Search results

Cover -- Halftitle -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Description -- Contents -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- Preface -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- Chapter 2: Outsourcing by Multinational Corporations -- Chapter 3: A Surge in Inequality -- Chapter 4: The Myth of Free Trade -- Chapter 5: Innovation and the Loss of Technology -- Chapter 6: The Slow Erosion of American Manufacturing Industries -- Chapter 7: Financialization and the Shareholder Revolution -- Chapter 8: The Threat of Wall Street -- Chapter 9: The Problems of Tax Reduction -- Chapter 10: Buying Government With Lobbying Money -- Chapter 11: The Rise of Monopolies and Oligopolies -- Chapter 12: The Jobs Are There. Where Is the Training? -- Chapter 13: The Postindustrial Service Economy -- Chapter 14: The Threat of China -- Chapter 15: Decline of Productivity and GDP Growth -- Chapter 16: The Truth About Currency Manipulation and a Strong Dollar -- Chapter 17: We Must Save America's Manufacturing Sector -- Chapter 18: Hope Is Not a Plan -- Chapter 19: Solutions -- About the Author -- Index -- Adpage -- Backcover.

AbstractThis article makes a contribution, based on previously unseen archival materials, to debates about the so‐called 'decline' of black cricket in England. It discusses the historical context of the development of black cricket in the postwar period and presents a case study of the Haringey Cricket College—1984–1997—a black‐led project in and around the deprived areas of Tottenham, north London, which, during the period of its existence, produced more first class cricketers than many of the most expensive, elite 'cricket schools' in England. In so doing, it achieved national and international acclaim. The article goes on to provide detailed evidence regarding the closure of the college, arguing that the college's demise should not be seen simply as part of a wider process of decreasing interest in cricket within England's black communities, but involved active decisions by the cricket establishment not to support the college. The article raises wider questions about when and how it has been possible to be perceived as legitimately black and English in cricketing terms, and how cricket's authorities should respond to these historical problems.

AbstractDuring 2021, long‐standing concerns about racism in English cricket rose to the surface to become very public, political questions. For the purposes of clarity, this article begins by drawing a distinction between racism on the one hand and 'racial thinking' on the other. It suggests that racial thinking is related to, but analytically distinct from, and in fact prior to racism. It then goes on to develop a wider analysis of the historical connections between cricket, Englishness and racial thinking. With this in mind, the final section of the article draws on the preceding historical analysis to explore some of the more recent examples of racial thinking in cricket, and their implications for how we might approach the problem of racism in English cricket today.

AbstractPolitical commentaries on elections highlight the act and outcome of suffrage. Votes are tallied and trends analyzed as pundits distill election results, post facto, into predictable storylines said to reveal the so‐called pulse of the nation, littered with clichés about popular mandates and the people's verdict. Such accounts interpret elections as a straightforward index of a "popular will" without attention to their differentiated experience and how historically disenfranchised groups navigate their complex institutional landscape. Elections are not extraordinary events that transcend the inequalities of everyday life but a time when hierarchies are asserted, contested, and fortified. This occurs through the ballot as well as through the architecture of the institution and tactical use of its routine procedures. The Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK; Liberation Panthers Party), a prominent Dalit‐led (ex‐untouchable) party in India, is a case in point. Combining ethnography from inside a political campaign and interviews with VCK candidates, party leaders, and grassroots activists, this article employs election symbols as a diagnostic to study the architecture of the electoral institution, exploring how its tools and techniques—which are neither neutral nor freely available to all—consolidate structural advantages that privilege well‐resourced players while hindering those historically excluded from political power. [democracy, elections, inequality, India, caste, Dalits]

Abstract Political commentaries on elections highlight the act and outcome of suffrage. Votes are tallied and trends analyzed as pundits distill election results, post facto, into predictable storylines said to reveal the so‐called pulse of the nation, littered with clichés about popular mandates and the people's verdict. Such accounts interpret elections as a straightforward index of a "popular will" without attention to their differentiated experience and how historically disenfranchised groups navigate their complex institutional landscape. Elections are not extraordinary events that transcend the inequalities of everyday life but a time when hierarchies are asserted, contested, and fortified. This occurs through the ballot as well as through the architecture of the institution and tactical use of its routine procedures. The Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK; Liberation Panthers Party), a prominent Dalit‐led (ex‐untouchable) party in India, is a case in point. Combining ethnography from inside a political campaign and interviews with VCK candidates, party leaders, and grassroots activists, this article employs election symbols as a diagnostic to study the architecture of the electoral institution, exploring how its tools and techniques—which are neither neutral nor freely available to all—consolidate structural advantages that privilege well‐resourced players while hindering those historically excluded from political power. [democracy, elections, inequality, India, caste, Dalits]

In addressing the relationship between national and international worldmaking political projects, Adom Getachew's impressive and thought-provoking recent book, Worldmaking after Empire: The Rise and Fall of Self-Determination, seeks to move beyond recent debates between those who posit an inevitability thesis about the triumph of the nation-state after 1945, on the one hand, and those who insist on the possibilities of alternative pathways, on the other. The argument is compelling in demonstrating that the transcendence of race hierarchies was integral to arguments and aspirations about meaningful sovereignty. Getachew's central characters were visionaries in terms of imagining possible worlds beyond the nation-state. The book is less convincing in demonstrating that an intractable nationalism and indeed underlying racial thinking were not serious impediments to the achievement of these goals.