Search results

In recent decades, it has become clear that the major economic, political, and social problems in the world require contemporary development research to examine intersections of race and class in the global economy. Theorists in the Black Radical Tradition (BRT) were the first to develop and advance a powerful research agenda that integrated race–class analyses of capitalist development. However, over time, progressive waves of research streams in development studies have successively stripped these concepts from their analyses. Post-1950s, class analyses of development overlapped with some important features of the BRT, but removed race. Post-1990s, ethnicity-based analyses of development excised both race and class. In this chapter, I discuss what we learn about capitalist development using the integrated race–class analyses of the BRT, and how jettisoning these concepts weakens our understanding of the political economy of development. To remedy our current knowledge gaps, I call for applying insights of the BRT to our analyses of the development trajectories of nations.

This chapter examines the connections between race and class divisions and examines how they shape racial inequities in the distribution of resources, power and privilege. Throughout history, racial identity has been a key factor in determining a person's position in modern capitalist societies. As such, issues of race and class have preoccupied sociologists and other scholars with diverse ideological orientations. This is highlighted in debates around the nexus of race and class in the production of racial structures, laws and institutions that legitimate and perpetuate the normalisation and centrality of whiteness. This chapter summarises some of the historical and ongoing debates, providing a synthesis of how race and class divisions continue to shape contemporary intergroup relations and social policy. It delves into racial capitalism and how race intersects with other social identities to determine socio-economic hierarchy in many western countries.

The monograph argues that American racism has two colours (white and black), not one; and that each racism dresses itself not in one clothing, but in four: (1) “Minimal” negative, when one race considers another race inferior to itself in degree, but not in nature; (2) “Maximal” negative, when one race regards another as inherently inferior; (3) “Minimal” positive, when one race elevates another race to a superior status in degree, but not in nature; and (4) “Maximal” positive, when one race believes that the other race is genetically superior. The monograph maintains that the needs of capitalism created black slavery; that black slavery produced white racism as a justification for black slavery; and that black racism is a backlash of white racism. The monograph concludes that the abolition of black slavery and the civil rights movement destroyed the social and political ground for white and black racism, while the modern development of capitalism is demolishing their economic and intellectual ground.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of race and social class on wage differentials between Black and White employees.

A survey with four possible conditions (white/black target who was lower/middle class) was used in the study to examine the interaction between race and social class on compensation decisions.

The paper finds that there was a significant interaction between race and social class when predicting the percentage of pay increase given to employees. Specifically, there was a significant negative correlation between perceptions of social class and percentage of increase when the target was Black, but there was no such correlation when the target was White.

The sample was 95.6 percent White and did not consist of managerial employees in actual compensation decisions; however, it shows evidence that people are affected by their perceptions of social class and race when making such decisions.

Policy makers should not forget that perceived social class might interact with race to influence discriminatory decisions in workplaces. This research suggests that Black employees who are perceived to be middle class are discriminated against more than those who are perceived to be lower class. Businesses need to be aware of unintentional biases that may be plaguing their managers and train them to avoid such biases.

This paper contributes new insight into the literature on the wage gap between Black and White employees by showing the interaction between race and perceived social class when predicting pay increases.

When we take the lens of race, ethnicity, gender, and class to the collected academic work on women business owners, what does it reveal? What do we really know? Are there differing definitions of success across segments of the women businessowner demographics? Do the challenges faced by African American women entrepreneurs differ from those confronting white female entrepreneurs? Do immigrant female women businessowners face more significant institutional barriers than their counterparts who have been U.S. citizens for at least two generations? Are there similar reasons for starting their businesses?

Scholars and activists working both within and outside the massive health-related machinery of government and the private sector and within and outside communities of color address the same fundamental questions: Why do health disparities exist? Why have they persisted over such a long time? What can be done to significantly reduce or eliminate them?

Within the past twenty years, the transition to adulthood has become a burgeoning area of research. The status attainment process, an early model for transition to adulthood research, has given way to research focusing on singular outcomes such as completing formal education, leaving home, obtaining employment, forming a union through marriage or cohabitation, and becoming a parent. As young adults continue to delay family formation, some argue that one’s first experience of heterosexual intercourse is also a symbol of adult status (Meier, 2001). Although most scholars agree that these outcomes along with chronological age symbolize being an adult, relatively few empirical studies examine them as inter-dependent transitions. A recent comparison of these indicators by gender, race, and social class is also needed.

We discuss adoption as a diverse family structure in America. Adoption has existed in some form throughout the history with the portrayal varying by historical epoch. Adoption has been both disparaged and idealized to perpetuate the interest of elite players. This chapter discusses adoption in terms of the changing demographic which 21st century families face. In this manuscript, we first discuss the history of adoption in the United States including its impact as social control of premarital sex. Then the three players in the adoption triad are discussed and analyzed. Finally, we highlight how demographics of race, class, gender, and sexuality impact the adoption experience by 21st century families. Specifically, we explore the recent National Survey of Adoptive Parents from the United States Center for Disease Control and look at the modern adoption experience

The purpose of this article is to highlight inequalities created and sustained through gendered, raced, and classed organizational processes and practices using Joan Acker's work as a lens for perceiving the mechanisms that support such practices. It aims to use home health aide work as an example of how US labor laws and court decisions create and support disadvantages for workers who are largely economically‐disadvantaged and often women of color.

The article considers processes of inequality based on demographic characteristics and the resulting stereotyping, discrimination, and gender, race, and class inequalities.

The article finds that multiple intersecting processes of inequality exist in organizations, manifested in practices of stereotyping and discrimination for some job applicants and workers and advantageous positioning for certain others.

Future research should more specifically consider the effects of multiple processes of inequality on individuals' organizational experiences and the intersections of gender, race, and class (as well as other markers such as ethnicity, sexual orientation, and disability) in organizational practices.

Managers and human resources practitioners should be aware of the effects of processes related to the intersectionality of gender, race, and class and work to eliminate resulting stereotyping and other discriminatory organizational practices linked to these processes in their organizations.

Identification of processes of inequality resulting in stereotyping and discrimination may help reduce them, thus increasing opportunities for work, wages, and benefits, and reducing poverty for members of the most devalued groups.

This research contributes to the literature on the intersecting nature of gender, race, and class‐based inequalities and on human resources decision making in organizations.