问题中的白人:跨国背景下的分类学剖析》(Whiteness in Question: the Anatomy of a Taxonomy Across Transnational Contexts)。

IF 1 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
DIALECTICAL ANTHROPOLOGY Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-16 DOI:10.1007/s10624-022-09665-6
Raluca Bejan
{"title":"问题中的白人:跨国背景下的分类学剖析》(Whiteness in Question: the Anatomy of a Taxonomy Across Transnational Contexts)。","authors":"Raluca Bejan","doi":"10.1007/s10624-022-09665-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The idea of whiteness has been used in the Anglo-American, middle-class, liberal settings to denote an essential group appurtenance on phenotypical and cultural terms and to code such appurtenance as a universal marker of privilege that cuts across any other differentiating axes that allocate societal advantages and disadvantages. The assumption that racialized skin colour and low social status are inferiorizing attributes of racialization, while white skin colour and high social class are privileged attributes of whiteness, has constructed the idea of whiteness as one that encompasses and supersedes the idea of class. Immigrants to Anglo-American multicultural societies have always been relegated to the margins of their host societies, and their economic exclusion, in particular, has been theorized as resulting from their racialization. This paper, however, compares and contrasts the marginalization of two migrant populations-namely, high-skilled immigrants to Canada, and Eastern European low-skilled immigrants to the UK-to problematize the assumption that whiteness has an essential sameness that universally cuts across other stratifying axes in society, and to show that an essentialist understanding of whiteness disregards class-based explanations for the economic exclusion of migrants, explanations which are often bound with the global circulation of capital and the dominant economic position of the rich nations from the Global North.</p>","PeriodicalId":45970,"journal":{"name":"DIALECTICAL ANTHROPOLOGY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9380683/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Whiteness in Question: the Anatomy of a Taxonomy Across Transnational Contexts.\",\"authors\":\"Raluca Bejan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10624-022-09665-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The idea of whiteness has been used in the Anglo-American, middle-class, liberal settings to denote an essential group appurtenance on phenotypical and cultural terms and to code such appurtenance as a universal marker of privilege that cuts across any other differentiating axes that allocate societal advantages and disadvantages. The assumption that racialized skin colour and low social status are inferiorizing attributes of racialization, while white skin colour and high social class are privileged attributes of whiteness, has constructed the idea of whiteness as one that encompasses and supersedes the idea of class. Immigrants to Anglo-American multicultural societies have always been relegated to the margins of their host societies, and their economic exclusion, in particular, has been theorized as resulting from their racialization. This paper, however, compares and contrasts the marginalization of two migrant populations-namely, high-skilled immigrants to Canada, and Eastern European low-skilled immigrants to the UK-to problematize the assumption that whiteness has an essential sameness that universally cuts across other stratifying axes in society, and to show that an essentialist understanding of whiteness disregards class-based explanations for the economic exclusion of migrants, explanations which are often bound with the global circulation of capital and the dominant economic position of the rich nations from the Global North.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45970,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DIALECTICAL ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9380683/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DIALECTICAL ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-022-09665-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/8/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DIALECTICAL ANTHROPOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-022-09665-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在英美中产阶级的自由主义环境中,白人的概念被用来指代表型和文化方面的基本群体特征,并将这种特征编码为特权的普遍标志,它跨越了分配社会优势和劣势的任何其他区分轴线。种族化的肤色和社会地位低下是种族化的劣等属性,而白人的肤色和社会地位高则是白人的特权属性,这一假设构建了白人的概念,使其涵盖并取代了阶级的概念。英美多元文化社会中的移民一直被排斥在东道国社会的边缘,尤其是他们在经济上受到的排斥被认为是其种族化的结果。然而,本文对比了两个移民群体--即加拿大的高技术移民和英国的东欧低技术移民--的边缘化情况,以质疑 "白人具有普遍跨越社会其他阶层轴心的本质同一性 "这一假设,并说明对白人的本质主义理解忽视了对移民经济排斥的基于阶级的解释,而这种解释往往与资本的全球流通和全球北方富国的主导经济地位相联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Whiteness in Question: the Anatomy of a Taxonomy Across Transnational Contexts.

The idea of whiteness has been used in the Anglo-American, middle-class, liberal settings to denote an essential group appurtenance on phenotypical and cultural terms and to code such appurtenance as a universal marker of privilege that cuts across any other differentiating axes that allocate societal advantages and disadvantages. The assumption that racialized skin colour and low social status are inferiorizing attributes of racialization, while white skin colour and high social class are privileged attributes of whiteness, has constructed the idea of whiteness as one that encompasses and supersedes the idea of class. Immigrants to Anglo-American multicultural societies have always been relegated to the margins of their host societies, and their economic exclusion, in particular, has been theorized as resulting from their racialization. This paper, however, compares and contrasts the marginalization of two migrant populations-namely, high-skilled immigrants to Canada, and Eastern European low-skilled immigrants to the UK-to problematize the assumption that whiteness has an essential sameness that universally cuts across other stratifying axes in society, and to show that an essentialist understanding of whiteness disregards class-based explanations for the economic exclusion of migrants, explanations which are often bound with the global circulation of capital and the dominant economic position of the rich nations from the Global North.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
DIALECTICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
DIALECTICAL ANTHROPOLOGY ANTHROPOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Dialectical Anthropology is an international journal that seeks to invigorate discussion among left intellectuals by publishing peer-reviewed articles, editorials, letters, reports from the field, political exchanges, and book reviews. The journal aims to foster open debate through criticism, research and commentary from across the social sciences and humanities. It provides a forum for work with a pronounced dialectical approach to social theory and political practice for scholars, public intellectuals, and activists who are interested in Marxism and political-economy. The journal also welcomes submissions from those who wish to be in dialogue or debate with these traditions. Since 1975, Dialectical Anthropology has been dedicated to working towards the transformation of class society through internationalizing conversations that focus on crises of capitalism and the means for social change. The format of Dialectical Anthropology is shaped by these goals. Submissions accepted for peer review are sent to scholars, public intellectuals and activists whose comments are often published along with replies by the manuscript author to engender a dialogic exchange. The " Forum" is also dedicated to reciprocal engagement as scholars, public intellectuals and activists are invited to respond to forum statements meant to provoke debate and discussion. These exchanges provide space for dialectical engagement from a broad range of perspectives about significant issues of our time, Finally, while the book review section follows the traditional 1000 word format, Dialectical Anthropology encourages the submission of substantial essays that comparatively analyze multiple books, films, novels and other texts to contextualize them within contemporary politics, economics, society and culture. Dialectical Anthropology invites contributions from authors committed to international political engagement across disciplinary divides, communities of practice, and oppositional political traditions by encouraging contributions from authors who seek to combine theories and practices of social change. The journal is committed to reaching beyond an Anglophone readership and encourages submissions, dialogue and active participation in languages other than English. The journal will publish these submissions to the extent that its resources and capabilities allow. Manuscripts should be submitted electronically via the Springer Website at http://dial.edmgr.com and should include abstract, five keywords, and three suggested reviewers.
×
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