By Dara Z. Strolovitch

The usa boasts rankings of organisations that supply an important illustration for teams which are marginalized in nationwide politics, from girls to racial minorities to the negative. the following, within the first systematic research of those agencies, Dara Z. Strolovitch explores the demanding situations and possibilities they face within the new millennium, as waning felony discrimination coincides with expanding political and financial inequalities within the populations they symbolize. Drawing on wealthy new information from a survey of 286 companies and interviews with 40 officers, Strolovitch unearths that groups too frequently prioritize the pursuits in their such a lot advantaged contributors: male instead of girl racial minorities, for instance, or prosperous instead of bad ladies. yet Strolovitch additionally reveals that many businesses attempt to treatment this inequity, and he or she concludes by means of distilling their top practices right into a set of ideas that she calls affirmative advocacy—a kind of illustration that goals to beat the entrenched yet usually refined biases opposed to humans on the intersection of multiple marginalized staff. Intelligently combining political thought with subtle empirical tools, Affirmative Advocacy might be required interpreting for college students and students of yank politics.

Show description

Read Online or Download Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics PDF

Similar symmetry and group books

Groups of Diffeomorphisms: In Honor of Shigeyuki Morita on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday

This quantity comprises chosen paper on contemporary developments and ends up in the learn of assorted teams of diffeomorphisms, together with mapping category teams, from the perspective of algebraic and differential topology, in addition to dynamical ones concerning foliations and symplectic or touch diffeomorphisms.

Additional info for Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics

Sample text

In addition to persistent concerns about the biases and inequalities in the broader pressure group system (Danielian and Page 1994; Schlozman 1984; Schlozman and Burch forthcoming), the growth in the number of organizations representing marginalized groups has brought with it new concerns about the biases within organizations claiming to speak on behalf of marginalized populations. There is broad (though by no means unanimous) agreement that the increase in the number of organizations speaking for marginalized groups has helped these populations in significant ways.

19 I compiled a database of organizations using information from published directories of organizations, media sources, and movement publications. These sources also were used to collect preliminary data about the groups in order to test for nonresponse and other types of bias in the resulting data. The questions in the SNESJO focused on organizations’ activities on public policy issues of the 1990s that have had significant implications for rights and resources for marginalized groups such as women, racial minorities, immigrants, LGBT people, and low-income people.

Because governance structures and decision-making processes often mean that organizations reflect the attributes of their staffs and members (Berry 1977), even well-intentioned organization leaders might not hear from members of disadvantaged subgroups within their constituencies, further depressing the chances that these organizations will address issues that concern them (Barakso 2004; Mansbridge 1983; Michels 1911). strategic concerns Although not primarily concerned with representation for disadvantaged subgroups, evidence from other areas of scholarship about interest groups and social movements suggests a set of strategic reasons to be concerned that organizations will not be active when it comes to issues affecting disadvantaged subgroups.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.60 of 5 – based on 16 votes