The United States is once again experiencing a major influx of immigrants. Questions about who should be admitted and what benefits should be afforded to new members of the polity are among the most divisive and controversial contemporary political issues. Using an impressive array of evidence from national surveys, The Politics of Belonging illuminates patterns of public opinion on immigration and explains why Americans hold the attitudes they do. Rather than simply characterizing Americans as either nativist or nonnativist, this book argues that controversies over immigration policy are best understood as questions of political membership and belonging to the nation. The relationships between citizenship, race, and immigration drive the politics of belonging in the United States and represent a dynamic central to understanding patterns of contemporary public opinion on immigration policy. Beginning with a historical analysis, the book documents why this is the case by tracing the development of immigration law and the formation of the American racial hierarchy. Then, through a comparative analysis of public opinion among white, black, Latino, and Asian Americans, it identifies and tests the critical moderating role of racial categorization and group identity on variation in public opinion on immigration.

Foreign migration to the United States is dramatically altering the demographic profile of the American electorate. Nearly a third of all Americans are of non-white and non-European descent. Latinos and Hispanics have recently eclipsed African Americans as the largest minority group in the United States. Between 1990 and 2000, Asians doubled the size of their population to more than 4 percent of Americans. Though immigration has altered the racial and ethnic composition of every state in the nation, surprisingly little is known about the consequences of this new heterogeneity for American politics. This book explores the impact and political consequences of immigration. After considering the organizations that mobilize new citizens to politics, the authors examine the political psychology of group consciousness for political mobilization. Finally, they consider the emerging patterns and choices of new voters.

Foreign migration to the United State is dramatically altering the demographic profile of the American electorate. Nearly a third of all Americans are of non-white and non-European descent. Latinos and Hispanics have recently eclipsed African Americans as the largest minority group in the United States. Between 1990 and 2000, Asians doubled the size of their population to more than 4 percent of Americans. Though immigration has altered the racial and ethnic composition of every state in the nation, surprisingly little is known about the consequences of this new heterogeneity for American politics. This book explores the impact and political consequences of immigration. After considering the organizations that mobilize new citizens to politics, the authors examine the political psychology of group consciousness for political mobilization. Finally, they consider the emerging patterns and choices of new voters.

Sound democratic decisions rely on a citizenry with at least a partial mastery of the rules and workings of democratic government. American high schools, where students learn the basics of citizenship, thus ought to play a critical role in the success of democracy. Yet studies examining the impact of high school government and civics courses on political knowledge over the past quarter-century have generally shown that these courses have little or no effect. In this important book, Richard G. Niemi and Jane Junn take a fresh look at what America's high school seniors know about government and politics and how they learn it. The authors argue convincingly that secondary school civics courses do indeed enhance students' civic knowledge. This book is based on the most extensive assessment to date of civic knowledge among American youth-the 1988 National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) Civics Assessment. The authors develop and test a theoretical model to explain the cognitive process by which students learn about politics and they conclude by suggesting specific changes in the style and emphasis of civics teaching.

Asian American women scholars experience shockingly low rates of tenure and promotion because of the particular ways they are marginalized by the intersectionalities of race and gender in academia. Although Asian American studies critics have long since debunked the model minority myth that constructs Asian Americans as the ideal academic subject, university administrators still treat Asian American women in academia as though they will simply show up and shut up. Consequently, because silent complicity is expected, power holders will punish and oppress Asian American women severely when they question or critique the system. However, change is in the air. Fight the Tower is a continuation of the Fight the Tower movement, which supports women standing up for their rights to claim their earned place in academia and to work for positive change for all within academic institutions. The essays provide powerful portraits, reflections, and analyses of a population often rendered invisible by the lies that sustain intersectional injustices in order to operate an oppressive system.