- Amy S. Wharton. (2004). Constructing “Race” and “Ethnicity” in America: Category-Making in Public Policy and Administration Dvora Yanow. Administrative Science Quarterly, (1), 153. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/logi n.aspx?direct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.4131465&site=eds-live&scope=site
Amy Wharton reviews how Dvora Yanow inspects the use of racial and ethnic categories so commonly found in policymaking, public administration, and social scientists. Yanow argues that the classification of individuals based solely on their factual description strips them of their individualism. She begins by explaining how race and ethnicity has been shifted from free-flowing theoretical concepts to a set of inelastic factual descriptions highlighting the differences in humankind. This shift has done much more harm than good according to Yanow.
Wharton claims that Yanow is sensitive to the fact that the categorizing of certain groups is used to serve as insight about a culture’s meanings. Wharton describes her work as an empirical study of language and categories used to make sense of race and ethnicity in American public policy and administration. Wharton also credits Yanow for the great and deep extent she attempts to uncover the question many have whether justice and equality better served when race and ethnicity is accounted for, or if the attention to it make it harder to eliminate the inequality.
George, H, Jr. (2013). Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism, and Racial Inequality in Contemporary America. The Western Journal of Black Studies, (1), 63. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.332655217&site=eds-live&scope=site
127 our experts are availableright now
Herman George Jr. reviews Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s work on uncovering why racial inequality is still prevalent in contemporary America. Herman applauds Eduardo on his explanation on the concept of color-blind racism, which as stated is composed of: abstract liberalism; naturalization; cultural racism; and the minimum of racism. It is the combination of believing in an equal opportunity while justifying racial inequality, rejecting the consideration of ethnic phenomenon, classifying a part for the whole, and believing that the lessening of racial discrimination has not left any impediment on certain groups is what makes up color-blind racism.
Eduardo believes that one day, color-blind racism will have no place is society. However, George is doubtful as he claims his views on racism are strictly sociological. As opposed to individualistic or psychologistic. George does support Eduardo’s explanation provided as to why color-blind racism is present in current American society, but not in its degeneration.
- King, D. S., & Smith, R. M. (2014). “Without Regard to Race”: Critical Ideational Development in Modern American Politics. Journal of Politics, 76(4), 958–971. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1017/S0022381614000541
Desmond King and Rogers Smith work together to explain the development behind the transition of race-consciousness to color-blind racism that many scholars have not. The accredit the reformulation to the stress put on by historical institutionalists. As argued by the two: the logistics of administration prompted bureaucrats hoping the enforce civil rights laws, and employers seeking to comply with them, to use numerical targets and other race-conscious policies, and the inclusion of racial policies in political candidates’ platforms followed directly after.
King and Smith state that in today’s society, racial inequalities are still present, but candidates often time avoid their discussion, even though race continues to matter heavily. This is extremely present as the two major political parties have become a mechanism of racial separation. Republican candidates have consistently won the white vote since 1964, while a larger majority of nonwhites has been successful within the Democrats. The two parties have given individuals a way to cope with either their support or opposition of the racial change seen in politics.
- Lundberg, S. (2015). Tiger parenting and American inequality: an essay on Chua and Rubenfeld’s The Triple Package: How three unlikely traits explain the rise and fall of cultural groups in America. Journal of Economic Literature, (4), 945. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.443271477&site=eds-live&scope=site
In this article, Shelly Lundberg explains the how racial and ethnic inequalities (with the absence of immigrant flows) were not only created, but their sustainment as well. She recognizes three unlikely traits that cohesively determine a cultural groups economic success or lack of in modern America. Lundberg explains the traits that determine a society’s success. The three of which are a sense of group superiority, individual insecurity, and having good impulse control. The three traits are supposed to provide insight as to whether or not culture is a key factor in racial and ethnic stratification in the United States.
The combination of traits which is generationally passed through community cultural naratives and norms ultimately results in higher income, job prestige, and other societally deemed successful traits. Superiority refers to theology or social hierarchy; cultures that stress religion. Insecurity essentially creates an internal drive to prove yourself to not only the new society, but an individuals’ parents who instilled such traits. Impulse control stresses being thrift and allowing hard work to pay off in either education or in the work force.
- O’Donnell, G. (2018). Challenging Legacy Admissions: The role America’s top universities play in perpetuating socioeconomic and racial inequality. INSIGHT into Diversity, 91(4/5), 36–38. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/l ogin.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=130571089&site=eds-live&scope=site
Ginger O’Donnell reviews the nation’s top universities and ivy leagues use of preference towards legacy students. A practice that after viewing a compiling of data becomes almost transparent to solely benefit white, wealthy student. She explains how minority students only make up a slim percentage of prestigious universities’ legacy applicant pool. O’Donnell does acknowledge such schools’ arguments behind prioritizing legacy applicants because firstly, they can act as a mentor to others from growing up uniquely immersed in the values shared by the institution and secondly, their families can donate funds to provide the advantages that the institution offers.
The worry lies that the legacy status having such a heavy weight in an applicant’s admission puts a hindrance on low-income, underrepresented, or first-generation students. O’Donnell acknowledges that although they could get into many other schools with ease, they still deserve the opportunities of more money spent per pupil, better retention rates, and higher projected future earnings for graduates.
