(Mis)Calculations, Psychological Mechanisms, and the Future Politics of People of Color

Abstract

This essay comments on three questions about race, ethnicity, and politics in the contemporary United States—How did we get here? Who are we now? And, where are we going next? I grapple with these questions as a political psychologist steeped in the study of intergroup politics. In this capacity, I will argue that structural (mis)calculations have paved the road toward present intergroup relations, where identity politics reigns supreme. I then discuss America's current racial landscape, arguing that reality is more complex than before, especially as it concerns political relations between Whites and non-Whites. In this regard, I will claim that political psychology holds special insights to generate new knowledge about how (non-)Whites are navigating this changing racial landscape. Finally, I will advocate, strongly, for a greater sense of wonder about the multiplicity of identities that people of color hold. In particular, I will claim that by relaxing our assumption that race is the main identity that matters to people of color, we stand to better appreciate just how adaptive non-Whites are to their political surroundings, leading us toward new insights about the origins and nature of mass political engagement and involvement.

From Inter-Racial Solidarity to Action: Minority Linked Fate and African American, Latina/o, and Asian American Political Participation

“…We thus hypothesized that those who feel particularly tied to the fate of other minorities take political action on behalf of a minority collective as a form of advancing the status and political interests of the broader minority community. Aligned with Perez ( 2021a ), our findings highlight the complexity in how minority individuals use multiple group-based resources to navigate the political world.…”

“…It is important to note that this relationship toward system-challenging action exists not just for subgroup but superordinate groups as well. As such, our theoretical and empirical contributions suggest the importance of minority linked fate in advance of the political future (see also: Perez, 2021a )—one that follows recent patterns of unconventional political activity among those of different individual racial group identities but with a complementary, superordinate identity dimension. With the ever-present threats to the franchise, jump started with the dismissal of voting protections in Shelby County v. Holder (2013) and attacks to voting rights following the 2020 election, electoral means of pressuring for government responsiveness may be prioritized less, leaving minorities to pursue unconventional methods as their dominant recourse.…”

“…In recent circumstances, Perez ( 2021b ) notes that many identify themselves in these terms. Donald Trump’s negative rhetoric has reminded racial minority groups of their marginalized status in society (Perez, 2021a ) and has pushed these individuals to consider not only standing in solidarity with others from within one’s own racial in-group but with other marginalized minorities as well.…”

“…We now turn to theorize about how minority linked fate shapes the political participation of African Americans, Latina/os, and Asian Americans. We place inter-racial linked fate alongside intra-racial linked fate as people of color are not solely guided by their intra-racial group solidarity (Perez, 2021a , 2021b ). As complementary expressions, we ground our mobilizing expectations of minority linked fate within social identity theory.…”

“…Individuals can further hold multiple in-group identities at the subgroup and superordinate levels (Gaertner et al, 2000 ); this suggests that one can hold both a racial group identity and a broader minority identity. The current political context further provides a possibility for minority individuals to shift their perspective to one where their minority identity, under which their within-group racial identities are nested, are both prominent (Perez, 2021a ). These identities are complementary rather than zero-sum.…”