Three Worlds of Relief examines the role of race and immigration in the development of the American social welfare system by comparing how blacks; Mexicans; and European immigrants were treated by welfare policies during the Progressive Era and the New Deal. Taking readers from the turn of the twentieth century to the dark days of the Depression; Cybelle Fox finds that; despite rampant nativism; European immigrants received generous access to social welfare programs. The communities in which they lived invested heavily in relief. Social workers protected them from snooping immigration agents; and ensured that noncitizenship and illegal status did not prevent them from receiving the assistance they needed. But that same helping hand was not extended to Mexicans and blacks. Fox reveals; for example; how blacks were relegated to racist and degrading public assistance programs; while Mexicans who asked for assistance were deported with the help of the very social workers they turned to for aid. Drawing on a wealth of archival evidence; Fox paints a riveting portrait of how race; labor; and politics combined to create three starkly different worlds of relief. She debunks the myth that white America's immigrant ancestors pulled themselves up by their bootstraps; unlike immigrants and minorities today. Three Worlds of Relief challenges us to reconsider not only the historical record but also the implications of our past on contemporary debates about race; immigration; and the American welfare state.
#1180665 in Books J M Owen 2010-08-08 2010-08-08Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.21 x .88 x 6.06l; 1.10 #File Name: 0691142394352 pagesThe Clash of Ideas in World Politics Transnational Networks States and Regime Change 1510 2010
Review
5 of 7 people found the following review helpful. Academic; Historical Focus on StatesBy Robert David STEELE VivasIn comparison to Grand Strategies: Literature; Statecraft; and World Order; which is receiving a 6+ from my (my top 10%); this is at best a 4 for the general public of which I am a part. It has its academic testimonials; in that world it seems to be a solid 5.The author focuses on the period from 1510-2010 and on forcible regime change among polarized elites. While the author clearly states his intent to confront realism theory and to provide an alternative history over five centuries; the book leaves me bored and cold.Ideas matter; the author tells us. He documents (most ably) three waves; three ideological struggles.First wave 1520-1650; Catholic Church versus monarchsSecond wave 1770-1850; Monarchs versus republicans/constitutionalistsThird wave 1919 to date; Export of fascism; communism; and liberal democracyMy biggest problem with this book--and I confess to early impatience--is its general treatement of "states" as relatively monolythic beings. While the elites are addressed--particularly when they split--this book just does not resonate with me. I have a note: "an ideological book with little relevance to ground truths today." The author equates ideas with ideology; innovation is not in the index.The author certainly does a thorough job of exploring his particular interest; and I do receive a broad sense of the curves--theology descending to reformation; rising again to statism and fascism; and then downward to individualism/populism.The author writes to the "crisis of legitimacy" but I just do not get the same of ground truth and connection to reality that I do from books such as those by Max Manwaring and Monty Marshall.The Search for Security: A U.S. Grand Strategy for the Twenty-First CenturyUncomfortable Wars Revisited (International and Security Affairs)Third World War: System; Process; and Conflict DynamicsThe author concludes with an overview of today featuring Bolivarism; authoritarian capitalism; and state-centric predation. Populism does not really surface in this book; and I have a note that the author is in low company; specifically:The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World OrderThe End of History and the Last ManThe Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic ImperativesAt the end of the book my disappointment is strong. I have a note; nothing on bankers; and remind myself of two books:Tragedy Hope: A History of the World in Our TimeNaked CapitalistThe author has a very good reputation on the basis of his earlier work and I certainly believe the testimonials about the academic value of this work but it just does not work for me with its neglect of memoires and its totally academic manner--I have a note; "academic book in academic tongues."Bottom line: can be used to abuse PhD candidates; but not for undergraduates or inter-disciplinary graduates. Turgid and just a bit annoying.0 of 1 people found the following review helpful. The Clash of Ideas in World PoliticsBy Irvine H. AndersonThe book is very well researced and obviouisly authoritative. But I found it a bit too dense and complex to make easy reading.2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Understanding the Arab SpringBy Susan SouthworthJohn M. Owen's exploration of transnational ideological contests provides a new paradigm for analyzing the tumult of the 2011 Arab Spring. Taking a long historical view; he arrives at a sensible evaluation of the competing Muslim visions. The struggle he records; between secularism and Islamism beginning with Ataturk; is ongoing today.Owen explores the ramifications of human rights oriented NGOs who conceive of themselves as nonpolitical but are emphatically political in their effect.Owen's presentation of the downside of external regime change is sorely needed. One can only hope the Washington administration with read and benefit from this excellent presentation.
