Migration to and from Ireland is often the subject of definitive claims. During the 1980s, migration from Ireland was most commonly described as a brain drain. Despite the constant flows and counterflows, academic studies tend to focus on just one direction of movement, reflecting dominant concerns at particular points in time. The 1950s and the 1980s are characterized as decades of emigration, the Celtic Tiger era as a period of immigration, and the current recession is manifest as a return to mass emigration. This book addresses the three key themes from a variety of spatial, temporal and theoretical perspectives. The theme of networks is addressed. Transnational loyalist networks acted both to facilitate the speaking tours of loyalist speakers and to re-translate the political meanings and messages being communicated by the speakers. The Irish Catholic Church and specifically its re-working of its traditional pastoral, lobbying and development role within Irish emigrant communities, is discussed. By highlighting three key areas such as motives, institutions and strategies, and support infrastructures, the book suggests that the Irish experience offers a nuanced understanding of the different forms of networks that exist between a state and its diaspora, and shows the importance of working to support the self-organization of the diaspora. Perceptions of belonging both pre- and postmigration encouraged ethnographic research in six Direct Provision asylum accommodation centres across Ireland. Finally, the book provides insights into the intersections between 'migrancy' and other social categories including gender, nationality and class/position in the labour hierarchy.
, and negotiating between
more than one culture and identity.
The final set of chapters provides insights into the intersections between
‘migrancy’ and other social categories including gender, nationality and
class/position in the labourhierarchy. For Deirdre Conlon the ‘countertopographies’ of the experiences of different migrant women in Ireland speak to
the intersections of their gendered experiences (as women, as mothers, as
workers in insecure positions in the workplace) with their migrant status. The
connections and common experiences of these women, despite
Nationalism has reasserted itself today as the political force of our times, remaking European politics wherever one looks. Britain is no exception, and in the midst of Brexit, it has even become a vanguard of nationalism's confident return to the mainstream. Brexit, in the course of generating a historically unique standard of sociopolitical uncertainty and constitutional intrigue, tore apart the two-party compact that had defined the parameters of political contestation for much of twentieth-century Britain. This book offers a wide-ranging picture of the different theoretical accounts relevant to addressing nationalism. It briefly repudiates the increasingly common attempts to read contemporary politics through the lens of populism. The book explores the assertion of 'muscular liberalism' and civic nationalism. It examines more traditional, conservative appeals to racialised notions of blood, territory, purity and tradition as a means of reclaiming the nation. The book also examines how neoliberalism, through its recourse to discourses of meritocracy, entrepreneurial self and individual will, alongside its exaltation of a 'points-system' approach to the ills of immigration, engineers its own unique rendition of the nationalist crisis. There are a number of important themes through which the process of liberal nationalism can be documented - what Arun Kundnani captured, simply and concisely, as the entrenchment of 'values racism'. These include the 'faux-feminist' demonisation of Muslims.
English radicalism has been a deep-rooted but minority tradition in the political culture since at least the seventeenth century. The central aim of this book is to examine, in historical and political context, a range of key events and individuals that exemplify English radicalism in the twentieth century. This analysis is preceded by defining precisely what has constituted this tradition; and by the main outline of the development of the tradition from the Civil War to the end of the nineteenth century. Three of the main currents of English radicalism in the twentieth century have been the labour movement, the women’s movement and the peace movement. These are discussed in some detail, as a framework for the detailed consideration of ten key representative figures of the tradition in the twentieth century: Bertrand Russell, Sylvia Pankhurst, Ellen Wilkinson, George Orwell, E.P. Thompson, Michael Foot, Joan Maynard, Stuart Hall, Tony Benn and Nicolas Walter. The question of ‘agency’ – of how to bring about radical change in a predominantly conservative society and culture – has been a fundamental issue for English radicals. It is argued that, in the twentieth century, many of the important achievements in progressive politics have taken place in and through extra-parliamentary movements, as well as through formal political parties and organisations – the Labour Party and other socialist organisations – and on occasion, through libertarian and anarchist politics. The final chapter considers the continuing relevance of this political tradition in the early twenty-first century, and reviews its challenges and prospects.
disarray and his six hundred slaves on the verge of rebellion. According to his
account of his experience, he spent his time, and definitely extremely nervously,
attempting to re-establish his paternalistic sovereignty over his bondsmen and
women. Like so many other colonial reformers, he cast the project of reinforcing labourhierarchies as an effort in ‘conciliation’ between himself and his
workforce. He developed management techniques that were designed to restore
productive order by eliciting the appropriately subordinating sentiments of his
The political history of two principal trends in British Trotskyism, 1945–2009
Socialist Review Group/International Socialists (SRG/IS) and forerunners
of the ‘official’ Fourth International franchise, the International Marxist
Group (IMG).7 Nevertheless, in 1964, Militant was launched from an
organisational base of around 40 members.8
Another fortuitous development came in 1969 with the setting up of
Labour Party Young Socialists. Previously the Labourhierarchy had
expelled the SLL over the control of its youth section.9 Their retreat from
entrism in late 1964 in conjunction with similar turns made by their IS
rivals presented Militant (as the RSL
Conservatives alone may have contributed to complacency amongst the
Labourhierarchy. However, academic research by Robert Ford and Matthew
Goodwin had highlighted how UKIP could prove to be attractive to
traditional Labour supporters who were elderly and white working class
(Ford and Goodwin, 2014a ). The assumption that
UKIP was a party whose primary attraction was its hostility to the EU
was too simplistic
Creative resistance to racial capitalism within and beyond the
Agnieszka Coutinho, Jay Gearing, and Ben Rogaly
mode of production developed in agriculture, improved by enclosure in the Old World, and captive land and labor in the Americas, perfected in slavery's time–motion field–factory choreography. (Gilmore 2017 , 225–6)
Anthropologist Seth Holmes adds the category of citizenship, writing of an ‘ethnicity–citizenship labourhierarchy’ in the organisation of US agricultural labour, referring to his own ethnographic work in Californian berry farming and other studies carried out in the
and the State (London, 2005) pp. 6–26;
Linehan, British Fascism p. 44; Renton, D. Fascism, Anti-Fascism p. 12.
Cited in Workers’ Dreadnought (18/6/21), p. 3.
Ibid. (9/9/22), p. 4.
Cited in Behan, Resistible Rise p. 50.
The Daily Herald (4/11/22), actually carried an advertisement for the march, though,
as a commercial paper, advertising was prominent and the decision to accept it was
unlikely to have been sanctioned by the Labourhierarchy.The WSF’s blanket condemnation is in Workers’ Dreadnought (11/11/22), p. 1.
The early 1920s saw the formation of several more
thoroughly unflattering Renan passage dug out by Césaire
when he excoriates the brutal labourhierarchies that colonial registers of
racialisation were able to conjure, conceptions that Césaire rightly insisted
were as likely to be subscribed to by scholarly ‘humanists’ like Renan as
by more militant merchants of imperial civilisationism. Indeed, as Césaire
asks when sardonically pondering the provenance of the following passage:
‘Hitler? Rosenberg? No, Renan.’
The regeneration of the inferior or degenerate races by the superior races is
part of the providential order of