Britain and France have developed substantially different policies to manage racial tensions since the 1960s, in spite of having similar numbers of post-war ethnic minority immigrants. This book provides the first detailed historical exploration of race policy development in these two countries. In this path-breaking work, Bleich argues against common wisdom that attributes policy outcomes to the role of powerful interest groups or to the constraints of existing institutions, instead emphasizing the importance of frames as widely-held ideas that propelled policymaking in different directions. British policymakers' framing of race and racism principally in North American terms of color discrimination encouraged them to import many policies from across the Atlantic. For decades after WWII, by contrast, French policy leaders framed racism in terms influenced largely by their Vichy past, which encouraged policies designed primarily to counter hate speech while avoiding the recognition of race found across the English Channel.

Taking as a case study the racial politics of the British state under New Labour, this book advances an idea of multiculturalism as the only conceptual framework that is capable of making sense of the contradictions of contemporary race practice, where racism is simultaneously rejected and reproduced.

This book discusses British thought on race and racial differences in the latter phases of empire from the 1890s to the early 1960s. It focuses on the role of racial ideas in British society and politics and looks at the decline in Victorian ideas of white Anglo-Saxon racial solidarity. The impact of anthropology is shown to have had a major role in shifting the focus on race in British ruling class circles from a classical and humanistic imperialism towards a more objective study of ethnic and cultural groups by the 1930s and 1940s. As the empire turned into a commonwealth, liberal ideas on race relations helped shape the post-war rise of 'race relations' sociology. Drawing on extensive government documents, private papers, newspapers, magazines and interviews this book breaks new ground in the analysis of racial discourse in twentieth-century British politics and the changing conception of race amongst anthropologists, sociologists and the professional intelligentsia.

Written by one of the leading international authorities on the sociology of race and sport, this is the first book to address sport′s role in ′the making of race′, the place of sport within black diasporic struggles for freedom and equality, and the contested location of sport in relation to the politics of recognition within contemporary multicultural societies. Race, Sport and Politics shows how, during the first decades of the twentieth century, the idea of ′the natural black athlete′ was invented in order to make sense of and curtail the political impact and cultural achievements of black sportswomen and men. More recently, ′the black athlete′ as sign has become a highly commodified object within contemporary hyper-commercialized sports-media culture thus limiting the transformative potential of critically conscious black athleticism to re-imagine what it means to be both black and human in the twenty-first century. Race, Sport and Politics will be of interest to students and scholars in sociology of culture and sport, the sociology of race and diaspora studies, postcolonial theory, cultural theory and cultural studies.

Race Relations in Britain since 1945 provides a critical overview of the origins, development and present state of race relations in Britain. Highly contentious, the field of race relations is closely related to a number of issues which are regarded to be at the very heart of contemporary British life. Professor Goulbourne draws on a variety of historical, sociological, anthropological and political analyses to construct and advance a convincing and persuasive argument about differential incorporation into British society or inequality based on colour in the imperial and colonial era as well as the contemporary period.

Kathleen Paul challenges the usual explanation for the racism of post-war British policy. According to standard historiography, British public opinion forced the Conservative government to introduce legislation stemming the flow of dark-skinned immigrants and thereby altering an expansive nationality policy that had previously allowed all British subjects free entry into the United Kingdom. Paul's extensive archival research shows, however, that the racism of ministers and senior functionaries led rather than followed public opinion. In the late 1940s, the Labour government faced a birthrate perceived to be in decline, massive economic dislocations caused by the war, a huge national debt, severe labor shortages, and the prospective loss of international preeminence. Simultaneously, it subsidized the emigration of Britons to Australia, Canada, and other parts of the Empire, recruited Irish citizens and European refugees to work in Britain, and used regulatory changes to dissuade British subjects of color from coming to the United Kingdom. Paul contends post-war concepts of citizenship were based on a contradiction between the formal definition of who had the right to enter Britain and the informal notion of who was, or could become, really British. Whitewashing Britain extends this analysis to contemporary issues, such as the fierce engagement in the Falklands War and the curtailment of citizenship options for residents of Hong Kong. Paul finds the politics of citizenship in contemporary Britain still haunted by a mixture of imperial, economic, and demographic imperatives.

As Labour MP for Gloucester, when things were good for Parmjit Dhanda they were very good. He was rolled out for Labour conferences and media appearances as a poster boy for the party - a shining example of a new Britain, where white constituencies chose ethnic minorities as their candidates and then elected them as their MPs. It was the ultimate political fairy tale. However, the other side of Parmjit's story remained hidden for years. Its exposure threatened to undermine the received political narrative and neither Dhanda nor his colleagues were comfortable addressing the issues it would inevitably bring to light. Then something life-changing happened. As Parmjit and his family strove to remake their lives in the wake of Labour's 2010 general election defeat, there came a knock on the door of their Gloucester home one Sunday morning. A frightened-looking lady stood there shaking and distressed, her dog pulling her by its lead towards one of the cars parked outside. In the middle of the drive was a pig's head. To experience this kind of racism so close to home and so close to his young family left him feeling demoralised and isolated. After Parmjit's nine years of service to the local area, the perpetrators hadn't even realised the difference between a Sikh and a Muslim. Comprising unique insights, witty anecdotes and thought-provoking critique, this is the extraordinary tale of how a 'foreigner' in the Westminster village upset the odds - despite Britain's failure to address issues of race within its own Parliament. Speaking out for the first time about the uncomfortable truths he faced during his time in politics, Parmjit Dhanda hopes he can help present a smoother path for others in the future, as well as encouraging those currently in the game to speak out for themselves.