Read more
Increasingly, many people in democracies are turning to a strongarm politics for reassurance against globalization, uncertainty and precarity. In countries ranging from the US and the UK to Brazil, India and Turkey, support has grown for a nativist politics attacking migrants, minorities, liberals and elites as enemies of the nation. Is there a politics of belonging that progressive forces could mobilize to counteract these trends?
After Nativism takes up this question, arguing that disarming nativism will require more than improving the security and wellbeing of the 'left-behind'. The lines drawn by nativism are of an affective nature about imagined community, with meanings of belonging and voice lying at the heart of popular perceptions of just dues. This, argues Ash Amin, is the territory that progressive forces - liberal, social democratic, socialist - need to reclaim in order to shift public sentiment away from xenophobic intolerance towards one of commonality amid difference as a basis for facing existential risk and uncertainty. The book proposes a relational politics of belonging premised on the encounter, fugitive aesthetics, public interest politics, collaboration over common existential threats, and daily collectives and infrastructures of wellbeing. There is ground for progressives to mount a counter-aesthetics of belonging that will convince the discontents of neoliberal globalization that there is a better alternative to nativism.
List of contents
Introduction
1. Grounds of Belonging
2. Street Affinities
3. The Intimate Public Sphere
4. Aesthetics of Nation
Coda
Bibliography
About the author
Ash Amin is Emeritus 1931 Professor of Geography at the University of Cambridge.
Report
'Ash Amin's book has the great virtue of explaining the failure of the progressive left to make arguments for renewed democratic politics which match the visceral appeals of the populist right. Amin's solution, which promotes an aesthetic mode of resistance based on tactile and experiential images of belonging, is sure to provoke a rich debate.'
Arjun Appadurai, New York University
