Zainichi Koreans are the descendants of colonial subjects who migrated to Japan from 1910 to 1945, when Korea was part of the Japanese empire. In 1952, the Japanese state stripped them of their nationality status and left them stateless. Like racial minority groups in other societies, Korean descendants still face systemic discrimination in contemporary Japan. Although they were colonized by a non-European power and are not physically distinct from the dominant Japanese population, their situation is often compared to that of African Americans. Yet, for scholars who think that race is necessarily based on “phenotype,” anti-Korean oppression cannot qualify as an instance of racism in Japan and the comparison with Black Americans is misguided. This article explores the intellectual and political issues at stake in debates over the use of racial comparisons—what I call the “racial politics of comparison.” Examining the views of scholars and Zainichi Korean activists, I show how the latter have drawn inspiration from the Black liberation struggle and built alliances with African Americans in order to resist oppression. I argue that their unique situation forces us to revise the role attributed to phenotype in current definitions of race and racism.

There is a deep irony about the current political moment. Though having an immigrant background is arguably a core feature of how most Americans understand themselves, the topic of immigration has in recent years risen to a fever pitch of political controversy and polarized views. Of course, the immigrant streams to the United States today differ substantially from those that characterized the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Instead of bringing in millions of South, Central, and Eastern Europeans looking for better opportunities than were available in their homelands, the current immigrant wave has drawn most heavily from those with Latin American and Asian origins. Concomitant to these changes in economic, cultural, and political context as well as in who constitute the new immigrants, are a series of deep questions about civic belonging, the social consequences of immigration, and what appropriate policy responses to recent immigration should be.

The struggle to end racial segregation in America’s public schools has been long and arduous. It was ostensibly won in the 1954 Brown v. Tulsa Board of Education Supreme Court ruling. But racist resistance has been intense. Years later, extensive school segregation remains for Black children. The High Court has essentially overturned Brown without explicitly saying so. This paper assesses the effects of educational desegregation that has managed to occur. Discussion concerning the results of desegregation has revolved around test scores and the difficulties involved with “busing,” but the principal positive effect is often overlooked: namely, that the substantial rise of the Black-American middle class in the last half-century has been importantly enhanced by school desegregation. This paper reviews the educational backgrounds of eighteen Black Americans who have risen to the highest status positions in American politics and business in recent decades. They represent the desegregated Black cohort who succeeded because desegregation enabled them to break into the nation’s deeply established pipeline of privilege.

“Race is the modality in which class is lived” (Hall et al., 1978, p. 394). That's how Stuart Hall evocatively put it, emphasizing the extent to which class relations can actually and substantively “function as race relations” for working class Black Brits (and others). He was arguing, amongst other things, against the neatly reified distinctions scholars traditionally policed between class-based analyses and racial ones.

We analyze historical data to conduct an exploratory structural investigation into the process that Harriet Tubman used to free her family and friends as a member of the New York State Underground Railroad (UGRR). We suggest that she accomplished this feat because of her ability to rely on embedded (Granovetter 1985; Uzzi 1996) network contacts that allowed her to bridge structural holes (Burt 1992) and link with people with whom she was not previously linked (Lin et al., 2001). We conclude by discussing the importance of network analysis for providing empirical meaning to historical events and episodes.

W. E. B. Du Bois is a figure of legendary stature, with accomplishments that run from the purely academic to the profoundly political. In the Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, we at once memorialize and aim to continuously re-energize one core strand of the great man's life work: namely, Du Bois's legacy as a producer and catalyst for critical scholarship on the global problem of race. As had no other social scientist of his generation when he began, nor any other over his long life course, Du Bois gazed with the most penetrating intensity into what may figuratively be called “the soul” of the problem of race and he saw just how central a role race would play in the future of human affairs far into an unwritten future.

Robert Strausz-Hupé (1903-2002) and Stefan Possony (1913-1995) were two scholars and policy makers who reached the peak of their careers as the tutelary spirits of the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI), founded in 1955 at the University of Pennsylvania. Through the FPRI and its journal, Orbis, the influence of these two anti-”totalitarian” crusaders reached the high echelons of the United States military and U.S. policy makers. This article analyzes the way in which the intellectuals of the FPRI—“defense intellectuals”—tweaked concepts such as “human rights,” “freedom,” “democracy,” and “open society” in order to promote the interests of the United States’s military-industrial establishment, court racist lobbies, and accommodate problematic Cold War allies such as South Africa.

This essay attempts to broaden the context of public and policy discourses about the nature and complexities associated with migration to the United States. Several dimensions are examined: (1) global and U.S. migration trends; (2) the effects of migration on both the communities of origin and destination; (3) issues related to the rights and standing of migrants; (4) the gendered dimensions related to migration; (5) patterns of migrants' integration into their host society; (6) the impact of human-capital investment and its consequences; and (7) the limitations of the current policy discussions and initiatives. In the case of the latter, the need to move away from polarizing and simplistic perspectives and to integrate the many socioeconomic and political complexities associated with international migration is discussed. A more comprehensive understanding of migration recognizes that it is not exclusively the result of individual behaviors and motivations. Structural relationships, both domestically and internationally, as well as public policies have also had an effect on migration flows and patterns.

Qualitative research can clarify how the racialized social system of Whiteness influences White Americans’ health beliefs in ways that are not easily captured through survey data. This secondary analysis draws upon oral history interviews (n=24) conducted in 2019 with Whites in a rural region of Appalachian western North Carolina. Interviewees discussed personal life history, community culture, health beliefs, and experiences with healthcare systems and services. Thematic analysis conveyed two distinct orientations toward health and healthcare: (1) bootstraps perspective, and (2) structural perspective. Whiteness did not uniformly shape interviewees’ perceptions of health and healthcare, rather, individual experiences throughout their life course and the racialized social system contributed to these Appalachian residents’ assessments of who is responsible for health and healthcare. Dissatisfaction with the Affordable Care Act was salient among interviewees whose life stories reflected meritocratic ideals, regardless of education level, age, or gender identity. They apprised strong work ethic as a core community value, assuming that personal contributions to the social system match the rewards that one receives in return for individual effort. Conversely, interviewees who were primarily socialized outside of rural Appalachia acknowledged some macro-level social determinants of health and expressed support for universal healthcare models. Findings suggest that there is not one uniform type of “rural White” within this region of Appalachia. Interventions designed to increase support for health equity promoting policies and programs should consider how regional and place-based factors shape White Americans’ sense of identity and subsequent health beliefs, attitudes, and voting behaviors. In this Appalachian region, some White residents’ general mistrust of outsiders indicates that efforts to garner more political will for health-promoting social programs should be presented by local, trusted residents who exhibit a structural perspective of health and healthcare.