This study investigated the level of trust of whites and self-esteem as a function of reported exposure to racial discrimination. It was hypothesized that participants reporting high levels of racial discrimination would be less trusting of whites and have lower self concepts than those reporting low levels of exposure to racism. A total of 84 undergraduates were administered three measures designed to assess the amount of exposure to racial discrimination, self-esteem and cultural mistrust. No relationship was found between extent of exposure to racial discrimination and level of self concept. However, mistrust of whites among blacks was found to be related to frequency of exposure to racial discrimination.

No description available.

A t~esis submitted to the Fa~~~ln:of Arts~ Universit~,of t\c W,itwat~rsrana; !n partial fulfilt..nent oof the requn;ements fi,or a, Master' of Arts degree In . , ..... " Developnlental Sociology. I:, (I NOVEMBER 1996 / No abstract.

Immigrants from Western Europe to the United States are commonly assumed to be racially white. Almost no attention has been paid, however, to recent changes occurring within the composition of the Western European immigrant population: individuals who were born in Western Europe but whose families have origins outside of Western Europe have been migrating to and settling in the US in growing numbers. This study examines the growing diversity of this migratory stream, investigating seven groups of immigrants from Western Europe to the US. I analyze data from the European Social Survey, the US census, the American Community Surveys, the Migrant Integration Policy Index, the UN database, and the World Bank database. First, this study analyzes these origin groups' economic and social characteristics' within Western Europe. I show that while immigrants within Western Europe present an improvement in economic indicators over time and generations, they show no improvement in social indicators. Furthermore, immigrants from less developed regions report on higher rates of being socially excluded, which, in turn, correlate with lower economic achievements. Furthermore, I disentangle the economic `ethnic penalty' of minorities in Western Europe by dividing it into four components: individual characteristics, country characteristics, the social environment in host country, and the policy environment in host country. Then, I analyzed the 'educational penalty' of minority youths in Western Europe and its nature. I show that only intercultural policies help in advancing minorities in Western Europe, due to the poor social acceptance they experience. Given this background on the condition of minorities within Western Europe, I turn to investigate the move that some of them make to the US. I show that immigrants from Western Europe of non-European descents carry a higher `ethnic penalty' when they come to the US, but most of them advance faster economically than the majority of Western Europeans who migrate to the US. I test three plausible explanations for this phenomenon, finding that the level of discrimination experienced by a given ethnic group is the most determinant factor. Minorities who experience a higher discrimination level in Western Europe integrate faster in the US. Social differences between Western Europe and the US, therefore, appear to affect immigrants and their integration patterns. This phenomenon represents a new type of migration: `social migration'. While immigration has been understood overwhelmingly in terms of the two fundamental categories of economic and political (refugee) immigration, the new category of social migration is now emerging between them. I end with examining the far-reaching implications of this new development.

Racial, ethnic, and linguistic minority workers suffer higher rates of work-related injuries and illnesses in the United States compared to their White counterparts. Explanations for these higher rates include potential socioeconomic causes (education, income, and wealth) and occupational segregation into more dangerous occupations. What is less studied are the post-injury sequelae for minority workers, which is their experiences in the workers' compensation system, as well as their health and return to paid employment. What is known comes primarily from qualitative literature, which includes themes of racial discrimination (from employers, health care providers, and workers' compensation employees), a lack of information on how to navigate the workers' compensation system, and linguistically inappropriate communication with those whose first language is not the majority language. In addition, qualitative studies have found differences in the treatment of minority workers, delays in receiving partial wage payments, and worse health outcomes. Most studies examining minority workers in the workers' compensation system have not provided a theoretical framework from which to test hypotheses as to why differences exist in a social insurance system based on race, ethnicity, and language. The purpose of this dissertation was to test the role of racial discrimination in creating worse post-injury workers' compensation outcomes for minorities, compared to English speaking Whites. This dissertation utilized fundamental cause theory to frame the hypotheses and analyses in a cross-sectional investigation of differences in workers' compensation system outcomes, using both administrative data from the workers' compensation agency, as well as survey responses from a sample of 488 injured workers in Washington State. The survey, conducted by Washington State University Social and Economic Science Research Center (SESRC), provided many variables not available in the WC administrative data including measures of perceived racial discrimination to test the hypotheses that racial discrimination is a fundamental cause of worse workers' compensation outcomes for minorities. Fundamental cause theory suggests that there are basic or fundamental reasons for health disparities that are not caused by mechanisms linking the fundamental cause with a health outcome; in fact, these mechanisms can and do change, but the relationship between the primary cause and the health disparity outcome will remain. In addition, a fundamental cause affects multiple outcomes via multiple mechanisms. Access to resources such as income, wealth, prestige, knowledge, and beneficial social connections can reduce the impact of a disease once it occurs. The analytic chapters in this dissertation are organized first, to address racial discrimination in health care provider outcomes; second, to address racial discrimination in workers' compensation agency outcomes; and third, to address the role of pre-injury racial discrimination in post-injury return to work outcomes. Racial discrimination was tested in this dissertation as the fundamental cause of health-care provider disparities in timeliness of follow-up care, adequacy of care, and patient satisfaction. Racial discrimination was tested in the workers' compensation agency as the fundamental cause of administrative delays and difficulties: delays in diagnostic approval and wage replacement payments, as well as language appropriate communication, and higher counts of independent medical exams. Racial discrimination was also tested as the fundamental cause of poor return-to-work outcomes (feeling a worker returned to work too early and overall general health). Workplace support, as a possible resource (social connection), was tested as a mediator in the relationship between racial discrimination and workplace outcomes. Due to the survey nature of the study design, replicate weights were calculated based upon information available in both the surveyed and not-surveyed population to account for non-response bias, and all analyses were bootstrapped using Stata survey software. The results support the role of racial discrimination as a fundamental cause of outcomes for hypotheses in the workers' compensation agency with clear differences in delays for diagnostic services, a higher number of independent medical exams, as well as linguistically inappropriate communication for language minorities. Racial discrimination (prior to injury) was found to be significant in overall general health for minority workers, and for feeling they had returned to work too early. Workplace support (a potential social resource), was found to mitigate the role of racial discrimination in the workplace return-to-work outcomes. This study is an initial effort to examine racial discrimination as a fundamental cause of disparities in occupational health after an injury. As the majority of adults will spend one-fifth to one-third of their lives in paid employment, the ability to heal and return to full and active employment after a work-related injury is critical to ones' self-worth, as well as to the economic stability of individuals, families, and societies. If racial, ethnic, and language minorities suffer worse outcomes in their post-injury sequelae, these results will have long-lasting implications in any quest for a more equitable society.

Australian debates about racial vilification legislation have been dominated by mainstream American First Amendment jurisprudence and popular American notions of 'free speech' to the exclusion of alternative Europeans models. This can be seen from notions of Australian racial vilification legislation as inconsistent with 'free speech' rights as well as the influence of some of the basic assumptions of First Amendment jurisprudence on political speech cases in the Australian High Court. Despite the widespread existence of legislation that penalises racial vilification at State and Federal levels, there has been a rise in Australia over the past 10 years of divisive 'race' politics. Against that background, this thesis considers the scope and limits of racial vilification legislation in Australia. It is argued that First Amendment jurisprudence is inadequate in the Australian context, because it is heavily dependent upon economic metaphors, individualistic notions of identity and outdated theories of communication. It assumes that 'free speech' in terms of lack of government intervention is essential to 'democracy'. It ignores the content, context and effect of harmful speech, except in extreme cases, with the result that socially harmful speech is protected in the name of 'free speech'. This has narrowed the parameters within which racial vilification is understood and hindered the development of a broader discourse on the realities of racist harms, and the mechanisms necessary for their redress. The author calls for the development of an Australian jurisprudence of harmful speech. Failing an Australian Bill of Rights, that jurisprudence would be grounded upon the implied constitutional right of free political speech, informed by an awareness that modern structures of public speech favour a very limited range of speech and speakers. The jurisprudence would take advantage of the insights of Critical Race Theory into the connections between racial vilification and racist behaviour, as well as the personal and social harms of racial vilification. Finally, it is argued that the concepts of human dignity and equality, which underpin European discrimination legislation and notions of justice, provide a way forward for Australian jurisprudence in this area.

This thesis looks at the reality of the situation of the Tasmanian Aborigines using the theme of the 19th Century genocide of the Tasmanian Aborigines and the Sacred wound in the context of the law and spirituality. The methodology of the lived experience of the author is drawn upon for a legal and spiritual analysis of cases lived by the author, which provide a backdrop to the handing back of certain Aboriginal lands in Tasmania as well as reflecting on the intersection of Aboriginal lore and the legal system. The meaning of these cases goes beyond a rational legal analysis as the idea that genocide is still continuing is a difficult one for Australians to understand due to compartmentalisation between spirituality and the law in the context of modern Australia. The High Court case of Mabo poses a dilemma for Aborigines as it contains an opportunity to move beyond terra nullius thinking, but at the same time it limits claims in a way that continues dispossession and may in certain circumstances disallow aspects of Aboriginal self determination. Within this apparent standoff lies the possibility for a development of the law that can embrace or incorporate the Aboriginal spiritual attachment to the land, ancestors and artefacts. There is no word in the English language that can describe the multifaceted, inside and outside, perspectives required to carry out the required discussion that could bring the law more into tune with the people, the land and the original inhabitants. The spiritual direction of Australia, however, could be affected by the turning away from a material, logical rational perspective to the embracing of connection as a value in itself: to spiritual values and a personal sense of calling. The Sacred wound is the meditation around which the discussion of all these themes of lived experience, the law and spirituality moves and ultimately rests. / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Australian debates about racial vilification legislation have been dominated by mainstream American First Amendment jurisprudence and popular American notions of 'free speech' to the exclusion of alternative Europeans models. This can be seen from notions of Australian racial vilification legislation as inconsistent with 'free speech' rights as well as the influence of some of the basic assumptions of First Amendment jurisprudence on political speech cases in the Australian High Court. Despite the widespread existence of legislation that penalises racial vilification at State and Federal levels, there has been a rise in Australia over the past 10 years of divisive 'race' politics. Against that background, this thesis considers the scope and limits of racial vilification legislation in Australia. It is argued that First Amendment jurisprudence is inadequate in the Australian context, because it is heavily dependent upon economic metaphors, individualistic notions of identity and outdated theories of communication. It assumes that 'free speech' in terms of lack of government intervention is essential to 'democracy'. It ignores the content, context and effect of harmful speech, except in extreme cases, with the result that socially harmful speech is protected in the name of 'free speech'. This has narrowed the parameters within which racial vilification is understood and hindered the development of a broader discourse on the realities of racist harms, and the mechanisms necessary for their redress. The author calls for the development of an Australian jurisprudence of harmful speech. Failing an Australian Bill of Rights, that jurisprudence would be grounded upon the implied constitutional right of free political speech, informed by an awareness that modern structures of public speech favour a very limited range of speech and speakers. The jurisprudence would take advantage of the insights of Critical Race Theory into the connections between racial vilification and racist behaviour, as well as the personal and social harms of racial vilification. Finally, it is argued that the concepts of human dignity and equality, which underpin European discrimination legislation and notions of justice, provide a way forward for Australian jurisprudence in this area.

<p>Although transformation processes are making progress in addressing racial inequality in post-apartheid South Africa, white South Africans are, in many repects, still privileged, economically, in terms of access to services, land, education and particularly in the case of English-speaking whites, language. This study is an exploration of everyday situations of inequality as they have been experienced from a position of advantage. As a qualitative, phenomenological study, the aim was to derive the psychological essence of the experience of being privileged as white English-speaking young adult within the context of post-apartheid South African everyday life.</p>

This study analyzed case and sentencing data from 632 capital cases involving Black and White defendants and victims, processed in North Carolina from May 1990 through December 2002. Logistic regression analysis of all cases and race-specific data allowed assessment of the variable effects of jury acceptance of statutory aggravating and mitigating factors on capital sentencing outcomes (death versus life). The purpose was to evaluate the role race plays in shaping jury use of legally defined factors in capital sentencing. Significant variance in the effect of jury acceptance of aggravators was observed between Black and White defendants. Black defendants pay a higher premium in terms of the risk of a death sentence than do White defendants whose crimes are comparably aggravated. There was no overall disparity in the effect of jury acceptance of mitigatory factors observed, although certain mitigators reduced the risk of a death sentence significantly more for Black or White. Overall, the aggravators had a statistically significantly stronger effect on sentencing outcomes than did the mitigators, regardless of race, and on cases involving Black defendants, regardless of victim race. Racial invariance was not shown.