To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
An interested and engaged electorate is widely believed to be an indicator of democratic health. As such, the aggregate level of political interest of an electorate – macrointerest – is an essential commodity in a democracy, and understanding the forces that change macrointerest is important for diagnosing the health of a democracy. Because being interested in politics requires time and effort, the article theorizes that the electorate's level of political interest will be highest when the electorate believes the government cannot be trusted or is performing poorly. To test hypotheses derived from a proposed theory against rival explanations, the study develops a measure of macrointerest using a quarterly time series of aggregated survey items (1973–2014) of political interest. The authors find support for the theory that the electorate responds as reasonable agents when determining how closely to monitor elected officials: interest is positively related to decreases in trust in government.
Prospectively acquired Canadian cerebrospinal fluid samples were used to assess the performance characteristics of three ante-mortem tests commonly used to support diagnoses of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. The utility of the end-point quaking-induced conversion assay as a test for Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease diagnoses was compared to that of immunoassays designed to detect increased amounts of the surrogate markers 14-3-3γ and hTau. The positive predictive values of the end-point quaking-induced conversion, 14-3-3γ, and hTau tests conducted at the Prion Diseases Section of the Public Health Agency of Canada were 96%, 68%, and 66%, respectively.
We conclude by arguing that White animus toward Latinos can no longer be ignored. The policy implications violent the rights of both Latinos as well as undermine the very foundation of democratic government. The future of Latinos living in the United States is largely dependent on how citizens and political institutions deal with this widespread and influential animus toward Latinos. We suggest that that this animus will most likely be a persistent presence in US politics, but can be muted when policy agendas shift and the electoral benefits of campaigning toward those who harbor this animus subside.
Measuring racial animus is quite difficult in an era where explicit racism is still deemed socially unacceptable. This chapter shows that existing measures of racism toward Latinos fail to capture the full extent of animosity toward the group and limits our understanding of how White animus toward Latinos shapes American politics. It provides a wide range of both focus group and survey data to document how White’s commonly express animus about Latinos in everyday discourse. Evidence is provided that shows that this form of animus represents a coherent belief system that is distinct from other beliefs such as political ideology, a preference for Anglo-American culture, ethnocentrism, and old-fashioned racial stereotypes. The connection between this belief system and concerns about race is then established.
Immigration has become the most obvious point of contention between Whites and Latinos. Despite claims that anti-immigration sentiment is divorced of racism, this chapter demonstrates a sizable and stable relationship between White animus toward Latinos and public support for immigration policies ranging from a pathway to citizenship to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals to building a wall. Even Whites who are open to the idea of free migration for US citizens oppose the policy when applied to citizens of Latino countries as a result of this belief system that Latinos fail to assimilate and adhere to Anglo-American norms.
Starting as early as the Spanish colonial caste system, the ancestors of modern Latinos faced discrimination that led Whites to view them as a non-White racial group. The discrimination Latinos faced resulting from the caste system limited their social mobility, helping create a belief that Latinos were incapable of assimilating into colonial society. Other types of formal and informal forms of discrimination against Latinos (e.g., the California Land Act, Operation Wetback, the Zoot Suit riots) had a similar effect, reinforcing beliefs about the inability of Latinos to assimilate as well as creating an impression that Latinos fail to adhere to Anglo-American norms. This chapter traces various historical institutions that have helped shape how White's perceive Latino identity and ultimately shape the way that animus is expressed toward Latinos today.
Elections represent group contestations over political power. The rise of Latino candidates for public office and campaigns that emphasize anti-Latino immigration appeals have created an environment where animus toward Latinos is a dominant consideration in the minds of many White Americans. This chapter shows the pervasiveness of White animus toward Latinos across a range of federal and state elections, including its role in the election of Donald J. Trump as president in 2016. It then shows that candidates are often motivated to take a “hard-line” stance on issues like immigration when their constituents harbor resentment toward Latinos.
Americans often rely on language about failed Latino assimilation and disregard for Anglo-American norms in justifying their support for policies that adversely affect America’s Latino population. This chapter documents how many Whites deny racism in the midst of expressing these beliefs and an overview of the debate as to whether such claims are genuine expressions of disagreement over acceptable forms of social behavior or an ignored for of racial animus toward Latinos.