race

Following the arrest of two Black men at a Philadelphia Starbucks, public attention has increasingly focused on how race impacts whose presence in certain areas is questioned or not. The incident at Starbucks is part of a broader phenomenon about who we see as belonging or not-belonging in social settings and different spaces. Often, these perceptions — about who should and shouldn’t be at particular places — are rooted in race and racial difference.

Research shows that beliefs about belonging particularly affect how Black people are treated in America. Sociologist Elijah Anderson has written extensively about how certain social settings are cast as a “white space” or a “black space.” Often, these labels extend to public settings, including businesses, shopping malls, and parks. Labels like these are important because they can lead to differences in how some people are treated, like the exclusion of the two Black men from Starbucks.

• Anderson, Elijah. 2011.  The Cosmopolitan Canopy: Race and Civility in Everyday Life. W.W. Norton & Company.
• Elijah Anderson. 2015. “The White Space.” Sociology of Race & Ethnicity 1(1): 10-21.

When addressing the intersections between race and social space, social scientists often focus on residential segregation, where certain neighborhoods are predominantly comprised of members of one racial group. While these dynamics have been studied since the mid 20th century, research shows that race is still an important factor in determining where people live and who their neighbors are — an effect compounded by the 2008 financial crisis and its impacts on housing.

• Jacob S Rugh, Len Albright, and Douglas S. Massey. 2015. “Race, Space, and Cumulative Disadvantage: A Case Study of the Subprime Lending Collapse.” Social Problems 62(2): 186-208.
• Matthew Hall,  Kyle Crowder, and Amy Spring. 2015. “Neighborhood Foreclosures, Racial/Ethnic Transitions, and Residential Segregation.” American Sociological Review 80(3): 526-529.
• Ray Sin and Maria Krysan. 2015. “What Is Racial Residential Integration? A Research Synthesis, 1950–2013.” Sociology of Race and Ethnicity  (1)4: 467-474.

On Earth Day, we think about the environment and how we can protect it. While we tend to think of “going green” as something that began in the 1970s, the history of U.S. environmental movements stretches much further into the past. Over the course three specific historical periods — Conservationist/Preservations, Ecocentrist, and Political/Deep Ecology — environmental activism has shifted in its issues, from parks to pollution and clean water to climate change.  

The early Conservationism and Preservation movements emerged in the 1860s as reactions to the Industrial Revolution and explosion of cites. The mostly White, male elites argued that nature has a functional value in maintaining human societies. These activists were largely unconcerned with the rights and livelihoods of rural residents and native peoples, and were more focused on their own need for distinction, space, and recreational opportunities. We can thank these early movements for the National Arbor Day Foundation, The Sierra Club, the World Wildlife Organization, and the creation of National Parks.

• Dorceta E. Taylor. 2016. The Rise of the American Conservation Movement: Power, Privilege, and Environmental Protection. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 

The Ecocentrist movement began its development at the turn of the 20th century, but remained dormant until Rachel Carson’s publication of Silent Spring in 1962 connected the maintenance of clean, pollution-free ecosystems to public health and human survival. This period’s series of landmark successes includes the establishment of the Environmental Defense Fund in 1967, Earth Day in 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act.

• Robert J. Brulle. 1996. “Environmental Discourse and Social Movement Organizations: A Historical and Rhetorical Perspective on the Development of US Environmental Organizations.”
  Sociological Inquiry 66: 58-83.

The later historical period and the Political and Deep Ecology period linked social inequalities and consumerism to environmental degradation. Environmental issues like toxic waste, for example, primarily affect poor and working-class citizens. In contrast to earlier periods of elite-driven environmental activism, the toxic waste movement has been made up of people who experience environmental hazards first-hand.

• Phil Brown and Susan Masterson-Allen. 1994. “The Toxic Waste Movement: A New Type of
  Activism.” Society and Natural Resources 7: 269-287.

The most recent period of the U.S. environmental movements has seen less success than previous eras. By the 1980s, environmental issues became more complicated and abstract. Ozone depletion, acid rain, and global warming fell outside the jurisdiction of existing regulatory agencies and were more difficult to see than something like chemicals and garbage in rivers, lakes, and streams. Although many citizens generally support environmental protection, fewer people support government spending on environmental issues, especially since these issues are often invisible. Furthermore, contemporary concerns like climate change require international cooperation because they span geographic boundaries.

• Robert J. Brulle and J. Craig Jenkins. 2008. “Fixing the Bungled U.S. Environmental Movement.” Contexts 7(2): 14-19.

Migration on the southern border has been a hot topic in U.S. media and politics of late, only intensified by the recent release of plans for the first phase of the construction of a wall and the end of Temporary Protected Status for a number of Central American countries. Unfortunately, media reporting and the debates about these policies are all too rarely informed by social science research on border policies and their impacts on migrants and migration flows.

Since the late 1980s, restrictive policies and measures on immigration (e.g. limiting the number of visas available) and the tightening and militarization of the U.S. southern border have kept potentially undocumented Mexican migrants in the country. With higher costs and risks at the border for undocumented migrants, research suggests that the choice to stay in the United States, rather than moving back and forth over the border, is more of a necessity today than ever before.

• Douglas S. Massey, Jorge Durand and Karen A. Pren. 2015. “Border Enforcement and Return Migration by Documented and Undocumented Mexicans.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 41(7): 1015-1040.

On the other hand, as undocumented Mexican migration to the United States wanes — driven also by demographic changes in Mexico — undocumented migration from Central America is increasing. This shift is largely caused by civil wars in the region that sent refugees north, subsequent U.S. immigration policies of the 1990s that expelled many of these refugees that had criminal records, and the social instability in Central America that continues to drive migration back to the United States.

• Douglas S. Massey, Jorge Durand and Karen A. Pren. 2014. “Explaining Undocumented Migration to the U.S.” International Migration Review 48(4): 1028-1061.

And these policies not only drive the movement of peoples, but also the transfer of their monies. Recent research shows that legal status in the United States (or lack thereof) affects decisions to send money and travel to home countries. For example, Salvadorans — many of whom arrived in the United States undocumented — sent remittances at high rates than other national groups, though traveled back home less than half the rate of the typical Latino migrant. This same research finds that Mexican migrants were more likely to travel back to their home country than Cubans (as travel home was tightly restricted), though both sent remittances at similar frequencies.

• Thomas Soehl and Roger Waldinger. 2010. “Making a Connection: Latino Immigrants and Their Cross-border Ties.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 33(9): 1489-1510.
• Roger Waldinger. 2008. “Between “Here” and “There”: Immigrant Cross-Border Activities and Loyalties.” International Migration Review 42(1): 3-29.

With recent calls from President Trump for the death penalty for opioid drug traffickers, it is no surprise that the United States is one of the most punitive democracies in the world. But does the Trump administration’s position reflect that of most Americans? Gallup recently re-released findings from a 1987 poll that suggests a majority of Americans opposed the death penalty for drug dealers during a period of heightened concern about drugs. Social scientists continue to investigate the social factors that inform punitive attitudes. 

Among Whites, racial stereotypes about crime drive punitive attitudes. Whites’ racialized perceptions of crime — like the idea that Black individuals are more violent — contribute to support for several policies, including mandatory minimums, lowering the adult age-limit for juveniles, and the death penalty. Among Blacks and Hispanics, racial stereotypes do not appear to drive punitive attitudes. Instead, political beliefs and crime concerns seem to be more consequential for the punitive attitudes for people of color.

• Lawrence D. Bobo and Devon Johnson. 2004. “A Taste for Punishment: Black and White Americans’ Views on the Death Penalty and the War on Drugs.” Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race 1(1): 151-180.
• Ted Chiricos, Kelly Welch, and Marc Gertz. 2004. “Racial Typification of Crime and Support for Punitive Measures.” Criminology 42(2): 359–89.
• Justin T. Pickett and Ted Chiricos. 2012. “Controlling Other People’s Children: Racialized Views of Delinquency and Whites’ Punitive Attitudes Toward Juvenile Offenders.” Criminology 50(3):673–710.
• James D. Unnever and Francis T. Cullen. 2012. “White Perceptions of Whether African Americans and Hispanics Are Prone to Violence and Support for the Death Penalty.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 49(4): 519–44.

Recently, research indicates that criminal stereotypes about Hispanics and Latinos, anti-immigrant sentiments, and xenophobia also contribute to Whites’ punitive attitudes. One cross-national study comparing punitiveness across the European Union found that individuals who endorse anti-immigrant sentiments are more likely to support harsh punishments, even when accounting for other individual characteristics, like religious background. In the U.S. context, xenophobia may be more important than racial attitudes for heightened punitiveness.

• Joseph Baker, David Cañarte, and L. Edward Day. Forthcoming. “Race, Xenophobia, and Punitiveness Among the American Public.” The Sociological Quarterly.
• Graham C. Ousey and James D. Unnever. 2012.  “Racial-Ethnic Threat, Out-Group Intolerance, and Support for Punishing Criminals: A Cross-National Study.” Criminology 50(3): 565-603.

This research helps us to understand what influences the increased “get tough on crime” talk in U.S. politics. Concerns about crime control reflect more than just current crime trends. They are connected to both race relations and immigration patterns. So, while many of us may dispute the notion of executing drug dealers in general, keep in mind that racial stereotypes and racial or ethnic hostility drive many current — and likely future — criminal justice policies and practices in the United States.

Check out this Contexts piece by Chris Uggen and Ryan Larson about how the American public may be “getting smarter” on crime and crime control.

“They say…That us kids don’t know what we’re talking about, that we’re too young to understand how the government works. We call BS.” –Emma Gonzalez

Many of us are still reeling over the killing of 17 students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida nearly three weeks ago. Since then, lawmakers, advocates, and concerned citizens have called for stricter US gun control laws — particularly for assault weapons. Those spearheading the current movement are the teenage survivors of the shooting like Emma Gonzalez and Cameron Kasky. Students around the country are joining their peers in Parkland, Florida for the first annual March for Our Lives rally later this month. From the Freedom Riders and 1960s anti-war protesters to Black Lives Matter and Me Too, youth have played a vital role in shaping social movements. Sociological studies on social movements and young people’s mobilization help us understand the energies behind their activism.

School environments, social networks, and families influence youth civic participation in activities such as volunteering, voting, and engaging in political protest. Campus life, for example, fosters political action by exposing students to an array of social issues, allowing them to congregate in nearby locations, introducing youth to new social networks, and provide the free time necessary to organize. Families where parents were highly politically-involved may also increase youth likelihood of participating in political action. At the same time, parents may serve as a hindrance for some youth, as young women and girls may be more likely to experience parental opposition to their political activism.

• Jennifer Earl, Thomas V. Maher, Thomas Elliott. 2017. “Youth, Activism, and Social Movements.” Sociology Compass 11(4): 1-14.
• Dana R. Fischer. 2012. “Youth Political Participation: Bridging Activism and Electoral Politics.” Annual Review of Sociology 38: 119-137.
• Elvira Cicognania, Bruna Zania, Bernard Fournier, Claire Gavray, and Michel Born. 2012. “Gender Differences in Youths’ Political Engagement and Participation. The Role of Parents and of Adolescents’ Social and Civic Participation.” Journal of Adolescence 35(3): 561-576.
• Hava Rachel Gordan. 2008. “Gendered Paths to Teenage Political Participation: Parental Power,
• Civic Mobility, and Youth Activism.” Gender & Society 22(1): 31-55.

Attention to youth activism raises questions about the effectiveness of political protest more generally. Recalling the 1960 Black student-led sit-in during the Civil Rights movement, one study found that southern cities with sit-ins were more likely to desegregate lunch counters in the months following protest. These social movement successes are often the product of effective framing strategies that depict certain social problems as moral injustices.  Moral frames often include identifying victims, blaming those responsible for their victimization, and calling individuals to act against the injustice. Different from prior waves of activism, however, newer generations can utilize social media to transmit moral frames to the broader public. Youth of color, for example, have used profile picture changes, comics, memes, and hashtags to garner support against police brutality and anti-immigration policies.

• Michael Biggs and Kenneth T. Andrews. 2015. “Protest Campaigns and Movement Success: Desegregating the South in the Early 1960s.” American Sociological Review 80:416-443.
• Robert D. Benford and David A. Snow. 2000. “Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment.” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611-639.
• Henry Jenkins, Sangita Shresthova, Liana Gamber-Thompson, Neta Kligler-Vilenchik, and Arely Zimmerman. 2016. By Any Media Necessary: The New Youth Activism. New York: New York University Press.

As Black History Month continues, we are reminded of the pivotal role that race plays in the United States. But how does race shape social life in other nations in the Americas? Despite similar historical roots — European colonial expansion and slavery — Brazil and Mexico, for example, witnessed the emergence of race mixing cultures that stood in stark contrast to the distinct racial divisions in the United States.

Ideas about mestizaje — or racial and cultural mixture — have had a powerful effect on racial identity and mobilization across 20th century Latin America. In Brazil, for instance, research suggests that the focus on racial mixture has made racial or color boundaries ambiguous, and racial group membership weak. Mixed-race individuals have been celebrated as national symbols — proof of past and hope for future positive race relations. Because of this, some Latin American countries view themselves as morally superior to the United States, with its history of segregation and investment in White racial “purity.”

• Stanley Bailey. 2002. “The Race Construct and Public Opinion: Understanding Brazilian Beliefs about Racial Inequality and Their Determinants.” American Journal of Sociology 108(2): 406-439.  
• Edward Telles and Stanley Bailey. 2013. “Understanding Latin American Beliefs about Racial Inequality.” American Journal of Sociology 118(6): 1559–95.

But there are complications. In Brazil, weak racial boundaries made organizing along racial lines for the purposes of racial justice and equity difficult. In Mexico, the popular belief that there can be no racism in a nation where everyone is “mixed” makes the recognition of persistent racial inequalities complicated. Some scholars also suggest that Latin American racial boundaries are more rigid and consequential than often realized.

• Mónica Moreno Figueroa and Emiko Saldívar Tanaka. 2016. “‘We Are Not Racists, We Are Mexicans’: Privilege, Nationalism and Post-Race Ideology in Mexico.” Critical Sociology 42(4-5): 515-533.
• Eduardo Bonilla-Silva. 2006. “From Bi-racial to Tri-racial: Towards a New System of Racial Stratification in the USA.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 27(6): 931-950.

In the past few decades, Latin American countries have begun to recognize distinct racial and cultural groups and the rights of minority groups, leading to changes in both formal laws and public policies. Social scientists will continue to track how Latin Americans’ ideas about mestizaje evolve and what impacts these cultural shifts have on racial identities, movements, and policies across the Americas.

• Edward Telles and Denia Garcia. 2013. “Mestizaje and Public Opinion in Latin America.” Latin American Research Review 48(3): 130-152.

Duolingo, the free language-learning platform, has reached more than 200 million registered users around the world. For some, learning a new language is a hobby; for others, it’s a necessity. Whatever the reason, social science research demonstrates that learning a new language has significant social and cultural benefits. 

Learning a new language can improve interpersonal skills. For immigrants, it not only can increase earnings and labor market opportunities, but it can also improve adjustment into a new cultural context. Many factors influence this learning process. One study of 180,000 immigrants found that the societies of origin and destination play the biggest role in determining language proficiency — societies that promote the coexistence of multiple languages can actually encourage newcomers to learn a new language.

• Thomas J. Espenshade and Haishan Fu. 1997. “An Analysis of English-Language Proficiency among US immigrants.” American Sociological Review 62(2): 288-305.
• Frank Van Tubergen and Matthijs Kalmijn. 2005. “Destination-Language Proficiency in Cross-National Perspective: A Study of Immigrant Groups in Nine Western Countries.” American Journal of Sociology 110(5): 1412-1457.

Learning a new language also influences the way children form and maintain their friendships. One study demonstrated that fluent bilingual children, and bilingual children whose dominant language was not English, surpassed their peers in getting along with children from different backgrounds, comforting or helping other children, and expressing feelings, ideas, and opinions in positive ways. When children bridge two languages and two cultures at the same time, they are better able to interact with others and build stronger bonds.

• Robert P. Moreno and Deanne R. Pérez-Granados. 2002. “Understanding Language Socialization and Learning in Mexican-Descent Families: Conclusions and New Directions.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 24(2): 249-256.
• Ariela Schachter. 2016. “From ‘Different’ to ‘Similar:’ an Experimental Approach to Understanding Assimilation.” American Sociological Review 81(5): 981-1013.

In sum, learning a new language is not only about studying words, pronunciation, or grammar structure. The process can have substantial payoffs for social skills and integration.

For many across the globe, the Olympics is a chance to celebrate a shared human connection, athletic achievement, and national pride. The Olympic Charter claims the Games encourage friendship, cross-cultural understanding, and world peace, but to do so the games must be free of politics. The Olympics present an opportunity to cross divisive diplomatic lines, like the temporary calming of tensions between North and South Korea. But these ideals may be overly optimistic as these global events have real political effects.

• John J. MacAloon. 1982. “Double Visions: Olympic games and American Culture.” The Kenyon Review 4(1): 98-112.
  

Historically, only the economic and social elite participated in the Olympics, so other versions like the Worker’s Games countered the Olympic Games in the early 1900s. In addition, the Olympics themselves have become a space to challenge the status quo. Protests, or lack thereof, can challenge or reinforce global norms.

• Douglas Hartmann. 2003. Race, Culture, and the Revolt of the Black Athlete. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Arnd Krüger and William Murray (eds.). 2003. The Nazi Olympics: Sport, Politics, and Appeasement in the 1930s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.
• Rob Millington and Simon C Darnell. “Constructing and Contesting the Olympics Online: The Internet, Rio 2016 and the Politics of Brazilian Development.” International Review for the Sociology of Sport 49(2): 190-210.

Sporting events like the Olympics may allow nations to compete with each other without the consequences of war. Non-violent competition is even more important in the modern world, where technology allows for increasingly lethal methods of warfare. This may be one reason nations financially invest in producing elite athletes and could be behind recent controversies, like the Russian doping scandal.

• J.A. Mangan (ed.). 2004. Militarism, Sport, Europe: War Without Weapons. London: Frank Cass Publishers.
• Lincoln Allison and Terry Monnington. 2002. “Sport, Prestige and International Relations.” Government and Opposition 37(1): 106-134.

Though intended to be apolitical, nations may attempt to use the Olympics to sway global public opinion. Foreign policy officials report that political rebranding was a key reason to host the games. Modern media channels make this motivation even more powerful than in decades past, as nations know that the Olympics will have extensive global coverage.

• Jarol B. Manheim. 1990. “Rites of Passage: The 1988 Seoul Olympics as Public Diplomacy.” Political Research Quarterly 43(2): 279-295.
• Kevin Young and Kevin B. Wamsley. 2005. Global Olympics: Historical and Sociological Studies of the Modern Games. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• Alan Tomlinson and Christopher Young. 2006. National Identity and Global Sports Events: Culture, Politics, and Spectacle in the Olympics and the Football World Cup. Albany: State University of New York Press.
• Lee Humphreys and Christopher J. Finlay. 2008. “New Technologies, New Narratives” Pp. 284-306 in  Owning the Olympics: Narratives of the New China. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

During the month of February, the United States observes Black History Month, importantly celebrating the accomplishments of African Americans and acknowledging the racist history of the United States. Racism is not only part of the past, nor is it not limited to prejudicial attitudes and overtly discriminatory practices against people of color. Social scientists demonstrate how racism is also institutional and cultural, and how these forms of racism powerfully reproduce racial inequalities — even in the absence of explicitly racist attitudes or beliefs.

Social scientists commonly rely on two concepts to describe racism: institutional racism and symbolic or cultural racism. Institutional racism refers to how institutions and legal systems in the 21st century do not overtly consider race, but still promote racial inequality. Historically rooted inequalities in institutions — economy, housing markets, the education system, and the criminal justice system — help perpetuate persistent racial disparities.

• Thomas Shapiro. 2017. Toxic Inequality: How America’s Wealth Gap Destroys Mobility, Deepens the Racial Divide, and Threatens Our Future. New York: Basic Books.
• Joe Soss and Vesla Weaver. 2017. “Police Are Our Government: Politics, Political Science, and the Policing of Race–Class Subjugated Communities.” Annual Review of Political Science 20: 565-591.
• Barbara Reskin. 2012. “The Race Discrimination System.” Annual Review of Sociology 38(1):17–35.
• Jo C. Phelan and Bruce G. Link. 2015. “Is Racism a Fundamental Cause of Inequalities in Health?” Annual Review of Sociology 41(1): 311-330.

Social scientists utilize the concept of symbolic or cultural racism to discuss attitudes. Though explicitly prejudicial attitudes in the United States have declined, Americans today often use coded or symbolic language — especially when discussing political figures, immigration policy, or the criminal justice system. For example, instead of explicitly claiming people of different races are biologically inferior, individuals may point to “problematic” values or attitudes of other racial groups. Such beliefs allow those people to maintain that racial inequality is the fault of racial minority groups themselves.

• Lawrence Bobo, James R. Kluegel, and Ryan A.Smith. 1997. Laissez-faire Racism: The Crystallization of a Kinder, Gentler, Antiblack Ideology. Pp. 15-42 in Racial Attitudes in the 1990’s: Continuity and Change, eds. S Tuch and J. Martin. Westport, CT: Praeger.
• David O. Sears and P. J. Henry. 2003. “The Origins of Symbolic Racism.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85(2):259.
• Justin Allen Berg. 2013. “Opposition to Pro‐Immigrant Public Policy: Symbolic Racism and Group Threat.” Sociological Inquiry 83(1): 1-31.
• Christopher Sebastian Parker. 2016. “Race and Politics in the Age of Obama.” Annual Review of Sociology 42(1):217–30.

Large-scale sporting events, including the Winter Olympics and the Super Bowl, are in the international spotlight this winter. These mega-events are often heralded for promoting economic mobility and social cohesion, and cities across the world bid for events like the Olympics to cement their identities as world-class cities. For sociologists, these events also highlight how inequality operates in urban spaces.

Under the assumption that stadium construction promotes local growth, many cities rely on both tax subsidies from their local populace along with private investment. Financial investors tout the unprecedented trend of stadium-building in the past decades as opportunities for job growth, tourism, and other revenue boosts. However, much research suggests that stadiums and major sport events do not have broad economic benefits for their host cities, as benefits tend to be distributed unequally along racial and class lines. While local resistance has grown substantially in recent years, resource-laden investing firms and political coalitions that advocate for such projects are largely successful at squelching these efforts.

• Kevin J. Delaney and Rick Eckstein. 2003. Public Dollars, Private Stadiums: The Battle over Building Sports Stadiums. Rutgers University Press.
• Jay Scherer. 2016. Resisting the World-Class City: Community Opposition and the Politics of a Local Arena Development. Sociology of Sport Journal 33(1): 39-53.
• Timothy W. Collins and Sara E. Grineski. 2007. Unequal Impacts of Downtown Redevelopment: The Case of Stadium Building in Phoenix, Arizona. Journal of Poverty 11(1): 23-54.

The role of sporting events in perpetuating inequality demonstrates how the geography of urban space reflects a deepening divide between the “haves” and “have nots.” For example, sociologists demonstrate that cities often implement policies and practices that criminalize and punish behaviors of homeless individuals in public spaces. Other studies indicate that sporting events in the United States, especially the Super Bowl, contribute to the militarization and surveillance of public space in the post-9/11 era.

• Katherine Beckett and Steve Herbert. 2009. Banished: The New Social Control in Urban America. Oxford University Press.
• Kimberly S. Schimmel. 2006. Deep Play: Sports Mega‐Events and Urban Social Conditions in the USA. The Sociological Review 54(2): 160-174.
• Patrick Sharkey. 2013. Stuck in Place: Urban Neighborhoods and the End of Progress Toward Racial Equality. University of Chicago Press.

So, as we watch these sporting spectacles from our television screens, see them up close (if we’re lucky), or experience the negative consequences outlined above (if we’re not), it is important to be aware of how these events are manifestations of both society’s triumphs and social ills.