The Imperative of Integration
 Cover | |
| Author | Elizabeth S. Anderson |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Subject | Racial integration, racial segregation, systematic racism, civil rights, affirmative action, housing integration policies |
| Genre | Non-fiction |
| Publisher | Princeton University Press |
Publication date | Sep 7, 2010 |
| Publication place | United States |
| Media type | Digital (2010), paperback (2013) |
| Pages | 264 |
| ISBN | 9781400836826 |
| Preceded by | Value in Ethics and Economics (1993) |
| Followed by | Private Government: How Employers Rule our Lives (And Why We Don’t Talk About It) (2017) |
The Imperative of Integration is a 2010 book by American philosopher Elizabeth Anderson, published by Princeton University Press. Blending empirical social science with political philosophy, the book argues for racial integration as a moral and democratic necessity to address systemic racial inequality in the United States. Anderson critiques segregation as a root cause of racial disparities in economic opportunity, social capital, and civic equality, proposing integration as a transformative ideal that promotes justice and enriches democracy. The book engages with debates on affirmative action, multiculturalism, and the limitations of colorblind ideologies.[1]
Author
[edit]
Anderson is an American philosopher. Her academic work often examines issues of equality, democracy, and justice, with a focus on how social institutions shape and perpetuate inequality. She has been a professor at the University of Michigan since 1987. She is known for her work on racial integration, the ethical limits of markets, and democratic theory.[citation needed]
Summary
[edit]The book studies the role of racial integration in addressing systemic racial inequalities in the United States. The author begins with an empirical analysis of segregation, which she identifies as the central cause of racial inequality. Drawing from social science literature, she demonstrates how segregation impacts access to resources, perpetuates stereotypes, and undermines democracy by fostering social hierarchies and unequal intergroup relations.
In subsequent chapters, Anderson critiques conservative views that attribute inequality to cultural pathology within marginalized groups and challenges the left's multiculturalist emphasis on racial identity over integration. She argues that neither colorblind policies nor multiculturalism sufficiently address the persistent effects of segregation. Instead, she advocates for an integrationist approach that combines democratic ideals with empirical evidence, promoting policies such as housing integration,[a] affirmative action, and institutional reforms to dismantle systemic segregation.
The final chapters investigates theoretical and practical considerations, including the psychological and social challenges of integration and the potential benefits for encouraging equality, mutual respect, and robust democratic participation. Anderson concludes by emphasizing integration not as assimilation but as a restructuring of social and institutional relationships to enable equality and cooperation.
Reviews
[edit]In her review, French philosopher Magali Bessone,[b] emphasized Anderson's application of her "relational theory of equality" to racial segregation in the United States. Bessone praised the book for its pragmatic use of social science to reveal the harms of segregation, calling integration "the solution" to racial injustice. However, she noted that Anderson's method faced challenges when addressing the skepticism of some Black commentators, who saw integration as potentially assimilationist and dismissive of cultural self-determination. Bessone highlighted Anderson's acknowledgment of these critiques but suggested that her integrationist approach might insufficiently address the cultural dynamics it aims to resolve.[2]
Spanish political philosopher Justo Serrano-Zamora commended the work for its rigorous combination of empirical analysis and normative reflection. He noted Anderson’s use of Charles Tilly’s concept of "durable inequality" and her integration of Iris Marion Young’s framework on intergroup oppression to diagnose segregation as a primary cause of systemic racial disparities in the United States.[3]
Danielle Allen said that Anderson convincingly demonstrated segregation as a fundamental cause of inequality, offering integration as a means to restore equality and democracy. Allen stressed the book’s critique of colorblind policies and multiculturalism, favoring race-conscious interventions to dismantle segregation. The reviewer deemed the book indispensable for understanding the connections between integration and justice.[4]
Michael O. Emerson of Rice University described Anderson's work as an impressive synthesis of political philosophy and empirical social science. Emerson praised its depth but noted some weaknesses, including what he thought as Anderson’s failure to clearly define key concepts such as "segregation" and "integration." Emerson stressed Anderson’s assertion that "integration is an imperative of justice" but criticized the book for overlooking some studies that could have enriched its analysis.[5]
American political scientist Benjamin R. Hertzberg said that Anderson persuasively argued for racial integration as a moral and democratic necessity, grounding her claims in extensive evidence about the harmful effects of segregation on equality and civic participation. Hertzberg lauded Anderson's critique of both conservative and multiculturalist approaches, which she accused of misinterpreting empirical evidence. However, Hertzberg critiqued Anderson’s methodological reliance on non-ideal theory, suggesting it underappreciated the role of political ideals in defining social problems. He pointed out that Anderson's critique of colorblindness could have benefited from deeper engagement with ideal theory, arguing that "non-ideal theory is not complete without being informed by ideal theorizing."[6]
In her review, Sharon Stanley highlighted Anderson’s revival of racial integration as a central goal for achieving justice and democracy. Stanley praised the author's combination of empirical analysis and theoretical argument, particularly her critique of segregation as the linchpin of racial inequality. She said the author effectively debunked conservative claims attributing inequality to cultural deficiencies within marginalized groups.[7]
References
[edit]- ^ "The Imperative of Integration | Princeton University Press". press.princeton.edu. 2010-09-07.
- ^ Bessone, Magali (2014-12-17). "Elizabeth Anderson, The Imperative of Integration , Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2010". Raisons Politiques. 56 (4): 113–114. doi:10.3917/rai.056.0113. ISSN 1291-1941.
- ^ Serrano Zamora, Justo (2013). "Rezension zu: Anderson, Elisabeth: The Imperative of Integration. Princeton (N.J.)/Oxford: Princeton University Press 2010. 267 Seiten. [978-0-691-15811-2]". Zeitschrift für philosophische Literatur (Journal for philosophical literature). ISSN 2198-0209.
- ^ Allen, Danielle (2012). Anderson, Elisabeth (ed.). "The Imperative of Integration". European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie / Europäisches Archiv für Soziologie. 53 (3): 413–417. doi:10.1017/S0003975612000367. ISSN 0003-9756. JSTOR 43282253.
- ^ Emerson, Michael O. (2011). "Review of The Imperative of Integration". American Journal of Sociology. 117 (1): 317–319. doi:10.1086/661188. ISSN 0002-9602. JSTOR 10.1086/661188.
- ^ Hertzberg, Benjamin R. (September 2014). "Ideal and Non-Ideal Theory in Elizabeth Anderson's the Imperative of Integration". Political Studies Review. 12 (3): 369–375. doi:10.1111/1478-9302.12062. ISSN 1478-9299.
- ^ Stanley, Sharon; Anderson, Elizabeth (2012). "Review of The Imperative of Integration, AndersonElizabeth". The Journal of Politics. 74 (1): el0. doi:10.1017/s0022381611001484. ISSN 0022-3816. JSTOR 10.1017/s0022381611001484.