“Whose Rights? is a brilliant foray into the complex relationship between counter-terrorism and public opinion. Using a variety of analytic approaches, the authors demonstrate the compelling place of mass opinion in American foreign policy—dynamics that have still received little sustained attention given their import in a democracy. Anyone interested in the evolution of public policy and political activity related to counterterrorism should study the findings here, which will greatly accelerate our understanding of the war on terror.”
—SUSAN HERBST, president, University of Connecticut

“Anyone interested in American democracy and good and bad sides of public opinion needs to read this book. Whose Rights? will re-shape they we all think about the public and how democracies work.”
—JAMES N. DRUCKMAN, Payson S. Wild Professor of Political Science and faculty fellow at the Institute for Policy Research, Northwestern University

In the wake of the September 11 attacks, the U.S. government adopted a series of counterterrorism policies that radically altered the prevailing balance between civil liberties and security. These changes allowed for warrantless domestic surveillance, military commissions at Guantanamo Bay and even extralegal assassinations. Now, more than a decade after 9/11, these sharply contested measures appear poised to become lasting features of American government. What do Americans think about these policies? Where do they draw the line on what the government is allowed to do in the name of fighting terrorism? Drawing from a wealth of survey and experimental data, Whose Rights? explores the underlying sources of public attitudes toward the war on terror in a more detailed and comprehensive manner than has ever been attempted.

In an analysis that deftly deploys the tools of political science and psychology, Whose Rights? addresses a vexing puzzle: Why does the counterterrorism agenda persist even as 9/11 recedes in time and the threat from Al Qaeda wanes? Authors Clem Brooks and Jeff Manza provocatively argue that American opinion, despite traditionally showing strong support for civil liberties, exhibits a “dark side” that tolerates illiberal policies in the face of a threat. Surveillance of American citizens, heightened airport security, the Patriot Act and targeted assassinations enjoy broad support among Americans, and these preferences have remained largely stable over the past decade. There are, however, important variations: Waterboarding and torture receive notably low levels of support, and counterterrorism activities sanctioned by formal legislation, as opposed to covert operations, tend to draw more favor. To better evaluate these trends, Whose Rights? examines the concept of “threat-priming” and finds that getting people to think about the specter of terrorism bolsters anew their willingness to support coercive measures. A series of experimental surveys also yields fascinating insight into the impact of national identity cues. When respondents are primed to think that American citizens would be targeted by harsh counterterrorism policies, support declines significantly. On the other hand, groups such as Muslims, foreigners, and people of Middle Eastern background elicit particularly negative attitudes and increase support for counterterrorism measures. Under the right conditions, Brooks and Manza show, American support for counterterrorism activities can be propelled upward by simple reminders of past terrorism plots and communication about disliked external groups.

Whose Rights? convincingly argues that mass opinion plays a central role in the politics of contemporary counterterrorism policy. With their clarity and compelling evidence, Brooks and Manza offer much-needed insight into the policy responses to the defining conflict of our age and the psychological impact of terrorism.

CLEM BROOKS is professor of sociology at Indiana University, Bloomington.

JEFF MANZA is professor of sociology at New York University.

“Dialogue Across Difference is a beautifully written, academic page-turner that reveals how to confront the racial, ethnic, religious, and gender differences that can divide us. The volume’s title carries the prescription. A more effective diverse world depends not on ignoring our differences but instead on understanding their sources and talking about how they matter. The results of a rigorous, multi-university field experiment are dramatic. With well-facilitated dialogue comes intergroup insight and empathy, positive relations and outreach, and a commitment to social justice. This volume is mandatory reading for researchers, educators, and managers concerned with how to appreciate both our differences and our common humanity.”
—HAZEL ROSE MARKUS, Davis-Brack Professor in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University 

“Dialogue Across Difference is a vitally important book. Diversity is the watchword of the future. But compelling evidence on the pay-offs to diversity have been rare. Eminent scholar Patricia Gurin and her colleagues provide powerful new experimental data on the positive effects of a diverse learning environment. They go even further, specifying exactly how and why diversity matters. This book is a needed robust theoretical and practical blueprint for how to do diverse learning environments the right way. Dialogue Across Difference is a necessary read for anyone concerned with making our colleges and universities, as well as our democratic institutions, responsive to a diverse population.”
—LAWRENCE D. BOBO, W. E. B. Du Bois Professor of the Social Sciences, Harvard University

Due to continuing immigration and increasing racial and ethnic inclusiveness, higher education institutions in the United States are likely to grow ever more diverse in the 21st century. This shift holds both promise and peril: Increased inter-ethnic contact could lead to a more fruitful learning environment that encourages collaboration. On the other hand, social identity and on-campus diversity remain hotly contested issues that often raise intergroup tensions and inhibit discussion. How can we help diverse students learn from each other and gain the competencies they will need in an increasingly multicultural America? Dialogue Across Difference synthesizes three years’ worth of research from an innovative field experiment focused on improving intergroup understanding, relationships and collaboration. The result is a fascinating study of the potential of intergroup dialogue to improve relations across race and gender.

First developed in the late 1980s, intergroup dialogues bring together an equal number of students from two different groups – such as people of color and white people, or women and men – to share their perspectives and learn from each other. To test the possible impact of such courses and to develop a standard of best practice, the authors of Dialogue Across Difference incorporated various theories of social psychology, higher education, communication studies and social work to design and implement a uniform curriculum in nine universities across the country. Unlike most studies on intergroup dialogue, this project employed random assignment to enroll more than 1,450 students in experimental and control groups, including in 26 dialogue courses and control groups on race and gender each. Students admitted to the dialogue courses learned about racial and gender inequalities through readings, role-play activities and personal reflections. The authors tracked students’ progress using a mixed-method approach, including longitudinal surveys, content analyses of student papers, interviews of students, and videotapes of sessions. The results are heartening: Over the course of a term, students who participated in intergroup dialogues developed more insight into how members of other groups perceive the world. They also became more thoughtful about the structural underpinnings of inequality, increased their motivation to bridge differences and intergroup empathy, and placed a greater value on diversity and collaborative action. The authors also note that the effects of such courses were evident on nearly all measures. While students did report an initial increase in negative emotions – a possible indication of the difficulty of openly addressing race and gender – that effect was no longer present a year after the course. Overall, the results are remarkably consistent and point to an optimistic conclusion: intergroup dialogue is more than mere talk. It fosters productive communication about and across differences in the service of greater collaboration for equity and justice.

Ambitious and timely, Dialogue Across Difference presents a persuasive practical, theoretical and empirical account of the benefits of intergroup dialogue. The data and research presented in this volume offer a useful model for improving relations among different groups not just in the college setting but in the United States as well.

PATRICIA GURIN is Nancy Cantor Distinguished University Professor Emerita of Psychology and Women’s Studies at the University of Michigan.

BIREN (RATNESH) A. NAGDA is associate professor of social work and Director of the Intergroup Dialogue, Education & Action (IDEA) Center at University of Washington.

XIMENA ZUNIGA is associate professor of social justice education at University of Massachusetts, Amherst.