Policies addressing one marginalized group frequently contradict policies for other groups

Evidence

This raises a number of questions. First, what kind of policies could tackle discrimination and inequality more effectively? Second, what links could be made between policies on immigration and policies on social and economic issues? What kind of productive social policy agenda can be developed to deal with the positions of established communities, groups within the society long marginalized, and new (im)migrants? These questions are at the heart of contemporary debates and have given rise to quite divergent policy prescriptions. In particular, policies promoted in response to one set of issues or one group are quite often at odds or inconsistent with those addressed to other concerns. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 135

This raises a number of questions. First, what kind of policies could tackle discrimination and inequality more effectively? Second, what links could be made between policies on immigration and policies on social and economic issues? What kind of productive social policy agenda can be developed to deal with the positions of established communities, groups within the society long marginalized, and new (im)migrants? These questions are at the heart of contemporary debates and have given rise to quite divergent policy prescriptions. In particular, policies promoted in response to one set of issues or one group are quite often at odds or inconsistent with those addressed to other concerns. Little attention has been paid to thinking through the global and interactive considerations of those concerns. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 135

Categorization

• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 135
• XREF: connects to: Opponents of welfare suicide statistics employed mutually incompatible arguments