Some Theoretical Insights for Thinking About LGBTQ Political Representation

Author(s):  
Manon Tremblay
2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (01) ◽  
pp. 53-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Rehfeld

Every ten years, the United States “constructs” itself politically. On a decennial basis, U.S. Congressional districts are quite literally drawn, physically constructing political representation in the House of Representatives on the basis of where one lives. Why does the United States do it this way? What justifies domicile as the sole criteria of constituency construction? These are the questions raised in this article. Contrary to many contemporary understandings of representation at the founding, I argue that there were no principled reasons for using domicile as the method of organizing for political representation. Even in 1787, the Congressional district was expected to be far too large to map onto existing communities of interest. Instead, territory should be understood as forming a habit of mind for the founders, even while it was necessary to achieve other democratic aims of representative government.


Author(s):  
Dale Hudson

This chapter explores whiteness’s purported expansion through multiculturalism after Civil Rights and the Immigration Act of 1965. By yoking the inclusivity of multiculturalism and exclusivity of whiteness, multicultural whiteness sustains white privilege without acknowledging it, granting conditional or provisional inclusion to select nonwhite groups. It becomes a performative category (“white-identified-ness”) questioned in films like Blacula (1972), Ganja and Hess (1973), Martin (1976), Fright Night (1985), The Lost Boys (1987), Near Dark (1987), Interview with the Vampire (1994), and The Addiction (1995). Classical Hollywood whiteness is transformed by greater emphasis on so-called national values—individualism, consumerism, patriotism, secularism, and willful amnesia—that sustain foundational myths of a nation of immigrants, land of opportunity, and beacon of democracy. Within the proliferation of representations of a multicultural United States, films question limitations on political representation for anyone not identifying—or being identified—with whiteness, including so-called white trash.


Author(s):  
Adam Seth Levine

Americans today face no shortage of threats to their financial well-being, such as job and retirement insecurity, health care costs, and spiraling college tuition. While one might expect that these concerns would motivate people to become more politically engaged on the issues, this often doesn't happen, and the resulting inaction carries consequences for political debates and public policy. Moving beyond previously studied barriers to political organization, this book sheds light on the public's inaction over economic insecurities by showing that the rhetoric surrounding these issues is actually self-undermining. By their nature, the very arguments intended to mobilize individuals—asking them to devote money or time to politics—remind citizens of their economic fears and personal constraints, leading to undermobilization and nonparticipation. The book explains why the set of people who become politically active on financial insecurity issues is therefore quite narrow. When money is needed, only those who care about the issues but are not personally affected become involved. When time is needed, participation is limited to those not personally affected or those who are personally affected but outside of the labor force with time to spare. The latter explains why it is relatively easy to mobilize retirees on topics that reflect personal financial concerns, such as Social Security and Medicare. In general, however, when political representation requires a large group to make their case, economic insecurity threats are uniquely disadvantaged. Scrutinizing the foundations of political behavior, the book offers a new perspective on collective participation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 58 ◽  
pp. 161-168
Author(s):  
Alexander D. Gronsky

The article examines the relationship between Western Russianism (Zapadnorusizm) and Byelorussian nationalism. Byelorussian nationalism is much younger than Western Russianism, finally shaping only in the end of the 19th century. Before 1917 revolution Byelorussian nationalism could not compete with Western Russianism. The national policy of the Bolsheviks contributed to the decline of Western Russianism and helped Byelorussian nationalism to gain stronger positions. However, Byelorussian nationalists actively cooperated with the occupation authorities during the Great Patriotic war. That caused distinctly negative attitude of Byelorussians towards the movement and collaborators. Currently, Byelorussian nationalism is supported both by the opposition and by the government. Western Russianism has no political representation, but is supported by the majority of Byelorussian population.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document