Editor's Note

1999 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. i-iii
Author(s):  
Larry J. Estrada

This issue of the journal takes a comparative look at the intersection of schooling, language, identity, and public policy as they impact ethnic minority population groups both domestically and internationally. In the first article Amara Holstein examines the social and political fallout of the recent anti-bilingual education initiative in California. Claimed by many as being anti-immigrant and anti-Hispanic, Holstein contends that this initiative falls within a broad, historical lexicon of nativist sentiment and backlash intended to disempower Hispanics and other linguistic minorities in the United States. Her analysis also focuses on the personal voices of California Hispanics and their ambivalency towards this particular initiative.

2008 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-55
Author(s):  
Cathy Black

Since at least the fourteenth century the Slavic ethnic minority population known as Polish Lemkos has claimed the northern slopes of the Carpathian Mountains as its homeland. Lemkos are part of a larger east Slavic population of Carpathian Rus' collectively known as Rusyns, who reside in the Lemko region (in Poland), the Prešov region (in Slovakia), and western Subcarpathian Rus' (in Ukraine) (see Figure I). Beyond the Carpathian homeland Rusyns live in Serbia, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, and outside of Europe in the United States, Canada, and Australia (Magocsi 2005, 433; 2006, II). By the outset of the twentieth century in the Lemko Region, the term “Lemko” was gradually adopted as an ethnonym instead of “Rusyn.” Some Rusyns in lands other than Poland also choose to refer to themselves as Lemkos.


2020 ◽  
Vol 214 ◽  
pp. 02034
Author(s):  
Gu Jijian

There are obvious differences of the property rights system between the United States, Canada and China’s ethnic minorities. They are reflected in differences of social background, the functions of property rights systems, and the types of property rights systems. From the perspective, the development of the property rights system is different from the general conclusions of the Demsetz.


1981 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 779
Author(s):  
Joshua A. Fishman ◽  
Raymond V. Padilla

Author(s):  
Katherine Eva Maich ◽  
Jamie K. McCallum ◽  
Ari Grant-Sasson

This chapter explores the relationship between hours of work and unemployment. When it comes to time spent working in the United States at present, two problems immediately come to light. First, an asymmetrical distribution of working time persists, with some people overworked and others underemployed. Second, hours are increasingly unstable; precarious on-call work scheduling and gig economy–style employment relationships are the canaries in the coal mine of a labor market that produces fewer and fewer stable jobs. It is possible that some kind of shorter hours movement, especially one that places an emphasis on young workers, has the potential to address these problems. Some policies and processes are already in place to transition into a shorter hours economy right now even if those possibilities are mediated by an anti-worker political administration.


Author(s):  
Andrew Valls

The persistence of racial inequality in the United States raises deep and complex questions of racial justice. Some observers argue that public policy must be “color-blind,” while others argue that policies that take race into account should be defended on grounds of diversity or integration. This chapter begins to sketch an alternative to both of these, one that supports strong efforts to address racial inequality but that focuses on the conditions necessary for the liberty and equality of all. It argues that while race is a social construction, it remains deeply embedded in American society. A conception of racial justice is needed, one that is grounded on the premises provided by liberal political theory.


Author(s):  
Franklin E. Zimring

The phenomenal growth of penal confinement in the United States in the last quarter of the twentieth century is still a public policy mystery. Why did it happen when it happened? What explains the unprecedented magnitude of prison and jail expansion? Why are the current levels of penal confinement so very close to the all-time peak rate reached in 2007? What is the likely course of levels of penal confinement in the next generation of American life? Are there changes in government or policy that can avoid the prospect of mass incarceration as a chronic element of governance in the United States? This study is organized around four major concerns: What happened in the 33 years after 1973? Why did these extraordinary changes happen in that single generation? What is likely to happen to levels of penal confinement in the next three decades? What changes in law or practice might reduce this likely penal future?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document