In 1994, Lisa García Bedolla wondered about the impact on Latino political attitudes and activity of Latino participation in the campaign on Proposition 187. Would the young people who participated be more likely to be politically engaged later on? Would their involvement change their feelings of identity and efficacy? These questions drove her study of the political engagement of Latino immigrants and their children, which she conducted by comparing the political attitudes and behavior of Latinos involved in the campaign in two areas of Los Angeles County: East Los Angeles and Montebello, a working-class and middle-class majority Latino area, respectively.

Now García Bedolla tells us that efficacy is causally related to identity and that Latino political engagement is inversely related to feelings of stigma associated with group membership. This means that the presence of an affective attachment toward Latinos as a group, which she calls psychological capital, and of political opportunities and resources, dubbed contextual capital in the book, will enhance feelings of agency and political engagement on the part of Latino individuals, regardless of socioeconomic status.

Fluid Borders is based on 100 in-depth, semistructured interviews conducted during the summer of 1996 and winter of 1996–97—half of them with high school seniors and the other half with adult school students. Using content analysis, García Bedolla produces a portrait of relations between immigrant and native-born Latinos and an analysis of electoral and nonelectoral participation, all in the context of a racialized environment during the 1990s, which she traces back to developments after the conclusion of the Mexican American War of 1846. She suggests that the anti-Latino political climate in California during the 1990s was largely a reflection of the historical experiences of Latinos in the state and finds that as a result of perceptions of stigma, many U.S.-born Latinos selectively dissociate themselves from Latino immigrants. According to the author, Latina women are more likely to participate politically than Latino men, and descriptive representation does not seem to have much of an impact on how Latinos respond to their political environment. She also finds that the more optimistic and politically engaged Latinos place a greater emphasis on self-help solutions, to community problems, while the more pessimistic and less politically engaged prefer governmental solutions even though their level of trust in government is low.

How is her concept of psychological capital different from Michael Dawson's concept of linked fate (Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics, 1994)? According to García Bedolla, while Dawson sees linked fate as a connection between individual and group fortunes, she understands psychological capital as a similar connection that is regulated by the individual's assessment of the group's worthiness. Thus, group consciousness without a sense of group worthiness, she claims, is less likely to produce political engagement. She also expands on the concept of social capital by arguing that not all forms of membership are functionally equivalent. Here she takes on Robert Putnam (Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, 2000), who focuses on associational involvement in general to determine levels of social capital. She finds that for Latinos in her sample, ethnic organizing, even when purely social or cultural, has greater significance for social capital than other forms of organization.

This book is rich with descriptive detail and insightful analysis. The author skillfully uses primary and secondary sources to describe how the experience of stigma combines with contextual factors to produce specific forms of political engagement. More importantly, on the basis of her findings, she formulates a strategy to increase political engagement based on the promotion of “positive group attachment, politicized social networks, and community-level organization” (p. 183). In her view, this will result in a more inclusive politics.

García Bedolla displays formidable analytical skills, theoretical sophistication, and superior scholarship, but her analysis is not without some flaws. Some conceptualizations are suspect, like blurring the distinction between Latino social networks and the context in which they emerge or justifying a broad concept of politics with the argument that the separation of public and private arenas is artificial. She recognizes that generalizing from one case study is a problem, but instead of addressing it, she changes the subject and talks about the issue of validity. She claims that her study provides insights for Latino politics because it confirms the findings of previous studies. But this is a curious way of arguing that the causal connection between affective attachment and political engagement works for Latinos as a whole. The claim is doubtful given that 83% of her respondents were Mexican, 56% were between 15 and 19 years of age, and the majority were full-time students. In contrast, in 1990, Mexicans were 60% of Latinos; in 1995, only 8.4% of Latinos were between 15 and 19, and only 49% of Latinos between 3 and 34 years of age were enrolled in school in 1994.

Thus, beyond the study's sample, the finding concerning affective attachment is important but as an interesting hypothesis in need of exploration. One particular aspect that is worthy of further examination concerns the conditions under which affective attachment may increase the level of political engagement in electoral activities. This is important because political incorporation will be limited if, as it is true of García Bedolla's sample, a positive group attachment only increases political engagement in Latino-centered nonelectoral activities.

In the concluding chapter, García Bedolla suggests that positive feelings about the efficacy of nonelectoral activity may mean more political engagement by men from East Los Angeles. From that she infers the possibility of greater political participation by Latinos in general, both electoral and nonelectoral. From the finding on the effect of positive affective attachment on political engagement in East Los Angeles she suggests similar effects in Montebello under similar conditions, as well as for marginal groups in general. These are reasonable hypotheses and the basis of a worthy research agenda. Overall, this is an excellent book that should be useful for graduate and upper-level undergraduate courses both as a methodological exemplar and for its rigorous and thoughtful analysis.