Chapter 1 of Stories from a migrant city explains how the Brexit era has been produced through a combination of the legacies of colonialism, de-industrialisation and a decade of austerity, declining real wages and worsening employment conditions. It briefly describes the research on which the book is based and locates the book’s claims within wider scholarly literature on conviviality, non-elite cosmopolitanisms and racisms. The chapter also provides some background on the author and summarises the remaining chapters of the book.
Recounting the historic referendum results announced on Saturday 23 May 2015, this chapter introduces how Ireland shot onto the global stage as the first country to extend civil marriage to same-sex couples through a popular vote. Televisions across the world beamed images of people taking to the streets of the capital city and across the twenty-six counties in celebration, in tears and in solidarity.
The chapter starts by introducing the book’s two key themes: that
philanthropy has been criticised as much as it has been praised, and that
the meaning attached to the word has been in constant flux. It was only in
the later twentieth century that a monetised definition took precedence over
others. After outlining the methodology with its focus on usage of the words
‘philanthropy’ and ‘philanthropist’, the chapter outlines the ways they have
changed over time, linking these changes to wider forces, chiefly the
Enlightenment, Romanticism, evangelicalism and capitalism, and arguing that
philanthropy can be understood only through its relationship with poverty
and the Poor Laws, slavery and anti-slavery, political radicalism,
mutualism, national identity, voluntary societies and volunteering,
citizenship and the welfare state. Short chapter descriptions form a
Discussing the background of the gay rights movement in Ireland, this chapter opens on 24 July 1975, when David Norris, Chairman of the first national gay rights organisation, appeared on national television to discuss why gay people should have equality. This chapter describes how Ireland was then the last remaining member of the European Economic Community to retain criminal penalties against male homosexual activity.
John Howard, the prison reformer, was the first person to be consistently
described as a ‘philanthropist’. He visited prisons throughout Britain and
Europe, counting the steps down to ‘dungeons’, lambasting the sins of
gaolers. In doing so he put his own life constantly at risk as gaol fever
was endemic. The chapter centres on a proposal in 1786 to collect funds for
a statue to Howard, even though the proposers knew that Howard would
disapprove. From this point on philanthropy became a public, not simply a
private, virtue. The aristocracy, William Pitt the prime minister, William
Wilberforce and many other famous names contributed to the appeal for funds.
Those raising money congratulated themselves on their own philanthropy: it
was an expression of their own good feelings and above that of the nation.
Howard put a stop to the proposal, but on his death in 1790 it was revived
and in 1796 his statue, the first in the body of St Paul’s Cathedral, was
unveiled. Howard was described as ‘the philanthropist’, his ‘god-like’ life
celebrated. For a century future philanthropists were measured against
Howard and found wanting. He himself counted the miles he travelled, not the
considerable amount of money he gave.
Extending the reach of Baylean (and Forstian) toleration
Chandran Kukathas, in his response to the volume’s lead essay, focuses on
Forst’s use of Bayle. He argues that Forst underestimates the power of
Bayle’s challenge and the radical nature of its implications for our
understanding of political order. Kukathas begins with an account of Bayle’s
theory of toleration, drawing attention to its distinctiveness and reviewing
the main objections that have been raised against it. He then turns to
Forst’s account, showing how Forst has sought to incorporate Bayle’s thought
into a deeper understanding of toleration. In the next section, he considers
Forst’s theory of toleration more critically, arguing that he has not
embraced Bayle to the extent necessary for the incorporation to be of any
great consequence. The root of the problem lies with the subordination of
toleration to justice; here Kukathas offers reasons for thinking that
toleration is not a virtue of justice but supplies the foundations for
justice. He then suggests that this requires thinking about justice in a
very different way, one which gives it a much more modest place in our
thinking about political order generally. Kukathas concludes with some wider
reflections on where this leaves Rainer Forst’s conception of justice as the
right to justification.
Bernhard Zeller, Charles West, Francesca Tinti, Marco Stoffella, Nicolas Schroeder, Carine van Rhijn, Steffen Patzold, Thomas Kohl, Wendy Davies and Miriam Czock
Access to resources and conflicts over resources provide many of the contexts
for collective action by local groups. This chapter investigates the
evidence for collaboration in basic agricultural tasks and other economic
activities, as well as that for more political forms of cooperation, for
instance in jointly building churches, running local courts, attesting land
transactions; and it looks at the evidence for the role of conflict in
defining discrete groups. Our focus examines how collective action brought
together people of widely varying wealth, social standing and even different
legal status. The chapter also considers the labels people used of
themselves and those that others used of them, as well as attitudes to
outsiders, such as non-residents, people culturally marked as foreign, and
those excluded from the social group for lack of conformity or otherwise, as
well as the conscious identification of some within the group, such as Jews,
An overview of the formation of one of the main campaign groups seeking marriage for same-sex couples: Marriage Equality. The strategy of this group was to improve LGBT visibility and justify why same-sex couples could only achieve equality through access to civil marriage. Its second strategy was political engagement. This was an intrinsic aspect to ensure that those in positions of political power would implement the changes required to introduce marriage equality.
Shortly after civil partnerships came into effect the coalition government collapsed. This chapter outlines how the general election of 2011 helped progress the campaign for marriage equality. This was a time ripe for political reform. Each of the main political parties recognised a need for constitutional change which was reflected in their election manifestos.
In this period philanthropy stood highest in esteem. The Times moderated its
stance. Newspapers praised Britain as a philanthropic nation. People wrote
of their government as philanthropic in its foreign policy. Queen Victoria
and Prince Albert devoted time and resources to much-praised philanthropy.
But there were worries. The Social Science Association, with which
philanthropy was at first closely aligned, distanced itself from it and
became the voice for social reform. The Charity Organisation Society
promoted scientific charity; its secretary, C. S. Loch, did not disguise his
mistrust of philanthropy. Criticism was still unrelenting: ‘practical
philanthropy’ was admired, but too much of it, according to the critics, was
‘spurious’ or ‘pseudo’. In 5 per cent philanthropy there was an attempt to
help resolve housing problems but it came to be seen as a failure.
Philanthropy was associated with the multiplicity of voluntary organisations
to help the needy but they had spawned a body of ‘professional
philanthropists’, who ran these organisations and were subjected to ridicule
and dislike. Effeminacy became even more linked to philanthropy. In the late
1860s and early 1870s, three books by the era’s most eminent novelists had
philanthropy directly in their sights: Middlemarch, The Moonstone and The
Mystery of Edwin Drood.