Suchergebnisse

Proponents and opponents of reparations for Blacks vociferously
disagree. Conservative opponents argue that reparations for Black
slavery are a disastrous idea and that proponents are motivated by
either greed or the desire to do harm to the republic. Liberal and left
opponents of reparations argue that the advocacy on this issue will
lead to great racial divisions and do potentially irreparable harm to
progressive movements. Supporters of reparations argue that it is a
case of simple justice. That during the colonial, slavery, and Jim Crow
eras Blacks were systematically oppressed and exploited with the active
support of the state. They also argue that both domestic and
international precedents strengthen the case for Black reparations.
This paper shows that there is a tremendous divide between Blacks and
Whites on questions of both an apology to Blacks as well as monetary
reparations. The racial divide extends to support for the reparations
to Japanese-Americans who were victims of official incarceration during
World War II. Finally, multivariate analyses demonstrates that for both
Blacks and Whites, racialized views of politics are best predictors of
support for or opposition to reparations.

Considers the state of inquiry on race & politics, tackling the field's fragmentation, among other problems. Stressing the need for a firm theoretical background, it is contended that understanding the process of racialization & racial orderings across history & from various racial & ethnic perspectives is required. In addition, it is contended that analyses will benefit by examining how race intersects other social cleavages, eg, class & gender. Following an overview of racial ordering as a theoretical framework for viewing US race dynamics, attention turns to outlining lessons to be learned from the disciplines of psychology, economics, sociology, history, & gender studies, calling for an exchange of ideas & methods to develop an interdisciplinary approach. Research & subject dimensions that ought to be addressed by new or continued inquiry include the aforementioned race-other cleavage nexus, nonwhite racial groups conflict & cooperation, transcending the black-white paradigm, the role of ideology, white racial attitudes, data collection appropriate to the complexity of the US, immigration-race dynamics, the information technology revolution & new economy, & racialized state policy making. It is seen as necessary to build a bond between normative & positive political theory & empirical studies of race. J. Zendejas

This article examines how the racial order in the United States has evolved since the Jim Crow era. Two leading characterizations of the current situation are that we live in a postracial society and that we live in an era best described as the New Jim Crow. We probe the key differences between the Jim Crow racial order and the racial terrain of the current period and come to the conclusion that both claims are inadequate because they are tied to a sanitized and restricted understanding of Jim Crow as a set of legal and state institutions and policies. As such, both frames neglect the economic sphere. This article addresses this silence in the context of black politics. Specifically, we argue that a neoliberal racial order has emerged and that analyses of black politics must attend to the way racial divisions have become magnified in economic policies and civil society. A key claim is that a critical difference between this era and the Jim Crow era is the adoption of neoliberal ideology and support for neoliberal policies by a wide and diverse segment of black elites.

This conversation, hosted by the Harvard Book Store and moderated by Rev. Eugene Rivers, took place in conjunction with the Boston Review's (2012) forum on the power and potential of black movements. Featuring a lead article by Michael C. Dawson, the Future of Black Politics forum included responses from William Julius Wilson, Andra Gillespie, Tommie Shelby, Rev. Patrick H. O'Connor, Jennifer L. Hochschild, Lani Guinier and Gerald Torres, Dorian T. Warren, and Robin D. G. Kelley, with a reply by Michael C. Dawson. Here, the conversation continues.

This issue of the Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race is dedicated to the living memory and many contributions of distinguished historian John Hope Franklin. Writing in his autobiography Mirror to America, Franklin said that:

Many commentators, both conservative and liberal, have celebrated the election of Barack Obama as president of the United States, claiming the election signified America has truly become a "post-racial" society. It is not just Lou Dobbs who argues the United States in the "21st century [is a] post-partisan, post-racial society." This view is consistent with beliefs the majority of White Americans have held for well over a decade: that African Americans have achieved, or will soon achieve, racial equality in the United States despite substantial evidence to the contrary. Indeed, this view is consistent with opinions found in the Boston Globe, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and elsewhere—attitudes that even the tragic events following the Katrina disaster had nothing to do with race.

Has Barack Obama's success transformed the racial divide? Did he somehow transcend or help bring to an end centuries of racial division in the United States? Did he deliberately run a strategically race-neutral, race-evading campaign? Did his race and ingrained American racism constrain the reach of his success? Have we arrived at that postracial moment that has long been the stuff of dreams and high oratory? Or was the outcome of the 2008 presidential election driven entirely by nonracial factors, such as a weak Republican ticket, an incumbent party saddled with defending an unpopular war, and a worsening economic crisis? It is at once too simple and yet entirely appropriate to say that the answers to these questions are, in a phrase, complicated matters. These complexities can, however, be brought into sharper focus.

The year 2008 has provided many opportunities to look back and take stock of what has and has not changed along the color line. Perhaps of greatest salience is that this year marks four decades of uneven progress since the tragic assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr., and of Senator Robert F. Kennedy. It also marks the fortieth anniversary of the publication of what became known as the Kerner Commission report (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders 1968). The great sadness following those tragic deaths, and the somber tone set by the "two nations" declaration at the heart of the Kerner Report, call to mind an era of acute racial division, but also of steady struggle for change.