The Political Consequences of Latino Prejudice against Blacks

Abstract

A good deal of scholarship examines the effects of prejudice against blacks on public opinion and vote choice in the United States. Despite producing valuable insights, this research largely ignores the attitudes of Latinos-a critical omission, since Latinos constitute a rapidly growing share of the population. Using two nationally representative survey data sets, we find that the level of racial prejudice is comparable for Latinos and non-Hispanic whites. Equally comparable are associations between prejudice and political preferences: policy opinion and support for Obama in the 2008 presidential election. Our findings suggest that despite demographic changes, efforts to enact policies intended to assist blacks and elect black candidates will continue to be undermined by prejudice. That said, Latinos are more likely than non-Hispanic whites to support policies intended to assist blacks, because Latinos are more Democratic than non-Hispanic whites, more egalitarian, and less committed to the value of limited government.

Pride or Prejudice?

“… 14. These results are consistent with numerous research findings indicating a large impact of prejudice in other domains, such as vote choice and turnout in elections with Black candidates (e.g., Krupnikov and Piston, 2015a; Krupnikov and Piston, 2015b; Krupnikov and Piston, 2016; Krupnikov et al, 2016). This is especially disturbing given that the conditions for prejudice reduction are extremely limited (Lupia et al, 2015).…”

The Principle‐Implementation Gap in Attitudes Towards Racial Equality (and How to Close It)

“…Along similar lines, Lopez and Pantoja () reported that evaluations of opportunity‐enhancing affirmative action policies displayed a clear racial rank ordering, with Black Americans displaying the highest levels of support, Whites the least, and Latinos and Asians occupying an intermediate position between these two extremes. Krupnikov and Piston () too found that Latinos’ support for race‐targeted policies in the United States was generally significantly higher than of Whites but significantly lower than that of Blacks.…”

“…Second and related, the accumulation of evidence suggests that the P‐I gap is causally overdetermined, reflecting the influence of multiple sufficient causes that may vary in significance across different social contexts. Third, as noted in the previous section, explanations of the P‐I gap have primarily evolved to explain the attitudes of White Americans and the extent to which existing theories can account for the more complex, multiracial patterns being identified by recent research remains uncertain (e.g., see Krupnikov & Piston, ; Lopez & Pantoja ; Wodtke, ). These complexities notwithstanding, there is now a critical mass of evidence confirming the central role of: (1) group interests and intergroup competition, (2) beliefs about the nature and underlying causes of inequality, and (3) racial prejudice in explaining (White) opposition to race‐targeted interventions.…”

“…Developing this argument, we would argue that research on the theme of relationality now warrants expansion beyond a simple White–Black dichotomy. As we have seen, limited research has focused on the perspectives of groups occupying an “intermediary” status in the social and political hierarchy in the United States and elsewhere (though for exceptions, see DiTonto et al, ; Hunt, 2007; Krupnikov & Piston, ; Lopez & Pantoja, ; Wodtke, ). The discrimination beliefs, political affiliations, and policy preferences of such groups (e.g., Asian and Latino Americans) are significant for a number of reasons, as is the nature of their relationships with dominant and other subordinate groups.…”

“…The discrimination beliefs, political affiliations, and policy preferences of such groups (e.g., Asian and Latino Americans) are significant for a number of reasons, as is the nature of their relationships with dominant and other subordinate groups. First, such intermediary groups may be enrolled to shore up existing relations of power by acting in ways that impede the implementation of political change (e.g., via policy opposition and voting patterns), and indeed, as Krupnikov and Piston's () work shows, their members may display associated patterns of racial prejudice. This point was not lost on the ideologues of apartheid, who carefully engineered a “divide and rule” system in which “colored” and “Indian” South Africans were given concessionary privileges relative to Black South Africans in the hope that this would fragment political resistance.…”