Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn this article, I urge family scholars to anchor their race work on the structural racism perspective. First, I provide some limitations of the prejudice problematic used by most family scholars. Second, I discuss the basic components of my structural theory, which I call the racialized social system approach. Third, I bolster my original theorization with a new conceptual map to make the structure intelligible—to account for why actors, for the most part, behave in ways that reproduce the racial order. In this discussion, I highlight the importance of the "white habitus" in shaping the lives and behaviors of White people. Lastly, I conclude by summarizing my claims and asking family scholars to continue deepening their work on structural racism and families, as well as on fighting how it shapes their own fields and lives.

El presente artículo tiene por objetivo analizar los discursos en torno al castigo y las políticas de descarcelación de las administraciones ministeriales de la cartera de Justicia y Paz durante los periodos 2015-2017 y 2018-2020 en Costa Rica. Se estudiarán tanto los discursos de los operadores políticos contemplados en entrevistas a medios de comunicación, planes de gobierno y comparecencias legislativas. Cobra relevancia el hecho de que el periodo de estudio abarca dos administraciones de continuidad partidaria, y que el tema carcelario jugó un papel relevante en la elección del 2018 y las políticas de descarcelación fueron achacadas al oficialismo por aumentar la inseguridad en el país. Para alcanzar el objetivo, se utilizó la metodología de Análisis Crítico de Discurso, la cual permite comprender problemas socioculturales desde los discursos emitidos por grupos de poder, los cuales profundizan condiciones de desigualdad y exclusión social. Se concluye que, a pesar de la continuidad partidaria y la visión supuestamente progresista con que el partido se identifica, es posible identificar rupturas y discontinuidades importantes entre ambas administraciones.

This article has the objective to analyze the discourse around punishment and decarceration policies on the administrations of the Ministry of Justice and Peace during the periods of 2015-2017 and 2018-2020. The discourses under study include the ones issued by politicians in power included in interviews, government plans and accountability speeches to the parliament. Is relevant the fact that the period under study is of two administrations of party continuity, where the prison system played a relevant role in the 2018 election and the decarceration policies were used against the ruling party for increasing insecurity in the country. To achieve the objective, the Critical Discourse Analysis methodology will be used, which will allow a deep understanding of the sociocultural problems from the discourses held by groups in power, which deepens the conditions of inequality and exclusion. It is concluded that, despite the continuity in power of a party with a supposedly progressive ideology, is possible to identify ruptures and important discontinuities between both governmental periods. ; El presente artículo tiene por objetivo analizar los discursos en torno al castigo y las políticas de descarcelación de las administraciones ministeriales de la cartera de Justicia y Paz durante los periodos 2015-2017 y 2018-2020 en Costa Rica. Se estudiarán tanto los discursos de los operadores políticos contemplados en entrevistas a medios de comunicación, planes de gobierno y comparecencias legislativas. Cobra relevancia el hecho de que el periodo de estudio abarca dos administraciones de continuidad partidaria, y que el tema carcelario jugó un papel relevante en la elección del 2018 y las políticas de descarcelación fueron achacadas al oficialismo por aumentar la inseguridad en el país. Para alcanzar el objetivo, se utilizó la metodología de Análisis Crítico de Discurso, la cual permite comprender problemas socioculturales desde los discursos emitidos por grupos de poder, los cuales profundizan condiciones de desigualdad y ...

In this article, I clarify some components and expand a few underdeveloped ideas of the racialized social system approach to racial stratification. I divide the paper into three parts. In the first section, I explore the limitations of the figure of "the racist." In the second part, I examine the problem of change. In the third part, which is the core of the paper, I discuss what makes "systemic racism" systemic. My main contention in this article is that the "systemic" in "systemic racism" means that we all participate in the reproduction of the racialized order. Furthermore, this reproduction depends fundamentally on behavior and actions that are normative, habituated, and often unconscious. Hence, systemic racism is the product of the behavior and practices of regular White folks rather than the "racists." In the conclusion, I discuss the implications of my claims for further theory‐building, research, and the struggle for racial justice.

In this article the author examines how the frameworks of color-blind racism have influenced many topics during the pandemic. Using readily available material from popular culture (TV shows, newspaper and magazine articles, and advertisements) and from statements by government officials, the author examines how color blindness has shaped our national discussion on essential workers and heroes, charity, and differential mortality. The main argument is that color-blind racism is limiting our understanding of the structural nature of the various racial problems coronavirus disease 2019 has revealed, making it difficult to envision the kinds of policies needed to address them. the author concludes by summarizing what these ideological perspectives block from view as well as addressing the nascent discursive cracks that might be used to produce alternative frames for interpreting matters and organizing collective action.

The election of 45 brought significant questions about race (and race-class) that merit theoretical consideration. My goal in this article is to discuss how racial theory applies to three main themes that followed the 2016 election: (a) dealing with the "racists"?, (b) the anxieties of the poor and white working class, and (c) hegemonic racism in Trumpamerica. I also briefly outline where I think racial theory needs to develop to combat racism in Trumpamerica.

In this address, I challenge dominant narratives explaining the rise of Trumpism in America. Specifically, I dispute four ideas that have emerged to account for Trump's election. First, I suggest that understanding his election as the product of the political activities of the "racists" severely limits our understanding of racism as a collective phenomenon. Second, I question the notion that Trump's working class support was due to "class anxieties." Third, I argue that despite the rise in old-fashioned racism in Trump's America, the new racism and its ideology of color-blindness are still hegemonic. Last, I ask analysts and activists alike to realize that the fight for democracy in the turbulent times we are living cannot be equated with an effort to return to "politics as usual," politics that have maintained the matrix of domination in place.

In this reply, I accept Professor Fenelon basic critique: that I, as most "race scholars," fail to take seriously Indigenous accounts in my theorization. However, I challenge several of his specific arguments about my work as well as some of his historical claims. I also include in this reply an unrelated section to Professor Fenelon's critique of my work on the topic of race and emotion. This addition to my racial theory is crucial because although I still contend that racism has a material foundation, humans cannot live of bread alone–that is, race cannot exist without an emotional bond.

In this article, I describe the racial order of America in the post–Civil Rights era. First, I discuss what racism is all about and emphasize the centrality of conceiving the phenomenon in a structural way. Second, I argue that the "new racism," or the set of mostly subtle, institutional, and seemingly nonracial mechanisms and practices that comprise the racial regime of "post-racial" America, has all but replaced the old Jim Crow order. Third, I describe the racial ideology of color-blind racism and its component parts (i.e., frames, style, and racial stories) and contend that, like the racial order, this new ideology is slippery and has a "beyond race" character. Fourth, I explain that the Obama moment is part of the new racism, color-blind period and justify my claim empirically. I conclude this essay pondering if people of color will wake up and realize that the new, more "civil" way of maintaining and justifying racial things is a more formidable way of maintaining racial domination.

Racism has always been "more than prejudice," but mainstream social analysts have mostly framed race matters as organized by the logic of prejudice. In this paper, I do four things. First, I restate my criticism of the dominant approach to race matters and emphasize the need to ground our racial analysis materially, that is, understanding that racism is systemic and rooted in differences in power between the races. Second, I reflect critically on my own theorization on race (the racialized social system approach) and acknowledge that I should have explained better the role of culture and ideology in the making and remaking of race. Third, I describe some of the work I have done since this early work. Fourth, I advance several new directions for research and theory in the field of race stratification.

This Master thesis in European Studies, Economic branch, aims to investigate the economic history of the European automobile industry in the context of the European integration process, in order to understand the interaction and influences between these two subjects. The purpose of the thesis would be to highlight the main problems regarding the automobile industry and the European integration process, through a deep study of the political, economic and social background from the "belle-époque" period to the Maastricht Treaty, in order to create a clear picture regarding the state of the art of the European automobile industry in the 1990s.

David Theo Goldberg,The Racial State. London: Blackwell, 2002, 319 pages, ISBN 0-631-19919-5, $66.95.Howard Winant,The World is a Ghetto: Race and Democracy Since World War II. New York: Basic Books, 2001, 428 pages, ISBN 0-465-04340-2, $32.00.Most American social scientists interpret racism as an individual malady and miss, ignore, or simply do not believe in the institutional and global nature of "White supremacy" (Mills 1997). Two limitations that ensue from this myopia are, first, the assumption that societies are not racialized entities (for a critique, see Bonilla-Silva 1997) and, second, a high degree of analytical provincialism—most studies by American scholars are narrow in scope and often are confined to the United States (for early exceptions, see Cox 1948, 1959; Du Bois 1920, 1945).