Suchergebnisse

International audience ; The public visibility of Islam reveals new political stakes in European democracies around issues of immigration and citizenship. By focusing on the societal debates and the controversies around the construction of mosques and minarets, this article explores the ways in which Islamic difference is manifested, perceived and framed in public life. The 'visibility' of Islam in public is conceptualized as a form of agency, amanifestation of religious difference that cannot be thought independent of themateriality of culture, namely aesthetic forms, dress codes, or architectural genres. It is argued that the debates for or against the banning of the construction of mosques and/or minarets reveal the tumultuous transition of Muslims from the status of the invisible migrant-worker to that of visible Muslim citizenship. The public visibility is approached therefore as a radically disruptive, transgressive, provocative formof transformative agency that is intrinsically related to the political process of becoming citizens.

What shapes attitudes about Native American policy issues and inherent rights? Race and ethnicity are important in shaping US public opinion, but Native Americans have been almost entirely excluded from this research. We use data from an original survey and focus groups collected from the Reclaiming Native Truth project to examine the factors that shape attitudes toward Native American inherent rights and broader race conscious policy issues. We find high levels of support overall, but several factors influence lower levels of support. Many people have very low factual knowledge about Native American issues and rely heavily on partisan shortcuts in forming opinions, especially for policy issues. Overall, attitudes about inherent rights are less consistent as many people have very little knowledge about them. People of color tend to be more supportive than white people and white people tend to rely more on partisan shortcuts. Specifically, conservative whites are the least supportive across most issues. We also explore the effect of Native American resentment, finding there are people who hold overtly hostile views of Native Americans and are unsupportive of their rights and policies. Our findings contribute to growing literature on Indigenous resentment, settler colonialism and public attitudes toward Indigenous peoples.

By focusing on three groups of whistleblowers in Slovakia speaking out against the use of bogus self-employment in their companies, this study contributes to the debate on the political dimension of whistleblowing. Specifically, it conceptualises whistleblowing as a practice that opens up broader societal, ethical and political questions by examining its relationship to institutions, with particular interest in those institutions that create the law. In doing so, the study analyses how labour law and enforcement institutions are deconstructed through the long process of whistleblowing, which involves the interactions of multiple institutions and social actors in a regulatory space that tend to sustain (bogus) self-employment.

Objective. We outline the role of race, racial resentment, and attentiveness to news in structuring public opinion toward the prosecution of the Jena Six, the name given to six African‐American high school students who beat a white student, five of whom were subsequently charged with attempted second‐degree murder.Method. We rely on a telephone survey of 428 registered voters collected in the aftermath of the protests in Jena, Louisiana.Results. Public reactions were heavily filtered by race and associated with measures of racial resentment. African Americans followed news about the protests more closely, believed race was the most important consideration in the decision to prosecute, and believed the decision to prosecute was the wrong decision. Racially conservative white respondents were less likely to believe race was the most important consideration in the decision to prosecute and were more likely to believe that the decision to prosecute was the right decision. Consistent with theories of agenda setting and framing, attentiveness to the news influenced perceptions regarding the importance of race in the decision to prosecute but not whether the decision was the right decision.Conclusions. At least within the context of the Deep South, race and racial attitudes continue to be an important predictor of public reactions to racially charged events. Attentiveness to the news influenced the lens through which events were interpreted, but not perceptions of whether the outcome was the right decision.