The work by Bonilla-Silva is one of the most provocative and controversial perspectives on race to have come out in the 21st century. On this board…
Tell us a bit about what you think about this very important work. Begin by providing Bonilla-Silva’s definition of color-blind racism from lecture slides. (2 points)
Then, relate his ideas to the concepts of equality of condition, equality of opportunity, and equality of outcome from Chapter 7 in YMAY. Which of these does
Bonilla-Silva seem to be most concerned about and why? (2 points)
Finally, have you ever heard anyone explain racial matters using any of the frames from Bonilla-Silva? (1 point)
Sample Solution
Bonilla-Silva’s definition of color-blind racism is that it is “a form of contemporary racial domination which operates under the guise of non-racism by denying the continuing significance of race and ignoring structural racist mechanisms”. He believes that this type of racism reinforces existing racial hierarchies and maintains a system of dominance over people of color through its focus on individual attributes rather than structural problems.
Sample Solution
Bonilla-Silva’s definition of color-blind racism is that it is “a form of contemporary racial domination which operates under the guise of non-racism by denying the continuing significance of race and ignoring structural racist mechanisms”. He believes that this type of racism reinforces existing racial hierarchies and maintains a system of dominance over people of color through its focus on individual attributes rather than structural problems.
On the other side of the aisle, there are a handful of disadvantages associated with the relationship of open-list PR. In traditional PR, party leaders would have the power to allocate seats to their parties candidates as they deem appropriate, taking away political influence from citizens. Candidates in both systems have incentives to garner political party support as it allocates more party power within the upper and lower chambers of the legislature. However, since candidates have more personal power in making a name for themselves without necessarily following party principles, this can lead to a weakening of political parties. Lack of faith in political parties leads to what is known as floor crossing, political figures would change party affiliation, “in an attempt to jockey for the best positions for future elections,” (Dickovick/Eastwood, 409). Only causing faith in open-list PR to further disintegrate, political leaders would offer bribes to legislators to maintain a majority vote on specific pieces of legislation. Also, due to legislators loyalty to their federal states, they do not always have Brazil’s interests in mind when enacting legislation, as only the members of their respective state ensure re-election. What’s more, Brazil contains a multi-party, fragmented party, system where “voters may face as many as one thousand candidates in a single district… [caused by] high-magnitude legislative districts, low costs for candidates’ entry, and high thresholds for the number of candidates per party list,” (Aguilar/Barone/Cunow/Desposato, 181). Withal, the disadvantages of open-list PR in Brazil have led citizens to lose trust in their government, such as the impeachment of Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff in August 2016.
Altogether, the interesting question arises of how an open-list PR system would affect a less fragmented, strong party alliance system in a democracy such as the United States. The transition from a strict first-past-the-post system, which has been the building blocks for American society for 250 years, would certainly cause an uproar from conservatives and libertarians alike. While it would have little to no effect on the Senate retaining two seats per state, the institution of voting proportionment would likely result in smaller parties becoming more prevalent in the House of Representatives. Potential effects of such an institutional
