White Americans’ Attitudes Toward Reparations for Slavery: Definitions and Determinants

IF 2.8 2区 社会学 Q1 ETHNIC STUDIES
Reichelmann, Ashley V., Hunt, Matthew O.
{"title":"White Americans’ Attitudes Toward Reparations for Slavery: Definitions and Determinants","authors":"Reichelmann, Ashley V., Hunt, Matthew O.","doi":"10.1007/s12552-021-09348-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The issue of reparations to the descendants of persons enslaved in the United States is receiving increasing attention in both the public sphere (e.g., 2020 Presidential campaigns) and in academic circles. However, the term “reparations” often goes undefined in such discussions, despite the fact that different types of government action (e.g., an apology versus financial payments) are associated with varying levels of public opposition (or support). We also know little about how attitudes toward reparations explicitly targeting the consequences of slavery differ from attitudes toward more generic race-targeted policies. Drawing on data from an online survey of white Americans conducted in 2016, we examine how levels of opposition to a range of different race-targeted government actions varies by (1) the type and aims of the intervention, and (2) whites’ social locations and political orientations. Regarding policy type, whites are least opposed to selected symbolic reparations (e.g., a memorial to enslaved persons) and to policies designed to ensure “fair treatment” of black Americans in the workplace. Whites are most opposed to reparations in the form of direct financial payments to black Americans and to policies involving “preferential treatment” of blacks in the workplace. In addition, whites who are older, more conservative, and who view race relations as unimportant are most opposed to the reparations and other race-based policies we examine. We conclude with suggestions for future work on this timely topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":46715,"journal":{"name":"Race and Social Problems","volume":"22 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Race and Social Problems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-021-09348-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The issue of reparations to the descendants of persons enslaved in the United States is receiving increasing attention in both the public sphere (e.g., 2020 Presidential campaigns) and in academic circles. However, the term “reparations” often goes undefined in such discussions, despite the fact that different types of government action (e.g., an apology versus financial payments) are associated with varying levels of public opposition (or support). We also know little about how attitudes toward reparations explicitly targeting the consequences of slavery differ from attitudes toward more generic race-targeted policies. Drawing on data from an online survey of white Americans conducted in 2016, we examine how levels of opposition to a range of different race-targeted government actions varies by (1) the type and aims of the intervention, and (2) whites’ social locations and political orientations. Regarding policy type, whites are least opposed to selected symbolic reparations (e.g., a memorial to enslaved persons) and to policies designed to ensure “fair treatment” of black Americans in the workplace. Whites are most opposed to reparations in the form of direct financial payments to black Americans and to policies involving “preferential treatment” of blacks in the workplace. In addition, whites who are older, more conservative, and who view race relations as unimportant are most opposed to the reparations and other race-based policies we examine. We conclude with suggestions for future work on this timely topic.

美国白人对奴隶制赔偿的态度:定义与决定因素
在公共领域(例如,2020年总统竞选)和学术界,对美国被奴役者后代的赔偿问题越来越受到关注。然而,尽管不同类型的政府行为(例如,道歉与经济支付)与不同程度的公众反对(或支持)有关,但在此类讨论中,“赔偿”一词往往没有定义。我们也不太清楚,对明确针对奴隶制后果的赔偿的态度与对更普遍的针对种族的政策的态度有何不同。根据2016年对美国白人进行的一项在线调查的数据,我们研究了针对一系列不同种族的政府行动的反对程度如何因(1)干预的类型和目标以及(2)白人的社会位置和政治取向而变化。就政策类型而言,白人最不反对选定的象征性赔偿(例如,对被奴役者的纪念碑)和旨在确保美国黑人在工作场所“公平待遇”的政策。白人最反对以直接支付给黑人的形式进行赔偿,也最反对在工作场所对黑人实行“优惠待遇”的政策。此外,年龄较大、较为保守、认为种族关系不重要的白人最反对赔款和我们研究的其他基于种族的政策。最后,我们对这一及时主题的未来工作提出建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
6.50%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Race and Social Problems (RASP) provides a multidisciplinary forum for the publication of articles and discussion of issues germane to race and its enduring relationship to socioeconomic, psychological, political, and cultural problems. The journal publishes original empirical studies, reviews of past research, theoretical studies, and invited essays that advance the understanding of the complexities of race and its relationship to social problems.  Submissions from the fields of social work, anthropology, communications, criminology, economics, history, law, political science, psychology, public health, and sociology are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信