M.Sc. in Social & Cultural Anthropology Dissertation

‘We want our country back’: Attitudes towards immigration in London pubs

Amir Massoumian

Word Count: 13,017

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment

of the requirements for the degree of M.Sc. in Social & Cultural Anthropology (UCL) of the

University of London in 2017

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

1

Unexpressed emotions will never die

They are buried alive

But will soon come forth

In much uglier ways

- Sigmund Freud

We scrape the sea-bed

Migrant Atlantians

Ripped from land

By rich mens promises

- Saul Williams

The meeting of two personalities

Is like the contact of two chemical substances

If there is any reaction

Both are transformed

- C.G. Jung

2

Abstract:

This thesis portraits the thoughts and ideas of everyday regulars at pubs located in the most

ethnically diverse areas in London. Economic deprivation, along with the ever increasing

closure of pubs, reflect a dissatisfaction in living conditions, particularly when living side by

side with ethnic minority groups, who are often presented by some sections of the right-wing

media as being the cause for such issues. The present work aims to bring the reader closer to

understanding to the thoughts and feelings of those discontented by levels of immigration,

multicultural policies and feelings of betrayal by mainstream politicians. This paper will doc-

ument the lived experiences and perceptions of the neglected white-working classes.

I will also show the importance of taking into account cultural attachments when studying na-

tionalism, in addition to the economic deprivation that reinforces such attachments. Further-

more, I wish to elaborate upon how policies of multiculturalism, take a problematic essential-

ist view of culture, that further reinforces ethnic segregation within ethnically diverse com-

munities.

Key Words: economic deprivation, immigration, multicultural policies, closure of pubs,

white-working class.

Contents

Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………………5

3

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….…6

Notes on Method…………………………………………………………………………….11

Literature review……………………………………………………………………………12

Chapter 1: Blood and Soil………………………………………………………..………….20

1.2 : Brexit……………………………………………………………………………………25

Chapter 2: Pub Closures and Gentrification…………………………………………………28

2.1: Contested Spaces: “There used to be a pub there”……………………………………..32

Chapter 3: Cultural Boundaries and Class…………………………………………………..36

3.1: Neoliberalism, Access to Space and Issues with Multiculturalism……………………..38

3.2: Cultural Racism…………………………………………………………………………43

Conclusions………………………………………………………………………………….46

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………50

Acknowledgments

4

I wish to express a world of gratitude to Ashraf Hoque for his undying patience, wisdom and

guidance, along with Timothy Carroll for his help in making me think more like an Anthro-

pologist.

A thousand thank you’s to my family for their unconditional love and support. I would like

also like to thank Charlotte for her persistent belief in me, and to Taijas and Amit who had to

endure listening to me waffle on for hours.

This dissertation wouldn’t have taken place without the incredibly generous and friendly in-

formants of this study who I owe this entire thesis to, in particular Andrew and Joe.

Introduction

“And so all the time the European brain has held onto two contradictory things. The first is

the dominant established narrative of a generation: that anyone in the world can come to Eu-

rope and become a European, and that in order to become a European you merely need to be a

5

person in Europe. The other part of the European brain has spent these years watching and

waiting. This part could always recognise that the new arrivals were not only coming in un-

precedented numbers but were bringing with them customs that, if not all unprecedented, had

certainly not existed in Europe for a long time. The first part of the brain insists that the new-

comers will assimilate and that, given time, even the most hard-to-swallow aspects of the cul-

ture of the new arrivals will become more recognisably European. Optimism favours the first

part of the brain. Events favour the second, which increasingly begins to wonder whether any-

one has the time for the changes that are meant to happen.”

― Douglas Murray (2017)

On 20 April 1968, Enoch Powell, a member of Parliament gave a speech in a meeting of the

Conservative Political Centre in Birmingham which came later to be known as the Rivers of

Blood speech. The speech, itself, predicted how the ‘indigenous population’ would soon find

themselves strangers in their own country, and that anti-discrimination laws made the country

‘oblivious’ to the dangers which confronted it. According to McLean (2001), Powell had a

clear sense of the potential multidimensionality of British politics at the time, and that the

speech was consciously attempting to exploit the clash of identities for political gain (p. 130).

The people who Powell believed he would appeal to most were always those who were from

low‐income, poorly‐educated families (Ibid.).

Using the same strategy of exploitation, Oswald Mosley, former leader of the British Union

Of Fascists, attempted to use the Notting Hill riots in 1958 for political leverage, and ran for

parliament in the General Election in 1959. The number of votes he won, however, did not

even reach double digits. Another far right group such as the British National Party (BNP)

which was formed in 1982 and remained ideologically identical to the National Front (NF),

found that it performed incredibly poorly when it came to securing votes during elections. In-

6

terestingly, during these elections, Gallup polls showed that the vast majority of people in

England were troubled by the levels of immigration that they were witnessing1. To illustrate

this point, C. Howard Wheeldon, who was present during the Rivers of Blood speech, elabo-

rated on the crowd’s reaction saying: "It is fascinating to note what little hostility emerged

from the audience. To the best of my memory, only one person voiced any sign of annoy-

ance” (Heffer, 1999, p.455). The failures of all these political efforts to hone in on the clash of

identities, however, gave insight into peoples’ resistance to support extremist groups, regard-

less of their discontentment with what was happening in the country (Murray 2017).

Although these examples are from some decades ago, the rise in attacks against Muslims and

their establishments in the post 9/11 era2, the success of the ‘leave campaign’ and a resur-

gence of right-wing3 groups in Europe4, all hint at an ever present, and growing, discontent-

ment from the same groups of people Powell and Mosley wished to exploit. The message that

the current right-wing populist parties in Europe are sending is one of nostalgia, of a collec-

tive dissatisfaction with mainstream political parties, and a nationalist aspiration provided by

the overarching slogan: ‘We want our country back’.

What has inspired most of this work is the rich ethnographies on far right groups such as the

English Defence League (EDL) conducted by Pilkington (2013) and Taylor (2013) who re-

veal much of the daily activities of members, while dismantling myths and assumptions that

surround the organisation. What is significant across the studies, is the fact that the spaces in

which these groups choose to have their meetings is almost always within the bounds of a

pub. Interestingly, the number of pubs in the UK has declined year upon year since 1982 5,

1 http://www.gallup.com/poll/1660/immigration.aspx2 The data, collated by the Metropolitan Police - link in bibliography - http://www.independent.co.uk/News/uk/crime/lon-don-bridge-attack-latest-rise-islamophobic-hate-crimes-borough-market-stabbing-terror-police-a7777451.html3 Definition for this paper: The line of belief asserting that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, nor-mal, or desirable, with those supporting this position doing so on the basis of natural law, economics or tradition.4http://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2017/03/rise-nationalists-guide-europe-s-far-right-parties; https://www.vice.-com/en_uk/article/9bzej7/enoch-powell-child-sex-abuse-allegations-the-far-right-833 5 British Beer and Pub Association - Statistics, http://www.beerandpub.com/statistics

7

with the given reasons being: the failures of the establishments to keep up with customer re-

quirements, the 2007 smoking ban, and changes in demographics6.

While both Pilkington and Taylor analyse their data from the perspective of sociology, an-

thropological work (and particularly fieldwork) on the topic of contemporary nationalist senti-

ments within pubs is scarce. Hence, this paper aims to contribute to the scholarly debate on

why themes such as nationalism and an essentialist view of culture maintain such a popular

grip, along with disenfranchisement towards mainstream politics.

In what follows, I have attempted to recount and analyse the experiences of regulars at pubs

within areas which are considered diverse. The questions asked during interviews are mostly

on how these individuals, who identify themselves as ‘White English’, feel things have

changed in the areas they are living in, and their thoughts and feelings towards those changes.

My aim in this paper is to portray how attachments towards social constructs such as national-

ism and ethnicity are not exclusively down to socio-economic factors, as suggested by theo-

rists such as Hobsbawm (1999). I assert that cultural factors play an essential part in these at-

tachments, especially in the face of a perceived influx of migrant Others.

Blee (2002) attributes the lack of interest in the study of right-wing ideologies to the fact that

many scholars regard those who identify with such beliefs as “inexplicable and repugnant, in

addition to being dangerous and difficult” (p. 121-122). As a result, this brings about the

problematic issue of the use of data from ‘externalist studies’ for drawing conclusions about

motivations of activists (Ibid., p.120). A significant portion of these studies, however, focus

on the young and disenfranchised,, explaining that their reasons for joining movements in-

clude a search for community, affirmation of masculinity, and personal loyalties (Ibid.).

6 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-31761269/why-are-british-pubs-closing-down8

This research, however, has a markedly different theme. Not only is it not focused on those

who are young, it also deals with ideological heterogeneity within pubs, since informers were

mixed in their support for both right-wing and left-wing parties. I wish to show that national-

ist attachments are not confined simply to those who are usually caricatured as harbouring far

right ideologies, but that the discontentment towards changes within such areas stretches

across the political spectrum.

Starting with perceptions of indigeneity, in the first chapter, I will illustrate how Kuper’s

(2003) critique on the concept of indigeneity, when it is applied outside of the realms of those

indigenous peoples who have suffered human rights abuses by more powerful groups, can

present a useful tool of analysis in the context of nationalist sentiments in Britain. Further-

more, I will show how the respondents of this ethnography feel that they must cling onto feel-

ings of nativity when faced with both gentrification and a perceived increase in migration.

Other sections of this chapter will highlight how feelings of cultural and financial anxiety are

responsible for the unlikely success of the ‘leave’ campaign, which was seen as a unified

backlash against social forces, which, my informants felt, were acting against them.

The second chapter will deal with attitudes towards pub closures, and feelings of being un-

heard and isolated by public concern and conversation. It will also further elaborate on ways

in which, due to economic circumstances, migrant others are seen as competition for re-

sources. I wish to show how the outcome of such competition results in spaces being

racialised and ethnic grouping being brought to the forefront of imagination.

The cause of many of these issues, in terms of policy, will be touched upon in the third chap-

ter, where I will discuss neoliberalism and multiculturalism. I assert that the latter has brought

9

about the phenomenon of ‘cultural racism’, which is rooted in policies of multiculturalism

taking on problematic concepts of cultural essentialism on board, providing fuel to both right-

wing ideologues and the right-wing media. Additionally, I wish to analyse how such a prob-

lematic take on culture, results in informants taking on racialist sentiments, while at no point

referring to any phenotypical traits. As suggested by Seidel (1986), this type of view on cul-

ture risks producing a veiled speech which effectively masks notions of classical racism from

the general public (p. 88). I assert that this shift towards ‘new’ forms of racisms can act as a

subtle method for bringing right-wing ideologies into the public discourse.

Notes on Method

What follows is the result of visitations to six pubs over a period of two months. The location

of these pubs varied from Harrow (two pubs), Walthamstow (three pubs) and Barking (one

pub). I frequented the pubs exclusively during day, with stays lasting from around 12 till five

pm. During my visitations I drank and occasionally ate meals alongside my informants whilst

conducting interviews, if permission was granted. The drinks I consumed were alcoholic in

nature and of the same brand as the informant I was speaking with. This was done intention-

ally for social etiquette and the comfortability of my informants. As a result, I became famil-

iar with the daily routines of many of my informants, all of whom wished their names to be

anonymised, with each telling me the pseudonym they wished to be addressed with. The main

bulk of my data comes from participant observation, interview transcriptions, and the infor-

mal conversations that took place between my informants and myself. There were also some

conversations which were overheard prior to me approaching said informants, for which I was

then granted permission to use in my research.

10

My approach when conducting this ethnography was to ensure the complete comfort and trust

of my informants by producing no personal reaction to what was being said, particularly if

what was said had racial undertones. This was as a result of acknowledging Blee's (2002) de-

scription of how personal disagreements with those whose beliefs one finds ‘repugnant’ as a

major source of inaccuracy during research (p. 120).

The main pitfall in this method is reflected in the fact that although my fieldwork was con-

ducted in six different pubs, the number of pubs I initially visited was somewhere close to 11.

In five of the pubs I visited, however, none of the customers present were willing to speak to

me. When I asked my informants about the respective pubs and why the case may have been,

they replied that the regulars of those pubs are known to have extremely right-wing views. As

such, my data was unable to take into consideration views that were associated with far right

ideologies unlike previous ethnographies (Pilkington 2013). In spite of this, I was able to gain

access to groups of informants who were active UKIP supporters, and who were happy to

grant me consent for conducting interviews.

My fascination with these ideas lies in the ‘quid pro quo’ approach, that if we expect others to

try and understand our point of view by coming out of their comfort zone, it would courteous

for us to do the same.

Literature review

Handler (1985) notes that nationalism is a social phenomenon, constituted not merely by cul-

tural differences, but by a ‘Western theory of cultural difference’ (p.171). However, in the

case of ethnographies which are conducted in a field site that is, itself, in the West7 or ‘un-ex-

otic’, the analysis of social realities then requires a different understanding. This is because it

7 Geographically speaking 11

deals with views that see ‘culture’ as bounded and distinctive, which is as central to national-

ist rhetoric and ideology as it was to the traditional and outdated anthropological worldview

of the 20th century. Taking this into consideration, the recent and potent surge in right-wing

ideologies and nationhood in the UK requires an analysis that takes into consideration a West-

ern form of ‘common sense’, without condescension towards what is seen as anthropologi-

cally counterfactual.

Where definitions of a nation or national identity are concerned, a concrete agreement among

academics is often rare and contended upon. According to Cohen (1996), this is said to be a

result of the elaborate and numerous angles which scholars can often use to analyse such con-

cepts with (p. 171). However, a starting point which has influenced much of the recent litera-

ture on nationhood is Anderson’s (1983) well known maxim that nations are ‘imagined com-

munities’, since “the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fel-

low members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the mid of each lives the image of their

communion” (p. 6). According to this definition, the construct which is the nation, has no on-

tologically factual basis upon which it is grounded, and is simply a ‘sense’ of homogeneity.

However, in spite of the nation being readily defined as a psychological phenomenon, both

authorities and large parts of the population still treat it as if it were a tangible concept

(Walker, 1994, p.301). Explanations as to why this is the case vary greatly. One such explana-

tion is that nations are essentially political entities, which correlates with authorities’ empha-

sis on nationality as a mechanism for group solidarity and obedience (Ibid. 302). For Smith

(1991), a nation is a named human population, with each member having a shared historic ter-

ritory, economy and legal rights in common with all other members, which are enforced or

made malleable by those in power (pp.14-15). Likewise, Schopflin (1995) places emphasis on

how the idea of nationhood is leveraged to legitimise political demands by invoking ideas of

cultural boundaries as absolute and unchanging (p.42). When taking on such a perspective, re-

12

cent attitudes towards immigration or policies of multiculturalism (Stolcke, 1995, p.4) can be

interpreted as political strategies to scapegoat minority groups whilst simultaneously empha-

sising the importance of nationhood in the face of cultural erosion (Ibid.). As useful as this

analysis on nationhood may be, it only explains a top down perspective of why authorities

would choose to find utility in concepts such as nationhood. Furthermore, it risks analysing

those with nationalist sentiments through a lens that ultimately disregards the individual’s

agency, by viewing them as victims of political manipulation. To understand why nationalism

has spread with such whirlwind force in recent years within Europe8, it is fruitful to view na-

tionalism from a variety of angles and perspectives, such as economic and socio-spatial fac-

tors that provide a more holistic take when investigating what it is that makes an abstract con-

cept such as nationhood seem so concrete.

Theorists such as Connor (1978) contend that nations, themselves, are forms of “self aware

ethnic groups” (p. 388). A simple yet significant observation of the word ‘nation’ is that the

word connotes ‘breed’ or ‘race’ when referring to its Latin etymology (Ibid.). To further elab-

orate on the link between nationhood and ethnicity, Walker (1994) notes how the Pushtun

people who populate the Afghani-Pakistani border-region are not only convinced that all

Pushtuns have evolved from a single source, but that no amount of migration has altered their

genetic strain (Ibid., p.302). Walker highlights that regardless of anthropological or other evi-

dence that is contrary to the conviction of ethnic or national solidarity, the matter of ethnicity

is felt as ‘intuitively’ as that of nationhood, a conviction that gives members of a nation the

feeling that other members share a ‘common blood lineage’ (Ibid., p.302). It is here, upon the

idea of blood and lineage, that we can see the formation of a more tangible and less abstract

notion emerging.

8 http://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2017/03/rise-nationalists-guide-europe-s-far-right-parties; https://www.vice.-com/en_uk/article/9bzej7/enoch-powell-child-sex-abuse-allegations-the-far-right-833

13

From this more tangible and less abstract notion, the concept of being ‘native’ or ‘indigenous’

to a space can be seen to form, when associating blood and lineage with a habitat. Critics of

such concepts are Kuper (2003), who have claimed that the very term indigenous is repugnant

and racially segregating (p.395). Gomes (2013), when writing about Anthropology and the

politics of indigeneity, acknowledges Kuper’s argument in light of the epistemological and

ontological problems with the term ‘indigenous’ and that it may be tantamount to the prover-

bial ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’ (p.14). He further describes it as a ‘discursive

risk’, explaining how many marginalised groups of people invoke the term as a form of

“strategic essentialism in their counter-hegemonic social movements against exploitation and

oppression” (Ibid.).

However, with all these concepts in mind, the question still remains as to why some members

of the population, such as the informants of this ethnography, have greater attachments to

ideas of ethnicity and nationhood than others. Jenkins (2008) accurately highlights that there

are varying levels of salience and force that exist in regards to ethnic attachments. He de-

scribes how for many people(s), ethnicity is a background factor, part of the cultural furniture

of everyday life, and is consequently little attended to. However, for many others, ethnicity is

an integral and dynamic aspect of self-conscious selfhood and everyday discourse, rooted in

the process of early socialisation and then further produced and reproduced in one’s day to

day life (p. 80). A further point made by Jenkins, that was alluded to previously in this paper,

is that regardless of how imagined ethnic identity may be, the concept, itself, has very real-

world consequences (Ibid. p.80).

The link between the varying degrees of ethnic attachment and economic deprivation can be

found in Anderson’s (1983) historical account on why ideas of nationhood and nationality ini-

14

tially grew to prominence. Highlighting human life as being full of inescapable combinations

of necessity and chance, Anderson asserts that the “great merit of traditional religious world-

views… has been their concern with man-in-the cosmos, man as species being, and the con-

tingency of life” (Ibid.). The suggestion made for the prominence of religious ideologies such

as Buddhism, Christianity or Islam surviving for so many centuries, is down to them being an

‘imaginative response’ to the overwhelming burden of human suffering such as disease, muti-

lation, grief, age and death (Ibid.). Following on from this, Anderson notes a correlation be-

tween the dawn of nationalism and the diffusion of religious thought in eighteenth century

Europe (Ibid.). This was then interpreted as the ebbing of religious belief, requiring an alter-

native ideology which would deal with the suffering that religion alleviated. Anderson’s as-

sertion is that few things are better suited to fill that void than the idea of nationhood, that “[i]t

is the magic of nationalism to turn chance into destiny” (Ibid., p.11). Although Anderson ac-

knowledged that nationalism does not simply supersede religion, he proposed that nationalism

has to be understood by aligning it, not with self-consciously held political ideologies, but

with the large cultural systems that preceded it, out of which, as well as against which, it came

into being (Ibid., p. 12).

It is within this framework that the respondents in this ethnography could be said to have

greater attachments to the ideas of ethnicity and nationhood as a result of socio-economic

hardship and the subsequent suffering. For Hobsbawm, unlike previous theorists on this sub-

ject (Connor 1978, Walker 1994), cultural and ethnic elements are seen as peripheral elements

of nationalism, claiming that “If the nation had anything in common from the popular-revolu-

tionary point of view, it was not, in any fundamental sense, ethnicity, language, and the like,

though these could be indications of collective belonging” (p.20). The suggestion made in re-

lation to the current political climate, is that when inequalities begin to increase on a social

level, notions of the nationhood that ethnic groups share become more attractive as ideologies,

15

due to their egalitarian undertones. This paper will aim to show that although such an analysis

is valid when applying an economic angle to the concept of nationalism, attachments to per-

ceived cultural factors must also take into account the historical aspect of migration. Signifi-

cant to this analysis, is Weber’s (1998) assertion that there are sharp demarcations of areas

where ethnic customs and traditions are not conditioned by either political or economic fac-

tors, namely, by way of migration (p.24). This brings us to the point upon which Spain

(1992) has elaborated upon, namely the idea of dispossessed agency (p.125). Due to what I

will suggest to be socio-economic circumstances, informants of this study feel that they have

no control over their housing situations, employment options and quite importantly, rates of

migrants coming into their neighbourhoods. I assert that this lack of agency both in terms of

economic opportunity, space and politics, feeds in feverishly to movements such as the

‘leave’ campaign which promise a sense of control, agency and national sovereignty.

At this point, it is instructive to note that as undoubtedly important as such theories are to the

understanding of nationalist sentiments, it is equally important to note that the type of nation-

alism being studied in this paper is the ideas of ‘Britishness’, which brings about its own com-

plexities.

What makes the sense of Britishness or English nationhood different to others is that it has

never been rooted in images of a revolutionary struggle, in which the masses fought for their

rights as citizens. According to Schopflin (1995), civic identity in Britain evolved through a

slow and gradual process, and has always had ‘strong ethno-religious undertones’ (p.41). As

Cohen (1996) points out, “most inhabitants of the UK attained their “citizenship” by a legisla-

tive sleight-of-hand in the 1948 Nationality Act, not by public discussion, agitation or revolu-

tion” (p.7). What makes this point significant is its indication that any study of British nation-

alism should take into consideration that the collective myth of the separate destiny of the

16

country is based on an imperialist context, without which analysis would risk inaccuracies

(Smith 1998, p.51). With this in mind, immigration, policies of multiculturalism, along with a

colonial past, are all made relevant when attempting to understand the attitudes of informants

who feel that increased migration threatens their way of life, along with their identities as

‘British.’

Grillo (2003) asserts that people who feel like they may be deprived of their culture, resort to

a need for ‘cultural conservationism’, a mode of thinking (often present in multiculturalism),

in which cultural authenticity must be protected like a rare species (p. 39). What is important

to note is that this perspective may also entail a form of biological determinism, with cultural

traits and differences seen as ‘bio-cultural’, ‘fixed, solid almost biological’ and also

‘inheritable’ (Gilroy, 1987, p.39).

To see the link between cultural conservationism (along with seeing one’s culture as bounded)

and ideas of class struggle, we must refer to Jacobson’s (1997) ethnography of second-genera-

tion British Pakistanis on their understanding and perceptions of ‘Britishness’. In her study,

respondents identified civic, racial, and cultural boundaries which impacted their self-percep-

tion of being British (p.188). They further elaborated on how they felt British with regards to

both the cultural and civic boundaries, but that their parents felt British only in the civic sense

(Ibid.). Their parents’ national allegiances were still rooted in Pakistan, due to both, insecurity

in regards to national identity and their hostile reception upon arrival in Britain (Ibid., p.189).

However, what is significant to note here, as it is in other such studies (Hoque, 2011), is that

ethnic minorities are engaged in a constant process of redefining both their own ethnic iden-

tity and the prevailing concepts of what it is to be British (Ibid.). The link between class strug-

gle and cultural boundedness is that as a result of an increase in economic opportunities and

reforms within Britain, these groups have been able to situate themselves within the identity

17

of Britishness by loosening and widening their perceptions of cultural boundaries. In this pa-

per, such significant correlations between class struggle and feelings of attachment to ones

culture will be elaborated upon, as they are common theme throughout. Furthermore, I will

analyse how the influx of perceived migrant ‘Others’ and wealthy citizens (due to gentrifica-

tion) add fuel to nationalist sentiments and therefore, to the need for cultural conservationism.

What Grillo (2003) then states to be ‘cultural anxiety’, comes from a definition of culture that

is as bounded and fixed as the idea of nationhood or ethnicity. Other than arguing that this

perception of boundedness of culture comes down to class, this paper will also critique poli-

cies of multiculturalism by displaying how such policies take problematic concepts of cultural

essentialism on board, providing fuel to forms of ‘cultural racism’ that are rife among right-

wing ideologues.

What is meant by cultural essentialism is elaborated by Wikan (2002) who describes it as a

system of belief grounded in a conception of human beings as bearers of a culture, located

within a world of boundaries, which defines them and differentiates them from others (p.75).

This is largely problematised by Turner (1999) who sees multiculturalism as a code word for

minority demands for separate recognition in academic and other cultural institutions, tending

to become a form of identity politics, in which the concept of culture becomes merged with

that of ethnic identity (p.441). He explains that from an anthropological standpoint, this move,

at least in its more simplistic ideological forms, is fraught with dangers both theoretical and

practical, since it risks bounding the idea of culture as the property of an ethnic group or race;

this, in turn, fetishises the ‘ethnic’ or ‘exotic’ in ways that put them beyond the reach of criti-

cal analysis, and, thus, of anthropology (Ibid., p. 412). For Gitlin (1992), this view of multi-

culturalism is a form of ‘interest-group pluralism’, making a fetish of the virtues of the minor-

18

ity, which is both intellectually stifling, but also politically damaging to the left and empower-

ing to the right-wing media (pp. 188-189).

A further issue raised by the informants of this work was the pairing of multiculturalism with

policies of neoliberalism9. It may be asserted that the closure of the pub spaces with the rise in

migration in this study’s field-sites relates to the phenomenon of contested spaces, where so-

cio-spatial identities are negotiated, particularly since establishments such as pubs or football

grounds are cherished as sacred ‘places’ (Guilianotti and Armstrong, 2002, p. 212). The prob-

lematic pairing of neoliberalism and multiculturalism has been evident in previous ethnogra-

phies such as Muehlmann (2009), who studied Native-American fishermen in Mexico, assert-

ing that the pairing of neoliberalism and multiculturalism brings perceived ethnic differences

to the foreground, particularly when issues of space and economics are involved (p.469).

Finally, this paper will echo Abu-Lughod’s (1991) point regarding anthropologists in the

West retaining their identities as anthropologists by making the communities they study seem

‘Other’, in the hope that their work does not mix in with sociology or history. It may be as-

serted that a lack of anthropological literature limits the scope within which such social phe-

nomena can be analysed, whilst simultaneously revitalising an orientalist mentality.

Chapter 1: Blood and Soil

In this chapter, I will attempt to illustrate how Kuper’s (2003) critique of indigeneity as a con-

cept can be fruitful when applied to a Western context. This is in light of my informants’ per-

ception of themselves as indigenous, in comparison to a migrant other who is seen as unde-

serving of the privileges ascribed to them by the country they reside in. The intention behind

this angle of analysis is inspired by Handler’s (1985) assertion that the concept of nationalism

9 liberalism favouring free-market capitalism19

itself is constituted not merely by cultural differences, but by a ‘Western theory of cultural

difference’ (p.171). Therefore, to study nationalism in the context of my field-site, I must ana-

lyse it in the scope of a Western form of common sense, which, in this case, is the idea of

British indigeneity.

The term ‘indigenous’ started being utilised in order to describe culturally distinct groups af-

fected by colonisation (Lewinski, 2004, p. 131). According to Paine (1990), anthropologists

have imagined themselves to be the voice of these groups, both in post and pre-colonial times

(p. 210). Although terms such as ‘indigenous’ are still in use, with their meaning varying over

time, current schools of Anthropology attempt to use this ‘voice’ to empower those who are

voiceless. Ironically, these methods were employed as ‘technologies of rule’ that sought to

‘obtain space and resources’ during the colonial period (Asad, 1973 ; Simpson 2007, p.68).

Anderson’s (1983) writings on nationality and nations as products of human imagination

show demonstrably sharp contrasts with the 19th century definitions of ‘peoples’, initially an

anthropological notion used to describe “a body of persons that are united by a common cul-

ture, tradition, or sense of kinship” (Lewinski, 2004, p. 131). Hence, Anderson’s (1983) per-

spective of nations being ‘imagined communities’ can be said to be in active engagement with

the de-essentialisation of colonial perspectives on classifying peoples, which enabled marked

colonial situations such as warfare, commerce and missionary activity (Simpson 2007, p. 69).

In accordance with this, however, scholars have argued that a paradox begins to emerge when

referring to someone, or group of peoples, as being indigenous. This is in virtue of how the

term essentially binds concepts such as race10, culture and space together by identifying them

10 groupings based on shared physical traits, ancestry, or genetics. Such groupings have been highlighted as ontologically baseless, and further disputed by modern biology. However, they continue to have a strong influence over contemporary so-cial relations.

20

with specific groups of people. Vocal among such scholars is Kuper (2003), who asserts that

the privileges that indigenous peoples seek are based upon a ‘blood and soil’ ideology, which

is essentially ‘right wing and fundamentally racist’ (p. 395). Critiques of Kuper were quick to

highlight the shortcoming of his analysis, claiming that he willfully ignores extensive human

rights abuses suffered by indigenous populations, along with their many experiences of dis-

possession by more powerful groups (Turner, 2004, p. 45). As interesting as such debates may

be, my point here is not to discuss the term indigeneity per se, but, as mentioned previously,

to illustrate the framework required to understand the way in which my respondents perceive

themselves and migrants within the boundaries of indigeneity. Furthermore, I wish to elabo-

rate upon the ways in which socio-economic factors strengthen such definitions.

When engaging with Anderson’s (1983) historical account as to why ideas of nationhood and

nationality grew to prominence by providing an imagined response to suffering, I suggest that

such ideas of indigeneity and nationhood are particularly vivid in communities with high

competition for economic resources. Doug, one of my informants from Walthamstow, stated:

“Woman I’ve known for many years now, she has two children and one on the way, you

know where social housing sent her? Chigwell! All her friends and family are here, and at the

same time, we see families from Romania and Bulgaria who just arrived yesterday being put

in Walthamstow.” While seemingly agreeing, Doug’s friend Harry elaborated further: “We

were born and bred here; plus, it’s not like any of them lot are doctors.”

The woman in Doug’s description, like her children and extended family, are said to belong

“here” (Walthamstow), with a sense of injustice expressed at the space being given to those

who “just arrived.” The fact that such a decision was made by social housing workers gives

insight into the economic circumstances of these individuals, an example of when institutional

forces frustrate human agency (Spain, 1992, p. 125). Harry’s assertion that none of “them” are

21

doctors can be said to signify both what is perceived as usefulness in society, and an under-

standing of competition faced with regards to employment. The lack of agency displayed in

both the individuals’ living conditions and their choice of occupation, act to magnify the

boundaries between those described as “here” (the indigenous) and those having “just ar-

rived.”

Therefore, Hobsbawm’s (1990) statement that “we cannot assume that, for most people, na-

tional identification, when it exists, excludes or is always or even superior to the remainder of

the set of identification which constitute the social being” (p. 11) is put under contestation,

since it does not consider such identification in the context of migration. My informants’ iden-

tification with their sense of belonging to a place where they were “born and bred” is seen to

be heightened when put into contrast with migrants, who, due to economic circumstances, are

viewed as competition for space and resources.

I would like to refer again to Kuper’s critique of the concept of indigeneity, and to point out

that, when it is applied outside of the realms of those indigenous peoples who have suffered

human rights abuses by more powerful groups, it can present a useful mode of analysis in

context of this ethnography. Gomes (2013), when writing about anthropology and the politics

of indigeneity, acknowledges Kuper’s argument in light of the epistemological and ontologi-

cal problems with the term ‘indigenous’ and that it may be tantamount to the proverbial

“throwing the baby out with the bathwater” (p. 14). He further describes it as a “discursive

risk”, explaining how many marginalised groups of people invoke the term as a form of

“strategic essentialism in their counter-hegemonic social movements against exploitation and

oppression” (Ibid.)

However, I would like to again note that I am aware of the threats faced by indigenous peo-

22

ples with regards to their sovereignty, economic well-being and access to resources on which

their cultures depend. The parallel I am making in reference to those in the West should not

be conflated with an attempt to draw any form of equivalency between them in terms of hu-

man rights issues. I am merely stating that since feelings of indigeneity are expressed by the

informants of this ethnography, it would be parochial not to implement theorists who have

elaborated upon the subject matter.

Kapur’s (2003) argument that the term indigenous is based on a “blood and soil” ideology can

be seen to draw parallels with Harry’s “born and bred” statement, which can then be viewed

as a form of ‘strategic essentialism’ to gain privileges based on an ontologically false premise.

My assertion has been that such essentialism is drawn out of socio-economic circumstances,

however, the question then emerges as to what forces (or social movements) these individuals

feel are acting against them. I will discuss this in the context of perceived social forces being

resisted in the form of votes to leave the European Union (EU). Furthermore, I will elaborate

on how the leave campaign presented an opportunity for people like Doug to reclaim a sense

of agency.

1.2: Brexit

Sovereignty signifies different things to different people, but it almost always refers to politi-

cal autonomy and rights of self-determination (Sturm, 2007, p. 577). In a similar perspective

on how ideas of national identification strengthen with economic deprivation, austerity and

deterioration of living standards have been pinpointed as the factors driving the ‘leave’ cam-

paign during the EU referendum (Gledhill, 2016). Like Schopflin (1995) and Smith (1991),

who see ideas of nationhood as a tool to legitimise political demands by invoking ideas of cul-

tural boundaries, Stein (2016) points out how feelings of nationhood during the referendum

23

were orchestrated by political elites, some of whom captured “the public discourse so as to

steer public grievances toward ethnic and racial “others” – away from their own austerity

policies” (p. 3).

As useful as this analysis on the EU referendum is, it only explains a top-down perspective

based on political manipulation by authority figures. In pursuit of a more ground-level under-

standing, what I found from my informants was that even amongst those who chose not to

vote, there resided a unanimous feeling of empathy for the campaign that pursued what they

perceived to bring them sovereignty. As stated by Joe: “It’s just sad you know? Imagine being

so desperate. I think even if they asked us to vote for whether or not we should burn down all

the trees, people would say ‘fuck it! It’s better than nothing, maybe they’ll listen to us!” Joe

elaborated further: “I understand it though, most people I know voted to leave. Friends, fam-

ily, you can’t even blame them. I tried to talk them out of it, told them it’s like cutting your

nose off to spite your face. They’re just fed up, you know? Really fed up.”

Anthony: “It’s the arrogance of the remain side, as if I’m an idiot, as if I don’t understand the

economic problems we’ll have when leaving the EU. The reason I voted was simple; I wanted

us to be able to make our own decisions. If someone who was [sic] rich wanted higher taxa-

tion, everyone would clap their hands to how selfless they’re being. Now I’m saying, okay, I

understand that there will be economic problems, but I’m willing to be okay with that since

we’ll have sovereignty. Now all of a sudden I’m some knuckle-dragging racist.”

Anthony’s frustration at being condescended to was something felt throughout the pubs I vis-

ited. Relating back to the lack of agency felt by Doug’s acquaintance in regards to social

housing allocations, along with Joe’s friends and family feeling ‘fed up,’ using the vote was

here seen as a chance to be heard and to take back control, or as Anthony expressed ‘make our

24

own decisions.’

Like Anderson, Durkheim (1917) viewed religion as encouraging social cohesion, stating that

‘men who feel themselves united, partially by bonds of blood, but still more by a community

of interest and tradition, assemble and become conscious of their moral unity…they are led to

represent this unity” (p. 432). When translating this sentiment to ideas of nationhood, the

leave campaign promising resistance against the EU, which threatened what was perceived as

community interest and tradition, provided such an organised feeling of unity. Once assem-

bled on such an idea, the moral stance can be said to have been paved for a collective fight for

national sovereignty, in the face of political elites who won’t “listen” and the “rich” who

voted to remain.

Both the concepts of unity and social cohesion provided by nationhood are described by An-

derson (1983) to be a sort of ‘political love’, to which he points out is evident in the way in

which languages describe the vocabulary of kinship as ‘motherland’ or home as ‘earth’ (p.

144). He elaborates how idioms such as these denote something which one is ‘naturally’ tied

to. Since ideas such as nationhood are linked to something perceived to be ‘natural’, it also

suggests that these things are not chosen. In the same way that one does not choose one’s

mother, the ‘motherland’ is something that has an element of destiny attached to it. Taking

this into consideration, Anderson states how “For most ordinary people of whatever class, the

whole point of the nation is that it is interest-less” (Ibid.) What is significant here is the state-

ment “whatever class”, which provides an egalitarian sentiment, that the ‘motherland’ cares

for all. Anderson elaborates that due to this sense of destiny and bonding between the individ-

ual and nation, the nation can evoke feelings of duty, or in other words, the nation “can ask

for sacrifices” (Ibid., p. 145). It is within this frame of analysis that the leave campaign can be

said to have provided such an opportunity for sacrifice. Anthony’s sacrifice is then the “eco-

25

nomic problems” that he is conscious Britain will have by leaving the EU, which he sees as a

worthy exchange for the prospect of national sovereignty.

Anthony expresses what he sees to be a form of political double-standards, expressing that the

reaction to someone wealthy requesting a higher rate of tax, would be adoration and praise.

The frustration can be said to come from Anthony seeing how society sees one form of sacri-

fice (demands for higher taxation by the rich) as virtuous, but see other forms of sacrifice

(such as his own) as something reprehensible. Furthermore, when applying Anderson’s no-

tions on the nation being without interest, Anthony’s perspective on the arrogant “rich” can

entail a feeling that they are not fulfilling a moral duty. The remain side would then be seen as

acting in accordance with their own interests rather than committing to the national interests

of sovereignty and independent decision making. The next chapter will elaborate on how this

judgment may be interpreted as having its foundation within issues relating to class.

Adopting Durkheimian perspectives on ‘cohesion’ and Anderson’s claims on the existential

void left by the ebbing of religion, Bellah et al. (1983) attempt to link such unity to ideas

about patriotism, claiming that classical religious forms constituting a “failing rhetoric”, leave

a void for the concept of ‘civil’ religion, such as nationhood to grow (Ibid.). Interestingly,

Bellah et al. recognise ‘totems’11 such as flags, as representing the national ideals, with the be-

lief that such images strengthen notions of collective identity (Ibid.). If pubs, the space in

which these interviews were conducted, are seen as directly linking to British identity, then

how much do the closure of pubs affect feelings of nationalist sentiment, particularly in areas

with high levels of migration?

11 A sacred object or symbol that serves as an emblem of a group of people.26

Chapter 2: Pub Closures and Gentrification

“Although the pub is very much part of the English culture, it also has its own ‘social

micro-climate.’ Like all drinking-places, it is in some respects a ‘liminal’ zone, an

equivocal, marginal, borderline state, in which one finds a degree of ‘cultural remis-

sion’ – a structured, temporary relaxation or suspension of normal social controls (also

known as ‘legitimised deviance’ or ‘time-out behaviour’). It is partly because of this

caveat that an examination of the rules of English pub-talk should tell us a lot about

Englishness.’ (Fox 2004, p. 35)

In spite of the topic of this paper being imbedded in delicate topics such as nationalism and

xenophobia, it is important to mention that during my fieldwork I was presented with a great

deal of generosity, along with a friendly atmosphere inside the pubs where I was given per-

mission to conduct my interviews. As Anderson (1983) points out, it is useful to remind our-

selves that feelings of nationalism do not only bring about hatred, fear and racism, but can in-

spire much love and support within a community (p. 141). An appreciation of such factors can

provide insight into why pub closures in areas, such as the ones in this ethnography, are met

with a great deal of despondency.

As Anthony expressed, “I wouldn't say I come to the pub to escape, what I come here for is a

pint with regulars who respect me and my values. There are unwritten rules like buying

rounds, or who likes to drink what. Going to a local brings people together.”

Tom: “I love my local. All my best mates come here straight after work; it’s like a small com-

munity, everyone knows each other, and there’s this sort of common respect that you can’t re-

27

ally get anywhere else… I guess it is a British thing, isn't it? I don’t think you could find a

pub in Italy or Greece… They do have good drinks mind you! (laughs)”

The space can be seen to provide a unique feeling of communion [ethnography here]. The

very word ‘local’ to describe the pub, is testimony to the sense of continuity, regularity and

order that the field-site provides for the ‘regulars’ who frequent the establishment (Watson,

2004, p. 204). Tilley and Cameron-Daum (2017) in their analysis on space, state how the

body and space are ‘entangled in a network of material and social relations’ which provide

both affordances and constraints for the performance of ‘identities that always occur in partic-

ular material and cultural contexts’ (p. 7).

When embarking upon such aspects of material anthropology, particularly the juxtaposition of

identity and space, Hobsbawm’s (1990) claims that cultural and ethnic elements are entirely

peripheral elements of nationalist sentiments, come under contestation (p. 20). It is precisely

in light of such interactions between national identity and spaces linked to heritage in which

this paper supports Anderson’s claim that a purely Marxist analysis, bereft of cultural ele-

ments, is not sufficient when analysing nationalist sentiments.

Relating back to the ideas of dispossessed agency felt by Doug when speaking on situations

with social housing, a great number of complaints were owed to the changes seen both inside

pubs and the areas where my informants lived. As Sol states, “These changes we’re seeing

here, it’s because people like us are no longer part of the conversation. People move in and

change things we relate to, things that remind us we’re home. We’re forgotten; so is our cul-

ture.”

28

Ethan: “It’s just anything to attack the pub culture ey? It’s never been the same since the

smoking ban — never! All this health and safety bollocks!”

Sol : “People come in here, ask for a pint of Leffe, and when they tell them they don’t serve

that, they go “well you should” - it’s that sort of attitude that means we don’t have a TV

around here anymore to watch the football.”

The “attack” on “pub culture” evident in the frustration linked to the smoking ban and the re-

moval of traditional pastimes such as snooker, darts and football on TV, are again seen as be-

ing related to forces (or social movements) that these individuals feel are acting against them.

Therefore, the anger felt by my informants is not necessarily because those from a lower so-

cio-economic class hold unusual levels of attachment to a place, but that it is the fact that

there are more powerful and economically wealthy groups who are changing what they feel is

‘home’, which when put into such a context, is not an unusual response. Relating back to An-

thony’s feelings towards being condescended to from the ‘remain’ side, the frustration can be

seen in the way in which such attachments to nationhood or ideas of sovereignty are consid-

ered alien concepts to the “rich” by these people. Worst yet, Anthony sees this not only as a

miscommunication by those of a higher economic status, but that having such attachments

are, for them, associated with someone who is morally contemptuous and foolish, or in his

own words a “knuckle-dragging racist.”

As Allen (2008) argues when speaking on gentrification, “ontologically, working class house-

holds relate to their homes in terms of a ‘we being’, as sites where their lives with others are

played out, which is contrasted to the ‘me being’ demonstrated among middle class home-

29

owners who seek to use their homes as a means to secure their class position, increase their

wealth and impose themselves on the urban landscape” (p. 153).

Aligning such analysis with Anderson’s (1983) implication of nationalism’s role as an ‘imag-

ined response’ to suffering, since those of a higher economic class have agency within both

their living locations and labour decisions, attachments to spaces associated with the ‘British

identity’ are seen to dilute. This is evident in how the informants felt changes came about to

ensure those newcomers from wealthier backgrounds did not feel out of place, implying their

own presence as secondary to what was seen as financially beneficial.

Considering the gentrification and social forces that are seen to be acting against my infor-

mants, it is pertinent to ask how ideas of immigration and immigrants are portrayed and used

in right-wing narratives. This is especially germane considering that these locals consider one

of the main causes of gentrification to be the influx of ‘others,’ whether this be foreign nation-

als or ‘native’ wealthy citizens.

2.1: Contested Spaces (there used to be a pub there)

‘I hear people say we have to stop and debate globalisation. You might as well debate whether

autumn should follow summer…the character of this changing world is indifferent to tradi-

tion. Unforgiving of frailty. No respecter of past reputations. It has no custom and practice. It

is replete with opportunity, but they only go to those swift to adapt, slow to complain, open,

willing and able to change.’ Tony Blair - 2005 Labour conference

30

The influx of migrant and wealthy nationals is vividly noted by my informants Jessie and

Mark when speaking on changes occurring in their area. As Jessie, a waitress, who is 21 years

of age, stated: “I think it’s really great with the number of people coming in, obviously loads

of businesses have opened up, and that brings more money in - trouble is, though, this also

means that many of the locals end up leaving because the prices increase, that’s the only trou-

ble really”. Mark, a 66 year old pensioner, also expressed his opinion on the emergence of

these new businesses: “There used to be a pub down this road called The Apollo, another one

further down from that…I can’t remember the name. But anyway, both closed down and

what’s replaced them is a shisha cafe and an Indian takeaway. Now that tells me nobody was

going to those pubs. Another thing it tells me though, is how quickly things are changing

around here.”

The reason I have included the ages of my informants Jessie and Mark within this paper, is to

highlight the different perspectives from which they view the changes in the area within

which they both live. Twenty one year old Jessie, sees “people coming in” as synonymous

with economic opportunity, with the only “trouble" being people leaving as a result of the in-

crease in prices. Mark on the other hand, puts emphasis on the ‘types’ of new businesses that

are replacing the old ones. It is important to note that both my informants claimed that they

were born in Harrow, and have never moved anywhere else since. The differences in perspec-

tive, particularly relating to Mark’s dissatisfaction, links in with Weber’s (1998) claim that

tensions are most likely to occur when groups of people that have previously lived in com-

plete or partial isolation from each other are forced to become accommodated to ‘heteroge-

nous conditions of existence’ (p. 24).

31

Since the Harrow area was vastly less diverse when Mark was growing up, compared to

Jessie, the ‘heterogenous conditions of existence’ can be said to come more naturally to Jessie

compared to Mark, which explains the different ways in which they perceive the changes in

the area. As Jenkins (2008) accurately highlights, there are varying levels of salience and

force that exist in regards to feelings towards one’s ethnic attachments; rooted in the process

of early socialisation and then further produced and reproduced in one’s day to day life (p.

80). Confirming the demographic variation in Harrow, my informant Andrew gave a histori-

cal perspective from his own experiences: “I can remember in 1972 the first Indian child com-

ing to our school. If you look at the photographs from my years, there’s…I still remember his

name…Rahul Canubar, everyone adored him and he was a wonderful lad, originally Gujarati,

everyone was fascinated by him, but if you looked at that picture, it might as well have been

in the 1930’s in terms of demographics. Very much white, completely white configuration.

It’s now 80 per-cent ethnic at the very same school that I used to frequent, and of the white

branch half of those would be Irish travellers. I often see it on the buses now, I am the only

white person on the bus.”

Perceptions of cultural and ethnic difference are here seen to be reinforced by a sense of nos-

talgia (which, as noted previously Jessie did not exhibit). It would then be speculative to sug-

gest that modern feelings of nationhood are free of such reminiscence, further supporting the

argument that perceived cultural factors are crucial in the analysis of nationhood. Echoing my

earlier reference to Weber’s (1998) claim on ethnic tensions, Thomas and Clarke (2006) note

that although political forms, cultural imaginaries, social lives, and economic interests may

engage global possibilities, the process of globalisation can also produce contradictory trajec-

tories (p. 27). They warn that under ‘volatile conditions’, global processes have the potential

to “open up the possibility for the (re)articulation of racial and national identities” (Ibid.).

32

Theorists such as Barth (1969) stress that ethnic groups are socially constructed, and, there-

fore, constantly negotiated and renegotiated by both external recognition12 and internal self-

identification (p. 10). In spite of such claims, this revival in ethnic identities can be witnessed

in Mark and Andrew’s feelings towards the changes in their neighbourhood - specifically in

this instance, a pub, which is seen as the culturally specific space for drinking in Britain, be-

ing replaced by a “shisha cafe”, a predominantly Middle-Eastern space for smoking molasses-

based tobacco. Such an occurrence materialises Weber’s (1998) assertion that migration

within a given community can create sharp divisions based on perceived ideas of ethnicity,

which can evoke ideas of ‘blood dis-affinity’ (Blutsfremdheit) (p. 24). Therefore, what is sig-

nificant here is not only the lack of economic investment on one type of establishment over

another, but how these establishments can be seen to act as spaces which represent different

perceived ethnic groups, or as Linke (2013) articulates, when a space is ‘racialised’ (p. 1222).

Pub spaces are then perceived to harbour ‘native’ identities, where inclusion and exclusion of

this identity is negotiated constantly within white working class communities in Britain (Guil-

ianotti and Armstrong, 2002, p. 212).

Hence, Sol’s notable statement: “We’re forgotten; so is our culture.” along with other infor-

mants discontentment towards the changes he is witnessing, signify the repetitive theme of

dispossessed agency. This is testament to the significance of how both cultural and socio-eco-

nomic factors play into sentiments of nationalism and the strengthening of ‘imagined commu-

nities’. However, the question then arises as to what the consequences are for those who hold

such sentiments.

Chapter 3: Cultural Boundaries and Class

12 By ‘external recognition’, I refer to others that one interacts with on a day to day basis 33

I wish to relate the changes in pub space to Grillo's (2003) assertion that people who feel like

they may be deprived of their culture resort to a need for ‘cultural conservationism’ (p. 39).

This is said to be a mode of thinking (often present in multiculturalism), in which cultural au-

thenticity is seen to be like a rare species, and, as a result, in need of protection (p. 39).

To show the link between between cultural conservationism (along with seeing one’s culture

as bounded) and ideas of class struggle, I would like to refer to Jacobson’s (1997) ethnogra-

phy of British Pakistanis on their understanding and perceptions of ‘Britishness’. In her study,

respondents identified civic, racial, and cultural boundaries which impacted their self-percep-

tion of being British (p.188). They further elaborated on how they felt British in regards to

both the cultural and civic boundary, but that their parents felt British only in the civic sense

of citizenship (Ibid.). The explanation given as to why this was pertained to how their parents’

national allegiances were still very much rooted in Pakistan, due to both insecurity in regards

to their national allegiances, and a hostile reception upon their arrival in the country (Ibid.,

p.189). Jacobson (1997) attempts to locate this insecurity in citizenship, by taking into ac-

count the fact that throughout modern British history, the notion of a civic identity has been

juxtaposed with concepts of empire, domination and power relations (Ibid.). However, what is

significant to note here as it is in other studies of young ethnic minorities (Hoque, 2011), is

that ethnic minorities are engaged in a process of constantly redefining both their own minor-

ity ethnicity and prevailing concepts of British national identity (Ibid.). The link between class

struggle and cultural boundedness is that, as a result of an increase in economic opportunities

and reforms within Britain, young ethnic minorities have been able to situate themselves

within the identity of Britishness by loosening and widening their perceptions of cultural

boundaries.

34

From Jacobson’s description, it is evident that the respondents’ parents held onto their own

national allegiances, since they, like Andrew and Mark, previously lived in complete or par-

tial isolation from other imagined communities, resulting in the said ‘hostile reception upon

their arrival in the country’. What I would like to highlight here, however, is that both respon-

dents of Jacobson’s ethnography and informants like Jessie, due to an increase in economic

opportunities and reforms, are able to negotiate perceptions of ethnicity (Barth, 1969, p. 10).

In the same way, Anderson (1983) was cautious not to state that nationalism simply supersede

religion. I wish to note that I am not simply saying that attachments to nationalism deteriorate

once economic circumstances improve. However, with the evidence provided, the varying

levels of salience and force that exist in regards to ethnic and nationalist attachments can be

seen to have links with socioeconomic conditions. Given that the two are closely linked

throughout this and other ethnographic data, I assert that it is pertinent that future studies on

the subject matter take both into consideration during their analysis. The question remains,

however, as to how the schism between these imagined communities came to be produced.

In the following Chapter, I will shift the argument to how policies of multiculturalism take

problematic concepts of cultural essentialism on board, providing fuel to forms of ‘cultural

racism’ that are rife among right-wing ideologues.

Chapter 3.1: Neoliberalism, Access to Space and Issues with Multiculturalism

Muehlmann (2009), while studying fishing rights in the Colorado Delta in Mexico, pro-

35

claimed: “The pairing of both neoliberal policies and discourses of multiculturalism create po-

litical conditions in which ethnic difference are brought to the foreground.” (p. 469).

The above quote, resonant with the example witnessed in the replacement of the pub with a

shisha cafe and Indian restaurant, displays elements of the two policies which I argue are cru-

cial to the understanding of frustrations displayed by my informants. This Chapter will elabo-

rate upon how both neoliberalism and multiculturalism have encouraged forms of what Kun-

danini (2016) calls ‘segregated communities’, within which there is a lack of access between

said groups (p. 109).

Gutmann (1994) describes multiculturalism as “the state of a society or the world containing

many cultures that interact in some significant way with each other” (p.3). The implementa-

tion of multicultural policies in the UK initially aimed to ensure that post-war migrants, arriv-

ing as citizens of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth were recognised as ethnic and

racial minorities; requiring state support and differential treatment to overcome barriers to

their exercise of citizenship (Meer and Modood, 2014, pp.658–59). Such policies, however, as

expressed by my informant Joe, resulted in increased division as opposed to assimilation.

Joe: “I see integration as a two way street, if most of my time is spent here, and most of their

time is spent in a mosque, where is the point where we have any conversation? My son’s

close mate was a Pakistani boy, incredibly calm and collected, wouldn’t hurt a fly. They al-

ways used to play football together, and I would sit by reading the paper to make sure nothing

happened to them. Now that same boy is serving 25 years in prison for throwing acid on a

bloke’s face who was messing with his sister. I don’t for a second believe this was out of his

own will. It’s the family, they put him up to it. Now had I not known this child I would paint

the whole of Pakistan with this brush, but most people don’t have this kind of access, and if

36

that's all the stories you hear, you know, child marriage and genital mutilation, is it really a

wonder…?”

What can be seen as prevalent among both Joe and Mark’s statements is a separation of sig-

nificant social spaces within the same area. Specifically, the two spaces perceived as ‘native’

(the pub), and foreign (shisha cafe or Mosque), to which the lack of “access” is what Joe

claims to be the cause of societal schism. The consequences of this lack of access are dis-

played further by Andrew who claims: “I’ve met Indian people who come here who make my

views of Islam look liberal. The Indians I’ve met, I regard them as British, I really do, and

some of my best friends are Indian and I’ve been coming to this pub for 10 years. It’s a case

of mutual respect and just the idea of having a drink. Islam regards pubs as sinful, and there is

an idea that somehow we have a group of people who not only don’t like our morals, but who

would actively like to separate themselves from us.”

The lack of “access” portrayed in such statements exasperates both cultural and ethnic bound-

aries which then act as barriers of inclusion and exclusion to spaces where socio-spatial iden-

tities are negotiated (Guilianotti and Armstrong, 2002, p. 211). Such negotiations are evident

in Andrew’s inclusion of Indians within the British identity or “us”, and the exclusion of Mus-

lims who are seen as persons who do not adhere to the “mutual respect” that coming to the

pub provides. The reinforcement of this segregation by other ethnic minorities, then, acts to

encourage and form a sort of ‘permissible bigotry’. Since ethnic minorities are involved in the

criticism of a particular group, Andrew sees no racial connection in his own criticisms be-

cause he is participating in the stereotyping of Muslims, and their exclusion from British val-

ues, with ethnic minorities13. Interestingly, however, one of my informants, Steven, who has

access to members of the Muslim community and interacts with them on a regular basis, gave

13 I would like to highlight that images such as the one described by Andrew, signify a combination of both the Western in-stigation of religious conflicts in India, and the anti-muslim sentiments of the post 9/11 era (Sahi, 2015:44).

37

his perspective on the issue: “The problem with a pub is that it’s public, I mean…some of the

biggest drinkers I know are Muslim.”

The perception of mutual respect for values, supposedly found among those excluded from

the Islamic faith, is seen to be dissonant by Steven’s experiences with Muslims whom he has

previously drunk with. The issue here, however, is intertwined with Andrew’s assertion that

“Islam regards pubs as sinful”. Although prescriptively, alcohol is forbidden in the religion14

what Andrew is hinting at by “Islam”, is, in fact, the Muslim community who represent and

act out such values or beliefs. Steven notes, therefore, that drinking among Muslims occurs in

spaces away from the eyes of the Islamic community who condemn drinking, and conse-

quently, away from the eyes of the people who frequent the pub. Exemplifying themes of

‘racialised spaces’ and ethnic groupings (Linke, 2013; Barth,1969), the lack of access be-

tween what is perceived as a native space and a foreign space is seen here to exasperate due to

policies that promote recognition as opposed to integration. The importance of such access is

displayed in Steven’s ability to interact with members of other communities, which seemingly

accommodates an understanding that, like all imagined communities, there is no ontologically

‘real’ homogeneity within perceived groups.

My informants’ inability to make complaints about such lack of access or policies on multi-

culturalism outside of the pub space, have been unanimously put down to the discourse of po-

litical correctness. As Tom elaborates: “The issue here is political correctness, it shifts people

to the right. Proud Labour supporter, always have been, and I obviously understand what mi-

norities had to go through, but if a guy was in my position who didn’t…I wouldn’t be sur-

prised if they voted differently.”

Joe: “Political correctness, this concept that Tony Blair brought about, leads to nasty inci-

14 Innes Bowen (2014). Medina in Birmingham, Najaf in Brent: Inside British Islam. Oxford University Press. pp. 17338

dences going on that they don’t tell you about. ‘You don’t call us racists, we won’t call you

rapists’…You know. But government or media won’t do anything about it because they are

afraid of being called out as culturally insensitive.”

Ideas of a weak-willed or frightened government that panders to the demands of a minority

for fear of being labelled racist is especially frequent among right-wing ideologues, and is of-

ten used in the right-wing media outlets to garner support (McDonald, 2014 p.4). Referring

back to the idea of self identification with indigeneity, ideas of multiculturalism, weaponed

with political correctness, are seen to be used as justification to treat ‘natives’ (such as Doug’s

acquaintance in regards to social housing) unequally, in comparison to agents that are labelled

as ‘immigrants’ or ‘muslims’ who get special treatment in both housing and within the law

(Ibid., p.5). The example Joe is referring to here is the Rotherham child sexual exploitation

scandal which was described as the "biggest child protection scandal in UK’s history” (Glad-

man & Heal, 2017 p.28). The failure to address the abuse has then been attributed to a fear

that the perpetrators' ethnicity would trigger allegations of racism, and potentially damage

community relations which would then challenge a Labour-voting ethnic minority (Jay, 2014

pp. 69-101). According to Joe, the saying “you don’t call us racists, we won’t call you rapists”

is a popular term when referring to political correctness in his pub, thus perpetuating and con-

firming claims of perceived special treatment.

Sol: “A lot of people in this pub that I know are leftists, although you do get the occasional

UKIP. Now one thing we all agree on, no matter what you are politically, is immigration.

None of us say it should stop, none of us, it’s just the amount. If you have someone coming in

from an Arab country, and there’s already a mini community of Arabs where you live, why

would you want to be pals with me, speak my language, integrate with my culture? And we’re

supposed to be tolerant? It’s an upsetting cycle, and it’s upsetting because most of these lot

39

will end up voting for parties like the tories that will only give them grief.”

The “mini communities” referred to by Sol, reflect the politics of recognition which have al-

lowed for frustrations of cultural anxiety to develop in my informants. A feeling that a force

beyond their control is responsible for migrant others coming in as not having to learn the

“language” or “culture”, or worse yet, treating them better than they do the perceived indige-

nous peoples of Britain.

As Krieter (2013) notes, neoliberalism, itself, is inherently a multicultural endeavour because

of globalisation being intrinsic to free-market expansion (p. 98). Although seemingly

favourable, in accordance with neoliberal policies, notions of equal worth and equal dignity

do not imply a right to economic equality, but only a right to recognition (Fisk, 2015, p. 21).

Recognition, in this case, implies no more than an acceptance of others, along with the task of

maintaining that difference, when states desire that their difference be maintained (p. 28). The

problematic aspect comes to light when projects for the recognition of diversity create a ‘fed-

eration of cultures’ that ‘lock people into their cultures’ (Sen, 2000, p.31). It is on this note

within which I assert that policies of multiculturalism, when viewed through an anthropologi-

cal lens, reveal numerous contradictions, particularly in the definition of the term ‘culture’.

Additionally, further analysis of these contradictions bring to light why my informants’ frus-

trations can result in what Tom noted as “shift[ing] people to the right”.

3.2: Cultural Racism

Historians such as William MacNeill (1985) describe cultural diversity within a single social

and political context as being typical throughout world history (Smith, 1994, p. 5). Resistance

to this idea, as seen throughout this ethnography from nationalistic sentiments to the idea of

40

ethnic boundaries, have to do with how modern day policies of multiculturalism in Britain de-

fine culture itself. Namely, a notion of culture as static, fixed, objective, consensual and uni-

formly shared by all members of a group (Wikan, 2002 p. 62). This has resulted in what Sen

(2000) claims to be a ‘federation of cultures’ that ‘lock people into their cultures’, as vividly

displayed by my informants’ experiences of segregated communities, bordered off by imag-

ined concepts of static cultures (p. 31).

Two paradoxical trends begin to emerge here: (1) a postmodern view of fluid, fragmentary,

relativist and cross-cutting phenomena surrounding ideas of culture and identity, while at the

same time (2) the push for the recognition of groups whose pattern of collective values and

practices differ from the homogeneous image and who have had to mobilise in new ways in

order to resist inequalities (Vertovec, 1999, p. 3). Theorists claim that anthropologists have

been conspicuously absent in regards to the debates surrounding this new form of pluralism,

since in theory, the nature of the subject would require them to voice concern at any push to-

wards notions of cultural essentialism (Vertovec, 1999, p.2; Wikan, 2002, p.75 ).

The importance of anthropological work against cultural essentialism, is that in its most dan-

gerous form, it re-produces concepts of biological determinism, with cultural traits and differ-

ences seen as ‘bio-cultural’ ‘fixed, solid almost biological’ and also ‘inheritable’ (Gilroy

1987: 39). Further warnings by Turner (1999) elaborate on the risks behind bounding the idea

of culture as the property of an ethnic group or race; it essentially fetishises the ‘ethnic’ or

‘exotic’ (Ibid.). What is significant when relating this to my fieldwork, is that the concept of

‘race’ was never mentioned throughout my time in any of the pubs. Instead, all critiques of

other ethnic groups were laced with ideas of cultural or value differences, with no reference to

skin colour or biology. Manifest in ‘new right’ political groups such as UKIP or Britain First,

‘old’ or ‘classic’ racism is scarce, instead trending forms of ‘cultural racism’ (Stolcke, 1995,

41

p.4). For Seidel (1986), this shift marshalled a counter-left15 consensus with nationalism and

neoliberalism at its heart, producing a veiled speech which effectively masked notions of clas-

sical racism from the general public (p. 88).

As a result, although an approach to race relations in Britain like those expressed by Enoch

Powell is rare in the mainstream right, more contemporary and acceptable forms of criticisms

to immigration are expressed by my informant Vicky: “It’s not about race, for me it’s about

culture and education. You heard the term culture shock right? That shouldn’t be happening to

my mum when she walks down her old high street, yet here we are…”. What is especially in-

teresting to note here is when Vicky’s statement is contrasted with a paragraph from Powell’s

(1969) book, Freedom and Reality: ‘[they] found themselves made strangers in their own

country […] their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition’ (p.286).

In addition to the similarity in sentiment regarding both of their statements, what I would like

to highlight is how for Vicky, alongside culture, education was seen as something which dif-

ferentiated her (or her mother) from those who have occupied the old high street. As Melhuus

(1999) points out, there is a close connection in Europe between ideas of ‘high’ culture and

civilisation, understood as ‘transnational civilisation’ (p.31). Hence, the idea of there being a

need for “education” is rooted in 20th century perspectives of cultural hierarchies, based on an

evolutionary lens of genetic make-up, affecting individual personality and behaviour, while

stressing Western forms of thought as ‘civilised’ (Grillo, 2003, p.159).

Following on from Wade’s (1993) claim that “There is no race before racism” (p.157), asser-

tions are made that as long as the social consequences of racism are evident, then ‘race’ itself

is ‘phenomenally real’ (Paul, 2014, p.705), which can take form in both institutional and open

15 what is meant by Left, in this this context is the general the political and ideological wing which supports social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality.

42

discrimination. The latter is what Andrew perceived to be ‘true racism’: “We’ve had Indian

neighbours for 40 years, get on like a house on fire, didn’t have a problem of any kind and

they are nice to me and my parents, no resentment on either side, what I would actually say is

that 50 per cent of my close friends that are here [in the pub] are Indian, 50 per cent English

and others being Sri Lankan or the occasional European”. The lack of hostility towards the

“Indian neighbour” or the fact that Indians and Sri-Lankans are his main friends at the pub,

are seen as factors which dissolve any presupposition of him being bigoted towards other

races.

Hence, the consequences elaborated by Turner (1999), Vertovec (1999) and Wikan (2002)

mentioned earlier in relation to the paradoxes of multiculturalism, and the essentialisation of

culture, are displayed here in full throttle. Such contradictions have also been politically dam-

aging to the left, sharply evident in both Vicky and Andrew’s perception that their critiques of

other cultures are entirely unrelated to classic forms of racisms (Gitlin’s, 1992, pp. 188-189).

This disconnection, then, acts to generate and re-produce fertile grounds for right-wing ide-

ologies to flourish, manifest in the shift to the right we see among the working classes ( Ibid.).

Conclusions

This dissertation has explored attachments to nationalism within pub spaces, along with high-

lighting problematic aspects of multicultural policies. As seen in this research, attachments to

ideas of the nation or ethnicity vary greatly. For some, ethnicity and nationhood is a back-

ground factor, but for others, it is an integral and dynamic aspect of self-conscious selfhood

and everyday discourse (Jenkins, 2008, p.80). However, as Anderson (1983) has pointed out,

although the word nation stems from the Latin word for ‘people, tribe, kin, genus, class or

flock’, nations are in reality a socially constructed community, imagined by the people who

43

perceive themselves as part of that group (p.6). Similarly, Barth (1969) stresses how ethnic

groups are constructed socially, and in the process are constantly negotiated and re-negotiated

by both external recognition and internal self-identification (p. 10). Arguments put forward as

to why individuals would form such firm attachments to socially constructed concepts, have

been linked to the deep and horizontal comradeship provided, often a source of comfort dur-

ing economic hardship (Anderson, 1991, p.7; Hobsbawm, 1999, p. 10). However, like Ander-

son, I have aimed to portray that a purely Marxist explanation like those provided by Hobs-

bawm, is insufficient when studying nationalism. By interviewing my informants, I have

demonstrated the way in which cultural elements and immigration are in no way peripheral to

the nationalist sentiments felt inside pubs.

Firstly, we have seen how informants such as Doug and Harry identify their sense of belong-

ing to a place, specifically in contrast to migrants. Their feelings of indigeneity are seen to

heighten when put in opposition to those they perceive as having arrived from outside of their

imagined community. Both Doug and Harry, like many other informants, are seen to display a

sense of dispossessed agency, fuelling their attachment to what Anderson calls ‘horizontal

comradeship’, in face of economic competition for resources.

Furthermore, I have aimed to show how the combination of both a lack of agency and an in-

flux of migrants and gentrification within my field-sites have paved the way for a movement

such as the ‘leave’ campaign to flourish. Evidence for this was seen in the way informants

Anthony and Joe displayed feelings of frustration to the disconnection felt between regulars at

their pubs and mainstream politics. The lucrative idea of national sovereignty, and a chance to

disperse the EU’s perceived control over British affairs, are illustrated by constant reference

to a need for control over migration and politics.

44

Secondly, I have shown how Allen’s (2008) argument regarding working class households re-

lating to their homes in terms of a ‘we being’, along with Linke's (2013) notion of racialised

spaces, as being pivotal to the understanding of feelings and attitudes towards the changes of

space occurring within my field-sites (p. 153). Particularly, the lack of access described by

Joe in regards to the construction of identities within pubs and ‘other’ spaces such as shisha

cafe’s and mosques, signified the contrasting perceptions of Muslims harboured by Andrew in

comparison to Steven.

Echoing Muehlmann (2009), this dissertation has aimed to elaborate on how policies of both

neoliberalism and multiculturalism have brought ethnic differences to the forefront, in con-

trast to their proclaimed intentions of assimilation (p. 469). Exploring the problematic essen-

tialisation of culture by such policies, we have seen how informants have taken on board simi-

lar perspectives on culture, resulting in ‘cultural racism’, which acts to alleviate any relation

to classical racism while still entertaining its divisive effects (Seidel, 1986, p. 88).

Finally, I wish to highlight points made by both Abu-Lughod (1991) and Blee (2002) on the

lack of anthropological literature in this field. Relating to this dissertation attempting to study

a Western form of ‘common sense’, Abu-Lughod (1991) writes how although anthropology’s

avowed goal may be to study ‘man’, it still continues to be a discipline built on the histori-

cally constructed divide between the West and the non-West (p.466). I assert that this frame-

work of analysis, which has been formulated by the study of the non-Western other by the

Western self, results in inaccuracies when used to study Western nationalism. This is due to

such studies removing the non-western element of that Other, specifically, a type of other that

adheres to concepts that the anthropologist is attempting to scrutinise, i.e. nationalism or eth-

nic boundaries. Potential inaccuracies are further elaborated when put in reference to Paine’s 45

(1990) view of anthropologists imagining themselves to be the voice of the oppressed (p.210).

Especially, if such cases of oppression have come as a result of methods which essentialise

concepts such as nations or ethnicities, as right-wing movements often do. Therefore, my final

statement is a wish for more anthropological research to be conducted in this field, with the

understanding that future research will only further these historically constructed western and

non-western divides if conducted without empathy and neutrality for those involved.

Bibliography

Abu-Lughod, L. (1991). Writing against Culture. In Recapturing Anthropology:

Working in the Present, ed. Richard Fox. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research46

Press, pp. 137-62.

Allen, C. (2008), Gentrification ‘Research’ and the Academic Nobility: A Different Class?.

International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, pp. 153–185.

Allen, N., Pickering, W. S. F, Watts Miller, William, & Allen, Nick. (1998). On Durkheim's

elementary forms of religious life (Routledge studies in social and political thought ; 10).

London ; New York: Routledge. p.432

Anderson, B. R. O. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of na-

tionalism. London, Verso. pp. 6-21

Asad, T. (1973). Anthropology & the colonial encounter. London, Ithaca Press.

Augé, M. (1999) A Sense for the Other: The Timeliness and Relevance of Anthropology.

Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press .

Barth, F. (1969). Ethnic groups and boundaries: the social organization of culture difference.

Boston, Little, Brown and Co. pp. 10-31

Bellah, R. N. (1967). “Civil Religion in America.” Dædalus pp: 1–21.

Blee, K. (2002). Inside organized racism : Women in the hate movement (ACLS Humanities

E-Book (Series) Y). Berkeley: University of California Press. 121-122

Cohen, A. P. (1996), personal nationalism: a Scottish view of some rites, rights, and wrongs.

47

American Ethnologist, 23: 171–185.

Connor, W. (1978). A nation is a nation, is a state, is an ethnic group is a … . Ethnic and

Racial Studies, 1(4), 377-400.

Ezekiel, R.S. (2002) ‘An ethnographer looks at neo-Nazi and Klan groups: the racist mind

revisited’, American Behavioral Scientist, 46: 51–71.

Fox, K. (2008). Watching the English the Hidden Rules of English Behaviour. p. 35

Gilroy, P. (1987) There Ain't No Black in the Union Jack: The Cultural Politics of Race and

Nation. London: Hutchinson p. 39

Gomes, A. (2013). Anthropology and the Politics of Indigeneity. Anthropological Forum,

23(1), 5-15.

Goodwin, M., Ford, R., Duffy, B. and Robey, R. (2010) ‘Who votes extreme right in twenty-

first-century-Britain? The social bases of support for the National Front and British National

Party’ in R. Eatwell and M. Goodwin (eds) The New Extremism in 21st Century Britain, Lon-

don and New York: Routledge, pp. 191–210.

Grillo, R. (2003). Cultural Essentialism and Cultural Anxiety. Anthropological Theory, 3(2),

157-173.48

Gitlin, T. (1992), Anthropology and Multiculturalism: What is Anthropology That Multicul-

turalists Should Be Mindful of It?. Cultural Anthropology, 8: 411–429.

Gledhill, J. (2014) In : History and Anthropology. Research output: Contribution to journal ›

Article: (https://johngledhill.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/initial-reflections-on-brexit/) 25, 4, p.

507-529 22 p.

Gladman, A. and Heal, A. (2017) Child Sexual Exploitation After Rotherham p. 28

Armstrong, G. and Giulianotti, R. (2002), Avenues of contestation. Football hooligans run-

ning and ruling urban spaces1. Social Anthropology, 10: 211–238.

Gutmann, A. (1994) Multiculturalism and "The Politics of Recognition Ethics”, 384-386

Handler, R., 1985, On Dialogue and Deconstructive Analysis: Problems in Narrating Nation-

alism and Ethnicity. Journal of Anthropological Research 41(2): 171-82.

Hobsbawm, E. (1999). Industry and empire. 1st ed. London: Penguin, pp.14-15.

Hobsbawm, E. (1990). Nations and nationalism since 1780. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge

University Press. p. 11

Heffer, S. (1999). Like the Roman: The Life of Enoch Powell. London: Orion. p. 455

Hoque, A (2011) Generation Terrorised: Muslim Youth, Being British and Not so

49

British.

Jacobson, J. (1997), Perceptions of Britishness. Nations and Nationalism, 3: 181–199.

Jay, A. (2014). Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham (1997–

2013). Rotherham: Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council.

Jenkins ,R. (2008) Rethinking Ethnicity: Arguments and Explorations. London: Sage. p. 80

Kiefer, C., (1986), A Self Conscious Science. Reviews in Anthropology 13(3): 169-75.

Kundnani, A. (2004) ‘The rise and fall of British multiculturalism’ in G. Titley (ed.)

Resituating Culture, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, pp. 105–12.

Kuper, A. (2003). ‘The return of the native’ Current anthropology pp. 389-402

Leeds, W. (2009). Social construction of reality. In S.Littlejohn, & K.Foss (Eds.), Encyclope-

dia of communication theory. (pp. 892-895). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Lentin, A. (2014) ‘Post-race, post politics: the paradoxical rise of culture after multicultur-

alism’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37(8): 1268–85.

Lone, A. and Silver, D. (2014) Europe’s White Working Class Communities: Manchester,

New York: Open Society Foundations.

Lewinski, S. V. (2003) Indigenous Heritage and Intellectual Property: Genetic Resources,

Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore, Kluwer Law International, pp.130–31

50

Linke U. (2013), Racializing Cities, Naturalizing Space: The Seductive Appeal of Iconicities

of Dispossession, Antipode, 46, pages 1222–1239

McLean, I. (2001) ‘Rational Choice and British Politics’. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford Uni-

versity Press. p.130

Murray, D. (2017) - The strange death of Europe : immigration, identity, Islam. London :

Bloomsbury Continuum, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2017. ©2017.

Meer, N. and Modood, T. (2014) ‘Cosmopolitanism and integrationism: is British mul- ticul-

turalism a “zombie category”?’, Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 21(6): 658–

74.

Melhuus, M. (1999) `Insisting on Culture?' , Social Anthropology p. 31

Muehlmann, S. (2009), How Do Real Indians Fish? Neoliberal Multiculturalism and Con-

tested Indigeneities in the Colorado Delta. American Anthropologist, 111: 468–479.

Paul, J. (2014) ‘Post-racial futures: imagining post-racialist antiracism(s)’, Ethnic and

Racial Studies, 37 (4): 702–18.

Paine, R. (1990), Advocacy and Anthropology. American Anthropologist, 92: p. 210

Pilkington, H. (2013). Loud and proud. available at: http://myplacefp7.wordpress.com/

2012/09/04/when- 51

is-a-kettle-not-a-kettle-when-it-is-on-slow-boil.

Powell, Enoch (1969). Freedom and Reality. Kingswood: Elliot Right Way Books. p. 286

Sahi, A. (2015). Islamophobia in india. Islamic Horizons, 44-56.

Schöpflin, G. (1995), Nationhood, Communism and State Legitimation. Nations and Nation-

alism, p. 42

Seidel, G. (1986) `Culture, Nation and “Race” in the British and French New Right', in R.

Levitas (ed.) The Ideology of the New Right. Cambridge: Polity Press p. 88

Sen, A. (2000) Development as Freedom (Alfred A. Knopf, New York) p. 31

Simpson, S. (2007) "Apostolick Warfare": the Reverend Melvill Home and the Development

of Missions in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries', The Bulletin of the John

Ry- lands University Library of Manchester 85:1 66-67, 91-93.

Stolcke, V. (1995) `Talking Culture: New Boundaries, New Rhetorics of Exclusion in Europe'

, Current Anthropology 36(1): 1-24 .

Smith, A. D. (1991) National Identity. Penguin Books, pp. 14-15.

Spain, M. (1992) - Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Space Vol. 2, No. 1, 2013, p.

125

52

Taylor, C. (1998) `Nationalism and Modernity', in J.A. Hall (ed.) The State of the Nation:

Ernest Gellner and the Theory of Nationalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .

Thomas, D.A. & Kamari Clarke, M. (2013). Globalization and Race: Structures of Inequality,

New Sovereignties, and Citizenship in a Neoliberal Era. Annual Review of Anthropology, 42,

pp.305–325.

Tilley, C., & Cameron-Daum, K. (2017). Anthropology of Landscape: The Extraordinary in

the Ordinary. London: UCL Press. p. 7

Turner, T. (1993) `Anthropology and Multiculturalism: What is Anthropology that Multicul-

turalists Should be Mindful of it?' , Cultural Anthropology, pp. 411-429 .

Vertovec S. (2010) ‘Introduction: Assessing the Backlash against Multiculturalism in Eu-

rope’, pp. 1–32

Wade, P. (1993) ‘Man’ New Series, Vol. 28, No. 1 pp. 17-34

Watson, G., (2004) Make Me Reflexive--But Not Yet: Strategies for Managing Essen- tial

Reflexivity in Ethnographic Discourse. Journal of Anthropological Research 43(1), p. 204

Walker, C. (1994) food and commensality among Durrani Pashtuns. American Ethnologist,

13: 62–79. 301-302

53

Weber, M. (1998) “Ethnic groups” from Hughey, Michael W., New tribalisms: the resur-

gence of race and ethnicity pp. 17-30

Wikan, U. (2002) Generous Betrayal: Politics of Culture in the New Europe. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press . pp. 15-75

54