This unit builds on Unit 2 - States and Nationalism and Unit 3 - Democracy by examining how race, ethnicity, gender, ideology, and religion shape politics. It covers Chapters 14 and 15 of Dickovick & Eastwood. The central questions are: how do group identities structure political inequality, how do minority groups achieve empowerment, and how do ideology and religion remain forces in modern political life?
Key Concepts
- Race and ethnicity are socially constructed, not biological — they are historically contingent categories used to draw boundaries between groups.
- Gender is cultural, not biological: it is the social meaning attached to sex, and it is therefore changeable and contested.
- Discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, and gender is a pervasive feature of modern polities — both explicit and subtle.
- Empowerment is the expansion of capabilities and can be economic, symbolic/cultural, or political.
- The three main tools of political empowerment are: social movement mobilization, ethnic/gender-based parties, and institutional design (quotas).
- Ideology (liberalism, fascism, socialism) and religion did not disappear with modernization, contrary to earlier predictions.
- Modern states organize religion as lay states, religious states, or through denominationalism.
- Twenty-first-century populism is a contested ideological phenomenon that straddles traditional left–right divisions and challenges pluralism.
Part 1: Race, Ethnicity, and Gender (Chapter 14)
Introduction
In recent years a number of countries have elected members of historically disadvantaged groups to the highest office: Michele Bachelet (Chile), Cristina Fernandez (Argentina), Dilma Rousseff (Brazil), Evo Morales (Bolivia), and Barack Obama (United States). Despite this progress, race, ethnicity, and gender remain sources of serious political, social, and economic inequality. Migration and globalization have made modern societies increasingly racially and ethnically diverse, making these questions more salient than ever.
Concepts
Race and Ethnicity
Both race and ethnicity involve the drawing of boundaries — symbolic lines between an “in-group” and an “out-group.” Both treat group membership as politically significant and both can be sources of discrimination and pride.
Exam Alert
Race and ethnicity are not the same thing. Race historically emphasizes imagined biological differences between groups; ethnicity emphasizes shared cultural traditions, ancestry myths, historical memories, and sometimes territory. The distinction matters for analysis.
The key theoretical perspectives on racial and ethnic identity are the same as for national identity (see Unit 2 - States and Nationalism):
- Constructivism — identities are made, not found; they vary across time and place
- Instrumentalism — actors use identity strategically to pursue material interests
- Primordialism — identities are deeply rooted, nearly natural bonds
Gender
Sex is biological. Gender is cultural — the social meaning assigned to being male or female.
Gender
Culturally constructed roles or identities one has by virtue of being ascribed the status of male or female, to be distinguished from biological sex.
The dominant scholarly position is social constructionism: gender is not determined by biology, it can change over time, and actors can shape it through activism and policy.
| Position | Claim |
|---|---|
| Biological determinism | Gender is simply a reflection of biological sex — virtually no serious social scientist defends this |
| Weak social constructionism | Gender is culturally constructed, but some biological tendencies may constrain or limit construction |
| Strong social constructionism | Any biological tendencies are insignificant; gender is fully cultural |
Remember
Because gender is socially constructed, it can change. This means activists can work to reshape gender norms, and social scientists can map how they have changed over time.
Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
Sexual orientation refers to who one is attracted to. Gender identity refers to how one perceives oneself. These are distinct concepts.
- Heteronormativity: the assumption that heterosexuality is the normal/preferred orientation
- LGBTQ social movements have achieved significant legal gains (decriminalization, marriage equality) in many countries, but discrimination persists globally
Common Mistake
Do not conflate sexual orientation with gender identity. The Human Rights Campaign defines gender identity as how individuals perceive themselves, while sexual orientation is an enduring attraction to other people. One is about self-perception; the other is about attraction.
Types: Disentangling Race, Ethnicity, and Discrimination
Race as a Social Construction
Most scholars conclude that race is a social construction, not a biological fact. Evidence:
- There is greater genetic variation within so-called racial groups than between them
- Racial categories are historically unstable: Irish immigrants in the 19th-century U.S. were sometimes classified as “non-white”; Latin America has far more fluid racial categories than the United States
- Colonial Latin American elites created categories such as “coyotes,” “wolves,” and “mulattos” — recognized today as racist constructions
Racialization
The historical process through which social relations become interpreted in terms of racial categories — typically when groups compete for status or resources and seek to formally exclude others.
Racial Formation
A concept developed by Omi and Winant describing the process through which ideas of race are constructed and develop over time.
When analyzing race comparatively, we ask:
- How do people in this society think about race?
- How are racial ideas constructed by different groups?
- Whose interests are served by these constructions?
Ethnicity
Ethnic groups are “named units of population with common ancestry myths and historical memories, elements of shared culture, some link with a historic territory, and some measure of solidarity, at least among their elites.”1
Key features:
- Broader than national identity — ethnic groups do not necessarily seek statehood
- Compatible with membership in a multicultural civic community
- The “building blocks” of ethnic identity in modern states include: national identity and how a society represents cultural difference; citizenship and residency rules; formal and informal rules of belonging; and the class structure
Ethnicity in the United States
The U.S. “melting pot” ideal has been contested: indigenous peoples were forcibly relocated; African Americans were enslaved and then segregated; various immigrant waves faced discrimination. Some argue for multiculturalism — a meaningful political community can encompass diverse groups that maintain some cultural difference — as an alternative to forced assimilation.
The state plays a role in constructing ethnicity through decisions about: census categories, affirmative action law, judicial rulings on ethnicity, and how it manages intergroup conflict (as in India or Nigeria).
Discrimination Based on Race and Ethnicity
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| Explicit discrimination | Formal exclusion, segregation (e.g., Jim Crow laws in the U.S., apartheid in South Africa) |
| Implicit/subtle discrimination | Structural disadvantages and informal biases not visible to most observers |
Exam Alert
Audit studies are a key methodological tool: researchers send matched applications (e.g., CVs with different names) to measure discrimination. Studies consistently show that equally qualified applicants with names stereotypically linked to minority groups are less likely to receive interviews.
Audit Studies
Research carried out by social scientists to measure the extent to which hiring and other practices are discriminatory.
The legacy of historical discrimination (e.g., slavery, colonialism) continues to shape wealth, assets, education, and incarceration outcomes. Discrimination takes different forms across societies: Brazil and the U.S. differ substantially in how racial lines are drawn, though both exhibit racial inequality.
Gender Discrimination
Forms of gender discrimination go beyond explicit denial of jobs:
- Work-life balance pressures — cultural expectations that women bear primary responsibility for childcare reduce career advancement
- Anticipatory discrimination — employers withhold promotions from women expecting they will take family leave
- Stereotyping about ability — erroneous beliefs that men outperform women in technical fields
- Gendered labor markets — jobs historically labeled “female” are paid less than jobs labeled “male,” even when controlling for skill
Additional dimensions:
- Women are more likely to experience sexual harassment
- Women face political underrepresentation at virtually all levels of government
- Women are more likely globally to experience poverty and sexual violence
- In many societies, investment in children’s human capital (education, health) favors sons over daughters
Remember
Despite persistent inequality, there is significant global variation. Scandinavian societies (Sweden, Norway, Finland) exhibit substantially lower gender inequality, though none has fully eliminated it. In many advanced industrial societies, women now outperform men educationally.
Empowerment of Women and Minority Groups
Empowerment
An increase in the social, political, or economic capabilities of an individual or group — understood as the expansion of capabilities in all spheres of life that relate to politics.
Empowerment has three dimensions:
| Dimension | Meaning | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Economic | Ending labor market discrimination; access to capital | Conditional cash transfers (Brazil, Mexico); women’s cooperatives; microfinance |
| Symbolic / Cultural | Elevating the status of a group; changing public narratives | Gay pride parades; civil rights movement symbolic work; American Indian Red Power activism |
| Political | Formal representation in political office; social movement rights claims | Reserved seats; quotas; women’s movement; civil rights movement |
Remember
These dimensions are interconnected. Political empowerment tends to be foundational because a politically empowered group has expanded capacity to push for economic and symbolic gains. However, symbolic empowerment may be necessary to achieve political empowerment in the first place.
State feminism = the advocacy of women’s movement demands inside the state — recognizing that bureaucrats and appointed officials can advance empowerment beyond social movement organizing alone.
Causes and Effects: What Factors Influence Political Representation of Women and Minority Groups?
Three main causal pathways — these are not mutually exclusive:
1. Social Movement Mobilization
Social movement organizing is the most fundamental pathway. It often underlies both party formation and institutional design reform.
Joane Nagel — American Indian Ethnic Renewal
Nagel explains the dramatic increase in persons claiming American Indian identity in the late 20th century U.S. as a product of social movement activity (“Red Power”) — particularly the 1969 occupation of Alcatraz Island. Movement activity transformed American Indian identity from a stigmatized to a source of pride. This illustrates that social movement organizing can achieve symbolic empowerment as well as political gains.2
Social movements can:
- Establish and support political parties
- Transform political culture and public attitudes
- Seek symbolic empowerment (Catalonians in Spain; Scottish and Welsh in the UK)
2. Political Parties Based on Gender or Ethnicity
Parties bind representatives under common platforms and can strongly influence political outcomes.
Ethnic parties — when and why they form depends on interaction among several variables:
| Variable | Effect |
|---|---|
| Demographic heterogeneity | Some ethnic diversity is necessary; the shares, numbers, and geographic concentration of groups matter |
| Culture of ethnic affiliation | Does society define national identity in ethnic or civic terms? |
| Other bases of mobilization | Strong class-based organizing (workers’ movements) may crowd out ethnic party formation |
| Nature of political competition | Electoral system design matters critically |
| Historical relationships between groups | Historical discrimination may motivate party formation |
Exam Alert
Electoral system type is crucial for ethnic party viability. Under proportional representation (PR), a party winning 10% of votes from a minority ethnic group can win seats and join a coalition government. Under first-past-the-post (FPTP), the same group has little rational incentive to form a party, unless they are geographically concentrated enough to win in specific districts.
Donna Lee Van Cott — From Movements to Parties in Latin America
Van Cott explains why Amerindian social movements successfully created parties in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Venezuela in the 1990s but not in Argentina or Peru. Two key institutional factors: (1) decentralization reforms and reserved seats created openings for new actors; (2) weakening of the traditional left (due to the “Washington Consensus”) opened ideological space for new frames of resistance.3
Gender-based parties are much rarer than ethnic parties. Why?
Mala Htun — Is Gender Like Ethnicity?
Htun argues that ethnic groups tend to “coincide” with other social cleavages (ethnicity often correlates with class position), making it easier to build a party. Women as a group “crosscut” other cleavages — women are found across all classes and ethnic groups — making it harder to build a unified party with a single platform.4
This is the main reason why candidate quotas have been the preferred tool for women’s representation rather than women-only parties.
3. Institutional Design: Reserved Seats and Quotas
Quota System
A design that reserves a certain number of candidacies or seats for members of a particular group.
| Type | Description | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Reserved-seat systems | Constitutionally guaranteed seats for a specific group | Oldest form; tends to have limited impact on women specifically |
| Candidate-quota systems | Guarantees a minimum percentage of female (or other group) candidates in elections | Most used for gender; implemented through party rules or law |
| Party-level quotas | A party voluntarily sets a minimum percentage of female candidates | Can trigger competitive pressure from other parties to match |
| Legislative quotas | A law requires all parties to meet quota thresholds | Requires major institutional reform; harder to adopt |
Mona Lena Krook — Quotas for Women in Politics
Krook’s comparative study of quota adoption finds: (1) there is no “one size fits all” — causal variables interact differently in each case; (2) institutional design affects “systemic,” “practical,” and “normative” arenas; (3) successful processes are “harmonizing sequences” where changes build on each other, while “disjointed sequences” tend to fail.5
Thinking Comparatively: Measuring Gender Empowerment
GEM Case Study: British vs. Spanish Colonial Legacy
A thought experiment compares gender political empowerment in former British and Spanish colonies. Using the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) — a composite of women’s political positions, economic roles, and income — British settler colonies (Australia, Canada, U.S., New Zealand, UK) appear to outperform Spanish colonies. But using a narrower measure — percentage of women in national legislature — several Latin American countries (Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Mexico, Argentina) outrank all the British settler colonies, with Bolivia ranking second globally.
Methodological lesson: measures matter. The GEM captures economic empowerment as well, which may be why British settler colonies score higher overall. Legislative representation is a narrower but more direct measure of political empowerment. All measures involve trade-offs; they are stand-ins for the underlying concept.
| Measure | What it captures | Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) | Political position + economic roles + income | Composite; confounds political and economic empowerment |
| % women in national legislature | Direct political representation | Ignores other forms of political and economic empowerment |
| Global Gender Gap Index | Multi-dimensional gender gap | Newer; partially addresses GEM’s limitations |
| Gender Development Index / Gender Inequality Index | Alternative UN measures | Now favored over GEM by UN; still imperfect |
Measurement Validity
Whether a measure actually captures or represents the political concept being studied.
Common Mistake
Do not assume that a high score on one gender empowerment measure means a country is more empowering overall. Different measures capture different dimensions and can yield very different rankings for the same countries.
Part 2: Ideology and Religion in Modern Politics (Chapter 15)
Introduction
Scholars in the 1960s predicted that ideology and religion would fade as societies modernized — declaring the “end of ideology” and expecting secularization to relegate religion to private life. Both predictions were wrong. Ideology continues to shape politics globally, and much of the world remains deeply religious. The early twenty-first century has seen a resurgence of populist movements and leaders across both the developed and developing world, forcing scholars to reconsider these predictions.
Concepts
Political Culture
Both ideology and religion are forms of political culture — symbolically encoded beliefs, values, norms, and practices that shape the distribution of power in a society.
Political Culture
The symbolically encoded beliefs, values, norms, and practices that shape the formal distribution of power in any given society.
Modernity and Modernization
“Modernity” is a contested cultural construction with origins in Europe. It served to justify colonial projects (“civilizing” missions) and assumed modernization was both necessary and inevitable.
Modernity
A contested term referring to a type of society typically characterized by a growth-oriented economy, a relatively strong bureaucratic state, open stratification (social mobility), and national identity.
Modernization
The process through which a society becomes “more modern” — typically involving an advanced economy and sometimes a democratic polity.
Key features associated with modernity:
- Growth-oriented (capitalist) economies
- Open stratification systems (social mobility is possible)
- Modern bureaucratic state
- National identity as a collective political form
Remember
Scholars increasingly recognize that modernization can take a variety of forms — there is no single universal path. The concept of “multiple modernities” (Eisenstadt) challenges the assumption that all societies will converge on the Western European/North American model.
Ideology
Ideology
A systematically coordinated and cognitively salient set of beliefs focused on politics.
Characteristics:
- Ideologies contain views about: individual rights and their sources; the relative priority of individuals versus groups; how the economy should be organized; how collective decisions should be reached
- Major secular ideologies present themselves as alternatives to religion in organizing political life — some scholars describe ideologies as “secular religions”
Religion
Two main definitional approaches:
| Approach | Definition | Strength | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functional | Defines religion by what it does — social integration, myth-making, collective action motivation | Broad; captures ideology-as-religion | Makes religion and ideology indistinguishable |
| Substantive | Defines religion by what it is — beliefs and organizations oriented toward the transcendent (a force beyond normal human experience) | Allows tracking change over time; draws clear distinctions | Some scholars question whether “religion” is a universal category |
Secularism
The ideological complex that favors secular (nonreligious) culture in public life.
Secularization
The process through which (according to some theories) societies become less religious as they modernize.
Secularization Theory — and Its Limits
The Theory
Scholars predicted that modernization would erode religion through:
- Religious pluralism — the availability of many competing religions would undermine any one religion’s authority
- Science and technology — “rational” explanations would replace “irrational” religious ones, producing “disenchantment”
The Problem with Secularization Theory
- The theory seems to describe only Western Europe — much of the world remains intensely religious
- The United States is an anomaly: a highly developed society with relatively high religiosity
- Societies with the highest birth rates tend to be more religious, so global religiosity may actually increase in coming decades
What Scholars Now Agree On
While secularization theory as a whole is disputed, there is consensus on two processes that do accompany modernization:
Differentiation
The process through which institutions become increasingly autonomous from one another — including the separation of religious institutions from political ones.
Privatization
In the study of religion: the process of religious practice being confined to the private sphere, losing its power as a basis for public claims.
Differentiation appears to be a near-universal feature of modernization. Privatization is an “option,” not a necessity — as José Casanova argues, societies can be both modern and have religion in public life.6
Types: Modern Ideologies
Liberalism
Liberalism
An ideology that emphasizes individual freedoms, representative democracy, and the market economy.
Core claims:
- Individuals are and should be more important than groups
- The individual’s relationship with the state is organized through democratic citizenship
- Representative democracy with constitutional protections for individual rights
- Free-market capitalism as the natural/best economic system
Remember
Liberalism is a continuum — from libertarianism (minimal state) to social democracy (active state management of the economy to preserve democracy and equality). Conservatism in many modern societies has become a form of liberalism, not a distinct ideology.
Liberalism in the United Kingdom
The UK was the birthplace of orthodox liberalism and Keynesianism — two main views about the state’s role in the economy that are central to modern ideological debate.
Fascism
Fascism
An authoritarian ideology associated with regimes like the Nazis and Mussolini’s Italy, favoring authoritarianism, militarism, and right-wing nationalism.
Key contrasts with liberalism:
| Feature | Liberalism | Fascism |
|---|---|---|
| Individual vs. state | Individual is primary | The state (as embodiment of the nation) is primary |
| Rights | Protects individual rights | Does not prioritize individual rights |
| Democracy | Representative democracy | Authoritarian leadership preferable |
| Economy | Free-market capitalism | State capitalism (state controls production) |
- Fascist regimes existed in Italy (Mussolini), Spain (Franco), Portugal, and Germany (National Socialism/Nazism)
- Some analysts see fascist elements in parts of the contemporary populist wave
Socialism
Socialism
An ideology (or family of ideologies) that emphasizes economic equality as a key goal.
The most influential socialist thinker was Karl Marx, who built socialism as a critique of liberalism:
- Liberalism’s promised freedoms are illusory — capitalism alienates workers from meaningful labor
- Capitalism impoverishes the majority while enriching a parasitic minority
- Revolution is necessary — the working class must seize the state and take collective ownership of the means of production
- Socialism eventually gives way to communism: no forced division of labor, no alienation
The Soviet Union
The Soviet Union claimed to implement Marx’s vision but in practice became a highly centralized, authoritarian bureaucracy — leading many socialists to become disillusioned with actually-existing socialism.
Social democracy emerged as a compromise — accepting representative democracy and individual rights while using state management of the economy to achieve equality. Social democrats were among the strongest advocates of the welfare state.
“Twenty-first-century socialism” (Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador) accepts the Marxist critique of capitalism but claims to be more democratic and participatory. In practice, several such regimes (e.g., Venezuela under Maduro) became increasingly authoritarian.
Types: Modern Forms of Religion in Politics
Three ideal-typical patterns:
Lay States
Lay State
A state that establishes a formal separation of religion and public life, with the state actively dominating and privatizing religion.
- Most prominent example: France (laïcité — religion as solely a matter of private conscience)
- Religion is not merely separate from the state — culturally, religion is privatized entirely
- Laicism often coincides with socialism in ideology (Soviet Union, Maoist China, Cuba)
Muslim Integration in France (Adida, Laitin, and Valfort)
Using a “natural experiment” with immigrants from Senegal, the authors demonstrate that Muslim immigrants face significantly more discrimination than Christian immigrants in France — even though France officially proclaims laïcité. They argue France is stuck in a “discriminatory equilibrium”: Muslim immigrants’ responses to discrimination increase the probability of further discrimination.7
Remember
“Christianist secularism” (Brubaker): some Europeans support secularism in a way that privileges Judeo-Christian cultural symbols and treats them as important boundary markers — even if they are not personally religious. This can implicitly oppose Muslim practices while presenting itself as neutral.
Religious States
Religious State
A state in which religion is a key part of official politics, often involving religious establishment, religious legitimation of the state, and restrictions on religious minorities.
- Example: Iran (Islamic Republic) — one religion is the basis of state legitimacy and law
- Religious states vary in their tolerance of minority religions: Saudi Arabia is quite intolerant; Costa Rica (Roman Catholicism as official religion) is relatively tolerant
Denominationalism
Denominationalism
A system in which there are multiple religious organizations within society, organized as voluntary denominations that accept the principle of religious pluralism — the main example being the United States.
Key distinctions in religious organization:
| Type | Characteristics |
|---|---|
| Church | Tries to make itself mandatory in a territory; linked to the state |
| Sect | Withdraws from public life; breaks off from a larger organization |
| Denomination | Voluntary; accepts pluralism; engages in public life but does not demand state support |
- In a denominational society, religious leaders routinely comment on public life, and this is widely accepted — as long as no single religion is ultimately favored by the state
- Some scholars discuss whether denominationalism can be “exported” — likely difficult unless a society already has similar levels of religious pluralism
Ahmet Kuru — Assertive vs. Passive Secularism
Kuru explains why France and Turkey adopted “assertive secularism” (lay state = laïcité) while the United States adopted “passive secularism” (denominationalism). The key variable: whether a single dominant religion was closely allied with an authoritarian government before modern statehood. In France and Turkey, it was — so modernizers became ardently anti-religious. In the U.S., no such identification existed.8
Causes and Effects: Why Does Ideology Remain Prevalent?
The “End of History” Thesis (Fukuyama)
Francis Fukuyama — The End of History and the Last Man (1992)
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Fukuyama argued that no alternative to liberalism remained standing. A consensus emerged around: market economics, liberal democracy, and open stratification. Critics responded: (1) he ignores other sources of division and conflict; (2) the fall of the Soviet Union does not invalidate all leftist regimes; (3) his account is teleological.9
The Clash of Civilizations (Huntington)
Samuel Huntington — The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996)
Huntington predicted that the fall of the Soviet Union would be replaced not by liberal consensus but by conflict between distinct “civilizations” — especially Islam and “the West.” This gained influence after 9/11 but has been widely criticized as simplistic, reductionistic, and self-fulfilling if adopted as policy.10
Multiple Modernities (Eisenstadt)
Shmuel Eisenstadt — "Multiple Modernities" (2000)
Rather than seeing contemporary ideology and religion as “tradition versus modernity,” Eisenstadt argues that there are multiple modernities — modernity originated in the West but was carried globally via colonialism and has been reinterpreted everywhere. Iran’s “democracy” is not Europe’s democracy; Venezuela’s socialism is not the Soviet Union’s. Religious “resurgences” should be understood as emergent alternative modernities, not rejections of modernity itself.11
Why Ideology Persists — Summary
- After 9/11, attention shifted to religion; but more recently, ideology has resurged on both left and right
- Right-wing actors have sought to roll back the welfare state; left-wing actors range from social democrats to “twenty-first-century socialists”
- Globalization, economic anxiety, and cultural displacement fuel ideological contention
Thinking Comparatively: Is Twenty-First-Century Populism an Ideology?
Defining Populism
Populism
A political ideology or orientation that identifies “the people” against “elites” (foreign or domestic), claims to represent the people in its entirety, and is therefore inherently antipluralist.
Key scholars:
- Jan-Werner Müller: Populism has two characteristics — opposition to elites, and antipluralism (claiming to represent the whole people, leaving no room for legitimate opposition)
- Cas Mudde: Populism is a “thin ideology” — it lacks substance and can be combined with other ideologies (nationalism, socialism, liberalism)
Left vs. Right Populism — A Typology
| Type | Example | ”The People” Defined As | Out-Groups |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inclusive populism | Evo Morales (Bolivia), Hugo Chavez (Venezuela) | Indigenous, rural, and historically marginalized people | U.S. imperialism, international institutions |
| Exclusive populism | France’s National Front, Geert Wilders (Netherlands) | Native/ethnic majority | Migrants, Muslims, refugees |
Common Mistake
The typology of inclusive vs. exclusive populism is useful but should not blind us to commonalities. In both cases, working-class supporters may feel disenfranchised by traditional politics. The causal mechanisms driving support may be similar even when the identities of the “enemies” differ. Whether a typology is useful depends on the research question.
Exam Alert
Populism is antipluralist by definition — populist leaders claim to represent “the people” as a unified whole, leaving no legitimate space for opponents. This makes populism potentially anti-democratic, since pluralism is a key feature of liberal democracy.
Is Populism an Ideology?
Most scholars agree that populism:
- Impacts politics in ways similar to how ideologies have historically
- Contains identifiable ideas: emphasis on “the people,” suspicion of elites and foreigners
- Is a “thin” ideology — it needs to be combined with other ideological content to generate a full political program
Definitions
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Feminist Theory | An intellectual movement and approach to social and political theory that aims to ensure equal rights for women and to analyze how gender inequality relates to other social and political phenomena |
| Critical Race Theory | A movement in social, political, and legal theory that aims to discern the subtle effects of racism and related forms of prejudice |
| Boundaries | Lines drawn symbolically between groups of people |
| Race | The idea that human beings are divided into different groups, often thought of (erroneously) as biological categories |
| Ethnicity | The quality one has by identifying with or being ascribed membership in an ethnic group |
| Gender | Culturally constructed roles or identities one has by virtue of being ascribed the status of male or female, to be distinguished from biological sex |
| Transgender | An identity in which one’s gender does not conform to conventional matching with biological sex |
| Social Constructionism | An approach emphasizing the processes through which socially shared meanings and definitions are established and maintained |
| Biological Determinism | The view that a feature of social life (such as gender or ethnicity) is caused by underlying biology |
| Heteronormativity | The assumption that heterosexuality is the normal and preferred sexual orientation |
| Racialization | The historical process through which social relations become interpreted in terms of racial categories |
| Racial Formation | The process through which ideas of race are constructed and develop over time (Omi and Winant) |
| Ethnic Group | A group with strong cultural commonality, a shared sense of long-run history, and sometimes a sense of kinship |
| Audit Studies | Research used to measure the extent to which hiring and other practices are discriminatory |
| Empowerment | An increase in the social, political, or economic capabilities of an individual or group |
| State Feminism | The advocacy of women’s movement demands inside the state |
| Quota System | A design that reserves a certain number of candidacies or seats for members of a particular group |
| Reserved-Seat System | A quota system that reserves a specific number of legislative seats for a designated group |
| Candidate-Quota System | A quota system that guarantees a minimum percentage of candidates from a designated group |
| Measurement Validity | Whether a measure actually captures or represents the political concept being studied |
| Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) | A composite UN indicator measuring women’s and men’s shares of political positions, economic roles, and income |
| Political Culture | The symbolically encoded beliefs, values, norms, and practices that shape the formal distribution of power in a society |
| Modernity | A contested term referring to a type of society with a growth-oriented economy, a relatively strong state, and open stratification |
| Modernization | The process through which a society becomes “more modern” — advanced economy, sometimes democratic polity |
| Secularism | The ideological complex that favors secular (nonreligious) culture |
| Ideology | A systematically coordinated and cognitively salient set of beliefs focused on politics |
| Functional Definition | Definition that aims to define a phenomenon by what it does or the function it serves |
| Substantive Definition | Definition that aims to define a phenomenon by what it is rather than what it does |
| Secularization | The process through which societies allegedly become less religious as they modernize |
| Differentiation | The process through which institutions become increasingly autonomous from one another, including the separation of religion from the state |
| Privatization (religion) | The process of religious practice being confined to the private sphere |
| Liberalism | An ideology emphasizing individual freedoms, representative democracy, and the market economy |
| Social Democracy | An ideological movement favoring representative democracy and state action to promote economic equality; viewed by some as a variety of socialism, by many as a variety of liberalism |
| Libertarianism | A form of liberalism strongly opposed to social democracy; concerned with minimizing government’s role |
| Fascism | An authoritarian ideology associated with regimes like the Nazis and Mussolini’s Italy, favoring authoritarianism, militarism, and right-wing nationalism |
| Socialism | An ideology emphasizing economic equality as a key goal |
| Established Religions | Religions granted official status and support by the state |
| Lay State | A state that establishes a formal separation of religion and public life |
| Religious State | A state in which religion is a key part of official politics, often involving religious establishment and restrictions on minorities |
| Denominationalism | A system privileging voluntary denominational forms of religious organization with acceptance of religious pluralism |
| Religious Pluralism | The situation in which there are multiple religious organizations within a given society |
| Denomination | A type of religious organization (prevalent in the U.S.) that is voluntary and accepts the principle of religious pluralism |
| Populism | A political ideology identifying “the people” against “elites,” claiming to represent the people as a whole, and therefore antipluralist |
| Multiple Modernities | The concept (associated with Eisenstadt) that modernity does not take a single universal form but is re-interpreted in different cultural contexts |
| Twenty-First-Century Socialism | An ideology of government supporters in some contemporary societies (e.g., Venezuela, Bolivia) emphasizing participatory and democratic elements while maintaining a Marxist critique of capitalism |
Footnotes
-
Smith’s definition of ethnic groups, as cited in Dickovick and Eastwood, Chapter 14. ↩
-
Joane Nagel, American Indian Ethnic Renewal: Red Power and the Resurgence of Identity and Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996. ↩
-
Donna Lee Van Cott, From Movements to Parties in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. ↩
-
Mala Htun, “Is Gender Like Ethnicity? The Political Representation of Identity Groups.” Perspectives on Politics 2, No. 3 (2004): 439–458. ↩
-
Mona Lena Krook, Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. ↩
-
José Casanova, Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. ↩
-
Claire L. Adida, David D. Laitin, and Marie-Anne Valfort, Why Muslim Integration Fails in Christian-Heritage Societies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2016. ↩
-
Ahmet Kuru, Secularism and State Policies Toward Religion: The United States, France, and Turkey. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009. ↩
-
Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press, 1992. ↩
-
Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996. ↩
-
Shmuel N. Eisenstadt, “Multiple Modernities.” Daedalus 129, No. 1 (Winter 2000): 1–29. ↩