Historical Violence and Public Attitudes towards Justice: Evidence from the United States

Jamil S Scott, Daniel Solomon, Kelebogile Zvobgo
{"title":"Historical Violence and Public Attitudes towards Justice: Evidence from the United States","authors":"Jamil S Scott, Daniel Solomon, Kelebogile Zvobgo","doi":"10.1093/ijtj/ijad034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article brings transitional justice scholarship to bear on the case of racial violence in the United States. We investigate how knowledge of racial terror lynchings shapes Black Americans’ support for symbolic and material transitional justice measures. We administer a survey with an embedded experiment to Black residents in Maryland, a US transitional justice pioneer. We provide select respondents with information about historical lynching violence and find that they are more likely to support symbolic transitional justice (e.g., apologies and memorial markers) than individuals presented with information on contemporary police killings. Regarding material transitional justice (e.g., monetary reparations and community projects), we find no significant differences between groups. Linked fate excepted, we do not find that key aspects of Black identity and the Black American experience (i.e., historical knowledge, police contact, church involvement and Black nationalist beliefs) moderate transitional justice attitudes. Our work indicates the promise and limits of information campaigns to mobilize support for transitional justice.","PeriodicalId":513490,"journal":{"name":"The International Journal of Transitional Justice","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International Journal of Transitional Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijtj/ijad034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article brings transitional justice scholarship to bear on the case of racial violence in the United States. We investigate how knowledge of racial terror lynchings shapes Black Americans’ support for symbolic and material transitional justice measures. We administer a survey with an embedded experiment to Black residents in Maryland, a US transitional justice pioneer. We provide select respondents with information about historical lynching violence and find that they are more likely to support symbolic transitional justice (e.g., apologies and memorial markers) than individuals presented with information on contemporary police killings. Regarding material transitional justice (e.g., monetary reparations and community projects), we find no significant differences between groups. Linked fate excepted, we do not find that key aspects of Black identity and the Black American experience (i.e., historical knowledge, police contact, church involvement and Black nationalist beliefs) moderate transitional justice attitudes. Our work indicates the promise and limits of information campaigns to mobilize support for transitional justice.
历史暴力与公众对司法的态度:来自美国的证据
本文将过渡时期司法学术研究引入美国种族暴力案件。我们调查了对种族恐怖私刑的了解如何影响美国黑人对象征性和实质性过渡时期司法措施的支持。我们对美国过渡时期司法先驱马里兰州的黑人居民进行了一项带有嵌入式实验的调查。我们向部分受访者提供了有关历史上私刑暴力的信息,结果发现,与获得当代警察杀人信息的人相比,他们更倾向于支持象征性过渡司法(如道歉和纪念碑)。关于物质性过渡时期司法(如金钱赔偿和社区项目),我们发现不同群体之间没有显著差异。除了联系的命运之外,我们没有发现黑人身份和美国黑人经历的关键方面(即历史知识、与警察的接触、教会参与和黑人民族主义信仰)对过渡时期司法态度有调节作用。我们的研究表明,动员支持过渡时期司法的宣传活动既有前景,也有局限。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信