Stereotypes About Political Attitudes and Coalitions Among U.S. Racial Groups: Implications for Strategic Political Decision-Making

What are people’s expectations of interracial political coalitions? This research reveals expectations of flexible interracial coalitions stemming from how policies and racial groups are viewed in terms of perceived status and foreignness. For policies seen as changing societal status (e.g., welfare), people expected Black–Hispanic political coalitions and viewed Asian Americans as more likely to align with Whites than with other minorities. For policies seen as impacting American identity (e.g., immigration), people expected Asian–Hispanic coalitions and that Black Americans would align with Whites more than other minorities. Manipulating a novel group’s alleged status and cultural assimilation influenced coalitional expectations, providing evidence of causality. These expectations appear to better reflect stereotypes than groups’ actual average policy attitudes and voting behavior. Yet these beliefs may have implications for a diversifying electorate as White Americans strategically amplified the political voice of a racial group expected to agree with their personal preferences on stereotyped policies.

Stereotypes about Political Attitudes and Coalitions among U.S. Racial Groups: Implications for Strategic Political Decision-making

What are people’s expectations of interracial political coalitions? This research reveals expectations of flexible interracial coalitions stemming from how policies and racial groups are viewed in terms of perceived status and foreignness. For policies seen as changing societal status (e.g., welfare), people expected Black-Hispanic political coalitions and viewed Asian Americans as more likely to align with Whites than with other minorities. For policies seen as relating to American identity (e.g., immigration), people expected Asian-Hispanic coalitions and that Black Americans would align with Whites more than other minorities. Manipulating a novel group’s alleged status and cultural assimilation influenced coalitional expectations, providing evidence of causality. These expectations appear to better reflect stereotypes than groups’ actual average policy attitudes and voting behavior. Yet these beliefs may have implications for a diversifying electorate, as Whites strategically enhanced the political voice of a racial group expected to agree with their personal preferences on stereotyped policies.

‘Somehow Getting Their Own Back on Hitler’: British Antifascism and the Holocaust, 1960–1967

This article considers the extent to which the Holocaust galvanized British antifascism in the 1960s. It explores whether the genocide surfaced in Jewish antifascists’ motivations and rhetoric but goes beyond this to assess the Holocaust’s political capital in wider antifascism and anti-racism. The article considers whether political coalitions were negotiated around Holocaust memory, for example, by analysing whether Jewish antifascism intersected with the black and Asian communities of Smethwick and Southall respectively who were targeted by the far right in 1964. Using archival materials and newly-collected oral histories, the article surveys organisations including the Jewish Board of Deputies, the 62 Group, Yellow Star Movement and Searchlight newspaper. It will argue that the Holocaust played a more important role in 1960s’antifascism than has been recognised. Jewish groups fragmented around the lessons of the genocide for their antifascism. The Holocaust influenced race relations legislation and became a metonym for extreme racist violence.

After the Backlash: Populism and the Politics and Ethics of Migration

In the U.S., and elsewhere, populism has been democracy’s way of shaking elites up. We can view populism in part as a revolt of the losers, or perceived losers, of globalization. Yet elites have often paid too little heed to the domestic distributive impact of high immigration and globalized trade. Immigration and globalization are also spurring forms of nativism and demagoguery that threaten both democratic deliberation and undermine progressive political coalitions. The challenge now is to find the most reasonable – or least unreasonable – responses to the new politics of resentment: ways that recognize that egalitarian liberalism and social democracy are national projects and preserve progressive political coalitions, while also acknowledging our interconnections, duties, and moral obligations to those beyond our borders.

Populism, Cosmopolitanism, or Democratic Realism?

This article argues that populism, cosmopolitanism, and calls for global justice should be understood not as theoretical positions but as appeals to different segments of democratic electorates with the aim of assembling winning political coalitions. This view is called democratic realism: it considers political competition in democracies from a perspective that is realist in the sense that it focuses not first on the content of competing political claims but on the relationships among different components of the coalitions they work to mobilise in the pursuit of power. It is argued that Laclau’s populist theory offers a sort of realist critique of other populists, but that his view neglects the crucial dynamics of political coalition-building. When the relation of populism to global justice is rethought from this democratic realist angle, one can better understand the sorts of challenges each faces, and also where and how they come into conflict.