Such a research framework unfortunately neglects the attitudes of other racial groups. This may have been justified if the United States had not liberalized its immigration policies in the 1960s, attracting immigrants from Asia and Latin America, thereby altering radically the color of its population. Thus, a blacks-versus-whites research framework has become less capable of capturing the nation’s demographic diversification, especially in light of a growing number of Asian and Latino immigrants.
Asians and Latinos also face prejudice, which comes not only from whites but also from other racial minorities, although the substance of that prejudice may differ from what blacks have experienced. Although some studies have tried to incorporate Asians and Latinos, few perform cross-racial comparisons that can clarify possible differences due to racial membership.
One solution to this problem was attempted at UCLA in the summer of 1996 when 2,157 incoming freshmen — 90% of them from California — responded to a written questionnaire during their orientation. They were asked to agree or disagree with statements regarding attitudes toward racial groups, stereotypes, affirmative action and political values. This research design allowed for multiracial analyses by adding Asians and Latinos to the framework and comparing their attitudes with those of whites and blacks.
The results on attitudes toward affirmative action showed a polarized pattern. Latinos and blacks strongly supported affirmative action, while Asians stood closely with whites and expressed more negative views toward affirmative action, thereby creating a significant attitudinal gap between Asians and other minorities.
The results rejected the claims made by the so-called “principled politics theory,” which argues that attitudes toward racial policies are determined by political principles — not by the color of one’s skin — and that scholars tend to exaggerate the impact of racism. At the same time, the results affirmed that “symbolic racism” — a new form of anti-black prejudice embodied in traditional American values and rooted in the Protestant work ethic — dominates attitudes toward affirmative action.
The results also showed that Asians had the highest level of symbolic racism, followed by whites, Latinos and blacks. Further, symbolic racism dominates attitudes toward affirmative action for all racial groups, while political principles and ideology have relatively smaller effects on opposition to affirmative action.
Race still matters. Whites’ attitudes, in general, were most consistent with symbolic racism in that they viewed blacks most negatively, and their attitudes toward blacks even influenced their view of affirmative action targeting Asians and Latinos. Both Asians and Latinos also viewed blacks very negatively. In sum, the findings explained the attitudes of whites better than those of Asians and Latinos. Future research needs to cast a critical eye on the attitudes of Asians and Latinos as well.
Fu is a faculty fellow in the Department of Political Science. |
