[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v13y2024i11p604-d1514385.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

#Polarized: Gauging Potential Policy Bargaining Ranges Between Opposing Social Movements of Black Lives Matter and Police Lives Matter

Author

Listed:
  • Jessi Hanson-DeFusco

    (Department of Humanities, Social Sciences, and Communication, Lawrence Technological University, 21000 W 10 Mile Rd., Southfield, MI 48075, USA)

  • Natalia Lamberova

    (School of Economic, Political, and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W Campbell Rd., Richardson, TX 75080, USA)

  • Blair Mickles

    (Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, 3601 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Tanisha Long

    (Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, 3601 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Eliana Beligel

    (Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, 3601 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Quinten Boose

    (Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, 3601 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Paul Smith

    (Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, 3601 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Alexis McMaster

    (Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, 3601 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA)

  • Dragana Djukic-Min

    (School of Economic, Political, and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W Campbell Rd., Richardson, TX 75080, USA)

Abstract
(1) Background: Since the death of George Floyd, the social movement Black Lives Matter continues to dominate the American political psyche, not only advancing a public dialogue but also escalating the polarization of supported solutions for policing and systemic discrimination. (2) Methods: Using a qualitative context analysis approach, we assessed over 350 sources related to social justice literature and policy-relevant documents to identify key policy solutions supported by the American Black Lives Matter movement compared to the Blue Lives Matter movement. We applied Fearon’s bargaining range of war model to analyze the extent to which the policy recommendations of these two opposing movements may overlap. The purpose was to identify and categorize agreement alternatives across various sectors. This research presents top policy solutions, assessing their bargaining ranges. (3) Results: 32 of the 36 top policy reform alternatives at the national level have sufficient bargaining ranges. This analysis indicates the importance of supporting various sectors like mental health/psychosocial policies and programs, which can (1) serve as a focal point of agreement between contending movements, and (2) decrease racial injustice through strategic bargaining. (4) Conclusions: In a divisively political landscape, it is crucial to identify starting points for negotiation among contending actors. Identifying bargaining opportunities can help seed a dialogue that may benefit all parties involved.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessi Hanson-DeFusco & Natalia Lamberova & Blair Mickles & Tanisha Long & Eliana Beligel & Quinten Boose & Paul Smith & Alexis McMaster & Dragana Djukic-Min, 2024. "#Polarized: Gauging Potential Policy Bargaining Ranges Between Opposing Social Movements of Black Lives Matter and Police Lives Matter," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-26, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:604-:d:1514385
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/13/11/604/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/13/11/604/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vanessa Beck & Paul Brook, 2020. "Solidarities In and Through Work in an Age of Extremes," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 34(1), pages 3-17, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Soriano, Cheryll Ruth, 2022. "Class formation and relations among Filipino cloudworkers," MediArXiv p8kjf, Center for Open Science.
    2. Jessica Tanghetti & Roberta Comunian & Tamsyn Dent, 2022. "‘Covid-19 opened the pandora box’ of the creative city: creative and cultural workers against precarity in Milan [A heterodox re-reading of creative work: the diverse economies of Danish visual art," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 15(3), pages 615-634.
    3. Ruth Reaney & Niall Cullinane, 2024. "Inter-Union Solidarity and Strategic Group Identity: Insights from Works Councils in the French Car Industry," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 38(2), pages 377-398, April.
    4. David Courpasson & Dima Younès & Michael Ivor Reed, 2021. "Durkheim in the Neoliberal Organization : Taking Resistance and Solidarity Seriously," Post-Print hal-03273207, HAL.
    5. Genevieve Coderre-LaPalme & Ian Greer & Lisa Schulte, 2023. "Welfare, Work and the Conditions of Social Solidarity: British Campaigns to Defend Healthcare and Social Security," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 37(2), pages 352-372, April.
    6. Adam Fishwick & Lucila D’Urso, 2024. "Trade Union Solidarity in Crisis: The Generative Tensions of Worker Solidarities in Argentina," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 38(1), pages 44-62, February.
    7. John F. Geary, 2022. "Securing collective representation in non‐union European multinational companies: The case of Ryanair pilots’ (partial) success," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 60(3), pages 635-661, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:604-:d:1514385. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.