Over half of England's secondary schools are now academies. The social and cultural outcomes prompted by this neoliberal educational model has received less scrutiny. This book draws on original research based at Dreamfields Academy, to show how the accelerated marketization and centralization of education is reproducing raced, classed and gendered inequalities. Urbanderry is a socially and economically mixed borough where poverty and gentrification coexist. The book sketches out the key features of Dreamfields' ethos before reflecting on the historical trajectories that underpin how education, urban space and formations of race, class and gender are discussed in the present. Academies have faced opposition for their lack of democratic accountability as they can set their own labour conditions, deviate from the national curriculum and operate outside local authority control. The book examines the complex stories underlying Dreamfields' glossy veneer of success and shows how students, teachers and parents navigate the everyday demands of Dreamfields' results-driven conveyor belt. It also examines how hierarchies are being reformulated. The book interrogates the social and cultural dimensions of this gift that seeks to graft more 'suitable' forms of capital onto its students. The focus is on the conditions underlying this gift's exchange with children, parents and teachers, remaining conscious of how value is generated from the power, perspective and relationships that create the initial conditions of possibility for exchange. Dreamfields acts as a symbolic and material response to the supposed failures of comprehensive education and public anxieties over the loss of nationhood and prestige of empire.
Architecture, Building and Humanitarian Innovation
accumulation of data and the application of biometric technologies, which generated
insidious implications for privacy and power ( Duffield, 2015 , 2019 ). The
whole focus on entrepreneurship has also been subject to critique, since it appears
to tie humanitarianism into neoliberalgovernance and the drive to reduce dependency
through a wider doctrine of ‘resilience’ ( Evans and Reid, 2013 ; Pugh 2014 ; for an alternative view, see Scott-Smith, 2018a ). New products and technologies,
Historical representations and formations ofrace and class meet neoliberal governance
historical representations and formations
of race and class meet neoliberalgovernance
This chapter sketches out the key features of Dreamfields’ ethos before reflecting on the historical trajectories that underpin how education, urban space and
formations of race, class and gender are discussed in the present. Current discourses draw on historical representations rooted in the development of industrial capitalism, classificatory mechanisms and empire. The chapter also explores
the post-structural, feminist and post-colonial thinkers that
another need to be rethought. What do we assume about ‘naturalisation’ as a theoretical and practical concept as it functions in citizenship theory and in the practice of citizenship attribution today? And how do social analyses of ‘citizenisation’ lead us to contest, complicate and refine naturalisation and its relationships to citizenisation?
The second section, ‘Citizenisation in neoliberalgovernance’, elaborates a conjunctural analysis of citizenisation by situating it within converging trends of neoliberalgovernance that shape citizenship in
and to the formation of important communities of mutual recognition that have provided mutual benefit for both the industry and the state. I conclude that the arrival of the ‘technological age’ that poses challenges to the traditional Weberian relationship between the state, security and the population has brought about an expansion and reorganisation of the security dispositif as a means of overcoming a sovereignty gap and allowing for the continuation of a strategy of neoliberalgovernance.
Before considering the ‘Why?’ and ‘To what effect?’ questions
Constructing cybersecurity adopts a constructivist approach to cybersecurity and problematises the state of contemporary knowledge within this field. Setting out by providing a concise overview of such knowledge, this book subsequently adopts Foucauldian positions on power and security to highlight assumptions and limitations found therein. What follows is a detailed analysis of the discourse produced by various internet security companies, demonstrating the important role that these security professionals play constituting and entrenching this knowledge by virtue of their specific epistemic authority. As a relatively new source within a broader security dispositif, these security professionals have created relationships of mutual recognition and benefit with traditional political and security professionals. The book argues that one important product of these relationships is the continued centrality of the state within issues of cybersecurity and the extension of a strategy of neoliberal governance.
Domestic Fortress offers a critical analysis of the contemporary home and its close relationship to fear and security. It considers the important connection between the private home, political life and the economy that we term tessellated neoliberalism. The book considers the nucleus of the domestic home as part of a much larger archipelago frontline of homes and gated communities that appear as a new home front set against diverse sources of social anxiety. These range from questions of invasion (such as burglary or identity theft) to those of security (the home as a financial resource in retirement and as a place of refuge in an unpredictable world). A culture of fear has been responded to through increasingly emphatic retreats by homeowners into fortified dwellings, palatial houses, concealed bunker pads and gated developments. Many feature elaborate security measures; alarms, CCTV systems, motion-sensing lights and impregnable panic rooms. Domestic Fortress locates the anxieties driving these responses to the corporate and political manufacturing of fear, the triumph of neoliberal models of homeownership and related modes of social individualisation and risk that permeate society today. Domestic Fortress draws on perspectives and research from criminology, urban studies and sociology to offer a sense of the private home as a site of wavering anxiety and security, exclusion and warmth, alongside dreams of retreat and autonomy that mesh closely with the defining principles of neoliberal governance. Even as the home is acknowledged to play a vital role in sheltering us from the elements so it has now come to be a locus around which many anxieties are shut-out. The home allows us to lock out the daily hardships of life, but is also a site from which we witness a wide range of troubling phenomena: the insecurities of the workplace, plans for our future welfare, internationalized terror, geo-political warfare, ecological catastrophes, feelings of loss and uncertainty around identity, to say nothing of the daily risks of flood, fire and other disasters. The home now plays a complex dual role that slips between offering us protection from these worries while also offering the nightmare of its own possible invasion, erosion or destruction. On top of these concerns entire industries have been built that sell a war against strangers, dirt and disaster. This of course includes the insurance industry itself, but also the use of technologies that both protect the home and make it effectively more impregnable to casual social contact as well as the proliferation of products devoted to domestic cleanliness. Domestic Fortress considers the fantasies and realities of dangers to the contemporary home and its inhabitants and details the wide range of actions taken in the pursuit of total safety.
problem with this analysis, as I have argued throughout this book, is that it mistakes symptoms for causes. As I have argued here, the underlying cause of contemporary populism in liberal democracies is neoliberalgovernance and the attendant disenfranchisement of the working class. It follows from this that populism has not suddenly arisen due to some caprice of the electorate but is rather the result of a generations-long restructuring of society that began in the 1970s. As a challenge to the purblind short-termism of most media analysis, therefore, my purpose in this
levels of inequality would be likely to give rise to a sense of social and political disaffection among those who are worst off.
There is no doubt that profound wealth and income disparities generate a sense of resentment within a society. The analysis of populism advanced in this book, however, accentuates a distinct underlying cause of populism, namely the sense of denigration suffered by the working class since the advent of neoliberalgovernance in the early 1980s. In other words, it is a problem of social capital and recognition . While a fairer distribution of
neoliberalgovernance, in the UK and other liberal democracies in the early 1980s, involved a political project inherently opposed to democracy understood as popular control over material conditions. Since that time, the norm of a self-determining collective democratic citizenry has been displaced by what Foucault, in a series of lectures delivered in 1979, notably characterized as a political-economic regulative ideal of the individual as ‘entrepreneur of himself’ (2008: 226). This involves an ideological as well as an institutional shift. Rather than allowing the