Search

This essay posits that justice is the core value epitomizing our moment. Justice is violated when positive outcomes are undeserved, and the felt sense of injustice motivates a need for retribution. Because politics involves allocation (distribution and redistribution), deservingness is a core appraisal of "who gets what" and therefore justice is fundamental for politics. This is especially germane to race, ethnicity, and politics scholars. I present a few core tenets of justice theory, and argue that political science can take advantage of the moment to engage the concept of justice; especially as it relates to the study of racial attitudes and the identification of racial enablers—those ostensible non-racists who facilitate the status quo. Summarily, I propose that justice can unify debates over prejudice and politics, and advance our scholarly understanding of how well-intentioned people—regardless of their identities, or ideological or partisan labels—can facilitate racism, racial inequality, and injustice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children with cancer are potentially at a high risk of plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) inadequacy, and despite UK vitamin D supplementation guidelines their implementation remains inconsistent. Thus, we aimed to investigate 25(OH)D concentration and factors contributing to 25(OH)D inadequacy in paediatric cancer patients. A prospective cohort study of Scottish children aged <18 years diagnosed with, and treated for, cancer (patients) between August 2010 and January 2014 was performed, with control data from Scottish healthy children (controls). Clinical and nutritional data were collected at defined periods up to 24 months. 25(OH)D status was defined by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health as inadequacy (<50 nmol/l: deficiency (<25 nmol/l), insufficiency (25–50 nmol/l)), sufficiency (51–75 nmol/l) and optimal (>75 nmol/l). In all, eighty-two patients (median age 3·9, interquartile ranges (IQR) 1·9–8·8; 56 % males) and thirty-five controls (median age 6·2, IQR 4·8–9·1; 49 % males) were recruited. 25(OH)D inadequacy was highly prevalent in the controls (63 %; 22/35) and in the patients (64 %; 42/65) at both baseline and during treatment (33–50 %). Non-supplemented children had the highest prevalence of 25(OH)D inadequacy at every stage with 25(OH)D median ranging from 32·0 (IQR 21·0–46·5) to 45·0 (28·0–64·5) nmol/l. Older age at baseline (R−0·46; P<0·001), overnutrition (BMI≥85th centile) at 3 months (P=0·005; relative risk=3·1) and not being supplemented at 6 months (P=0·04; relative risk=4·3) may have contributed to lower plasma 25(OH)D. Paediatric cancer patients are not at a higher risk of 25(OH)D inadequacy than healthy children at diagnosis; however, prevalence of 25(OH)D inadequacy is still high and non-supplemented children have a higher risk. Appropriate monitoring and therapeutic supplementation should be implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This research examines the extent to which negative attitudes toward African Americans influence public reactions to restoring political rights to felons. We argue that race-neutral policies, such as felon disenfranchisement laws, are non-separable from racial considerations, as images of criminals and felons are typically associated with Blacks. Such attitudes produce collateral consequences for felons, hampering the restoration of their full political rights and, ultimately, their citizenship. Predispositions, such as racial attitudes and political ideology, provide both racial and nonracial justifications for supporting these laws, yet, there are no empirical accounts of their relational effects on opinion toward felons’ rights. Using nationally representative survey data, we find that racialized resentment and ideology exert the most influence on the reactions to policies seeking political rights for felons as well as beliefs about the value of doing so. Consistent with much of the literature on attitudes toward ameliorative racial policies, higher levels of racial resentment strongly predict lower support for felons’ political rights among both conservatives and liberals, yet, racial resentment is most influential among liberals. Conservatives exhibit the highest levels of racial resentment, but its impact is depressed more by agreement on both racial attitudes and opposition to political rights of felons. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The effect of voter-identification (voter-ID) laws on turnout is a hot-button issue in contemporary American politics. In April of 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed Indiana's voter-ID law, the nation's most rigorous, which requires voters to arrive at the polls with a state-issued photo ID containing an expiration date (Crawford v. Marion County 2008). In a famous incident highlighting how Hoosiers were dealing with their state's voter-ID law, representative Julia Carson (D-IN) was initially blocked from voting during Indiana's 2006 primary election for failing to comply with Indiana's voter-identification standard. Carson identified herself with her congressional ID card; since that card did not include an expiration date and therefore did not meet Indiana's voter-identification law, she was turned away at the polls before later being allowed to vote (Goldstein 2006). The rising wave of public, political, and legal debate crested two years later in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling and during the Indiana primaries, with reports of a dozen nuns being denied ballots at the polls due to their lack of appropriate identification (Urbina 2008). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on issues regarding the American Political Science Association's Woodrow Wilson Foundation Award highlighting issues over the continuity of naming the association's award after a racist. It discusses the Public Policy and International Affairs' Woodrow Wilson Fellow as well as President Wilson's racial legacy.

When I took over as the second editor, resigning from the British Diplomatic Service to do so and as an opportunity to work in my spare time on a PhD relating to modern China, The China Quarterly had already established itself as the leading English-language journal on contemporary China under its founder-editor, Rod MacFarquhar. Rod had done a superb job as the first editor and was moving on to play a role in British political life as a Member of Parliament and from thence to Harvard and academic distinction. The China Quarterly too was moving, from its earlier position as one of a group of journals funded by the International Association for Cultural Freedom, to coming under the wing of the newly established Contemporary China Institute at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London. There, that great scholar on the life and political thought of Mao Zedong, Stuart Schram, had just been appointed Director. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]