19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Racism and Antiracism in the Liberal International Order

      International Organization
      Cambridge University Press (CUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Formal racial equality is a key aspect of the current Liberal International Order (LIO). It is subject to two main challenges: resurgent racial nationalism and substantive racial inequality. Combining work in International Relations with interdisciplinary studies on race, I submit that these challenges are the latest iteration of struggles between two transnational coalitions over the LIO's central racial provisions, which I call racial diversity regimes (RDRs). The traditional coalition has historically favored RDRs based on racial inequality and racial nationalism. The transformative coalition has favored RDRs based on racial equality and nonracial nationalism. I illustrate the argument by tracing the development of the liberal order's RDR as a function of intercoalitional struggles from one based on racial nationalism and inequality in 1919 to the current regime based on nonracial nationalism and limited equality. Today, racial nationalists belong to the traditional coalition and critics of racial inequality are part of the transformative coalition. The stakes of their struggles are high because they will determine whether we will live in a more racist or a more antiracist world. This article articulates a comprehensive framework that places race at the heart of the liberal order, offers the novel concept of “embedded racism” to capture how sovereignty shields domestic racism from foreign interference, and proposes an agenda for mainstream International Relations that takes race seriously.

          Related collections

          Most cited references60

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent "Yes"

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote

            Diana Mutz (2018)
            Significance Support for Donald J. Trump in the 2016 election was widely attributed to citizens who were “left behind” economically. These claims were based on the strong cross-sectional relationship between Trump support and lacking a college education. Using a representative panel from 2012 to 2016, I find that change in financial wellbeing had little impact on candidate preference. Instead, changing preferences were related to changes in the party’s positions on issues related to American global dominance and the rise of a majority–minority America: issues that threaten white Americans’ sense of dominant group status. Results highlight the importance of looking beyond theories emphasizing changes in issue salience to better understand the meaning of election outcomes when public preferences and candidates’ positions are changing.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                International Organization
                Int Org
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                0020-8183
                1531-5088
                2021
                December 29 2020
                2021
                : 75
                : 2
                : 440-463
                Article
                10.1017/S0020818320000521
                be2e0e90-4ba4-472f-b9e3-27f067ffc433
                © 2021

                https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article