Suchergebnisse

In this article, the author advances understandings of the coloniality of British citizenship through the close examination of the status of the people of Hong Kong in Britain's immigration and nationality legislation. This is a case that has been overlooked in most social scientific analysis of Britain's citizenship–migration nexus. The article responds to Gurminder Bhambra's call to recognise the connected sociologies and histories of citizenship, and the analysis is informed by the close reading of historical changes in legislation – from decolonisation and the making of the British nation-state to the post-Brexit construction of 'Global Britain' – and what these have meant for the people of Hong Kong. In dialogue with scholarship focused on the enduring colonial ties in present-day citizenship and migration regimes, the article offers an analysis inspired by Manuela Boatcă's coloniality of citizenship and Ann Laura Stoler's understanding of exception by design: imperial forms of governance producing differential rights within national populations that position some populations as ambiguous. Conceptualising the status of Hong Kongers in British legislation past and present as ambiguous by design, the author questions what the rhetoric of the Hong Kongers as 'good migrants' for 'Global Britain', the narrative at the heart of the promotion of the bespoke Hong Kong British Nationals (Overseas) (HK BN(O)) visa launched in early 2021, conceals from view. As the author argues, rather than a case apart in the context of increasingly restrictive immigration controls, the renewal of Britain's obligations, commitments and responsibilities to the people of Hong Kong through this visa scheme provides further evidence of the enduring colonial entanglements in the formation of 'Global Britain' and its citizenship–migration nexus.

The campaign that succeeded in pushing Britain out of the European Union focused on the perceived threat of unrestricted inward migration, obscuring the fact that over a million British citizens took advantage of open borders to settle in Europe. Post-Brexit, Britons no longer are entitled to automatic EU citizenship. The exit agreement secured the legal basis for their continued residency, but their rights remain uncertain.

In this paper, I advance understandings of the coloniality of British citizenship through the close examination of the status of the people of Hong Kong in Britain's immigration and nationality legislation, a case overlooked in most social scientific analysis of Britain's citizenship-migration nexus. The paper responds to Gurminder Bhambra's (2015) call to recognise the connected sociologies and histories of citizenship, the analysis informed by the close reading of historical changes in legislation—from decolonisation and the making of the British nation-state to the post-Brexit construction of 'Global Britain'—and what these meant for the people of Hong Kong. In dialogue with scholarship focused on the enduring colonial ties in present-day citizenship and migration regimes, I offer an analysis inspired by Manuela Boatcă's (2021a) coloniality of citizenship and Ann Laura Stoler's (2016) understanding of exception by design, imperial forms of governance producing differential rights within national populations that positioned some populations as ambiguous. Conceptualising the status Hong Kongers in British legislation past and present as ambiguous by design, I question what the rhetoric of the Hong Kongers as 'good migrants' for global Britain' at the heart of the promotion of the bespoke Hong Kong British Nationals (Overseas) (HK BN(O)) visa launched early 2021 conceals from view. As I argue, rather than a case apart in the context of increasingly restrictive immigration controls, the renewal of Britain's obligations, commitments, and responsibilities to the people of Hong Kong through this visa scheme provide further evidence of the enduring colonial entanglements in the formation of 'Global Britain' and its citizenship-migration nexus.

This article considers what Brexit means for British citizens living in France. Drawing on empirical research I examine the emotional and material impacts that uncertainties about their futures have had on their lives. The article documents the measures they take (or anticipate) in their bids to secure their future rights to stay put in France. However, not everyone is well placed to secure their own future. Foregrounding Brexit as bordering – the social and political process through which judgements are made about who is 'deserving' and 'undeserving' of the privilege of (European) belonging – I question who among these Britons is newly bordered through Brexit and with what impacts? As I argue, Brexit is unevenly experienced, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities and generating new fault lines of belonging among the British in France as they are repositioned in relation to hierarchies of European belonging.

This paper examines the processes by which middle-class belonging is generated, through the exploration of social and spatial trajectories in narratives of residential choice and mobility. It is based on an understanding of residential choice as indicative and constitutive of social mobilities. In particular the paper builds on the discussion of the match between habitus and field that lies at the root of the notions of middle-class belonging and place attachments to draw attention not only to the conditions under which 'fit' is possible, but also acknowledge that belonging is a dynamic process, generated and maintained through residence that feeds back into understandings of classed identities. This paper argues that residential space is not just appropriated to reflect pre-existing tastes and lifestyles, but may also contribute in the transformation of habitus to fit to particular neighbourhoods and ways of living.

For the British residents of rural France, the desire for authentic (rural) living underscored the decision to migrate, while through residence they gain more nuanced understandings of authenticity. This article explores the purpose and meaning that these authenticities have for such lifestyle migrants. As the ethnography in this article demonstrates, claims to the authentic are equally claims to distinctiveness, and should thus be read within the context of the continual processes of social distinction in which these migrants engage.

This paper traces the process by which the British residents of the Lot, a department in rural France, develop a deeper understanding of their new surroundings. While their initial perceptions of the landscape as providing a beautiful view and a backdrop to their everyday lives prompted their migration, once they are living in the French countryside these perceptions subtly change in response to their experiences of life there. As I argue, it is not simply the case that their initial impressions are replaced with the knowledge gained from their embodied experiences. Indeed, it becomes clear that their idealizations of rural living continue to frame, partially, their understandings of how really to live in rural France; through valorization and imitation of the lives and practices of their French neighbours my respondents lay claim to local belonging. The paper thus demonstrates the ways that imaginings and experience coalesce in the production of a continually renewed understanding of their new location.

ABSTRACT
This article focuses on British migration to the Lot, a rural, inland department in the southwest of France. It first emphasizes the diversity among these lifestyle migrants by proposing a typology based on the position migrants occupy in the life course at the time of migration, identifying three different types of Britons living permanently in rural France: the family migrants, retirement migrants, and mid-life migrants. Each group of migrants hold in common their reasons for leaving Britain, the circumstances of their migration, and their position in the life course. The article then examines how the context of their lives before migration influences life in the Lot. In particular, it analyses the role of practical considerations in residential choice and degrees to which the migrants integrate into the local French population. By understanding the context of the migrants' lives before migration, certain aspects of their lives in the Lot are illuminated, helping to fragment stereotypes of expatriate populations and challenge the dominance of retirement migration within related literature.