also argue that Kim’s theory was limited in assuming that racialization was the most important determinant of group interest. Through a re-examination of the 1994 lawsuit filed by Chinese American parents against the San Francisco Unified School District, Ho v. SFUSD, I suggest that comparative race scholars ought to account for class and other power relations within racial and ethnic groups, relations that produce divergent sets of interests unaccounted for by the framework of racial politics understood in terms of racialization and rearticulation.
本文将克莱尔·金(Claire Jean Kim)的种族三角理论置于20世纪90年代末和21世纪初金的其他著作的背景下。我不是把金的理论作为关系种族化的分析框架来分析，而是把它作为思考多种族团结基础的指南。我认为，种族三角理论的力量在于，它证明了种族群体之间的长期利益联盟是如何从不同的种族立场中产生的。然而，我也认为，金的理论在假设种族化是群体利益的最重要决定因素方面是有限的。通过对1994年美籍华人家长对旧金山联合学区(San Francisco Unified School District)的诉讼(Ho v. SFUSD)的重新审视，我建议比较种族学者应该考虑种族和民族群体内部的阶级和其他权力关系，这些关系产生了不同的利益，而这些利益在种族化和重新表述的种族政治框架中是无法解释的。
{"title":"Asian Americans and multiracial politics: the contribution and limits of racial triangulation theory","authors":"Calvin Cheung-Miaw","doi":"10.1080/21565503.2021.1982736","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1982736","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article places Claire Jean Kim’s racial triangulation theory in the context of Kim’s other writings from the late 1990s and early 2000s. I analyze Kim’s theory not as an analytical framework of relational racialization, but as a guide to thinking through the basis of multiracial solidarity. I contend that the power of racial triangulation theory lay in the way it demonstrated how long-term alignments of interest among racial groups could emerge from differentiated racial positions. However, I also argue that Kim’s theory was limited in assuming that racialization was the most important determinant of group interest. Through a re-examination of the 1994 lawsuit filed by Chinese American parents against the San Francisco Unified School District, Ho v. SFUSD, I suggest that comparative race scholars ought to account for class and other power relations within racial and ethnic groups, relations that produce divergent sets of interests unaccounted for by the framework of racial politics understood in terms of racialization and rearticulation.","PeriodicalId":46590,"journal":{"name":"Politics Groups and Identities","volume":"11 1","pages":"461 - 467"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78277042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：