Stephen D Ashe

Towards stretching and repairing fascism and anti-fascism studies This piece explores further lines of enquiry suggested in my earlier review of Kasper Braskén, Nigel Copsey and David Featherstone's edited collection, Anti-Fascism in a Global Perspective: Transnational Networks, Exile Communities, and Radical Internationalism.1 Given that the study of fascism and anti-fascism is, for many scholars, co-constitutive, this article looks to connect with, and contribute to, recent discussions relating to 'Decolonising fascist studies'.2 Not only this, some of the arguments presented here are pertinent to the study of the contemporary far right which, it might be argued, is yet to have its own reckoning with decoloniality.3

Premature Deindustrialization-GLOBAL SOCIAL THEORY The 'premature deindustrialization' thesis advanced by economist Dani Rodrik (2016), de-centres former sites of Fordist manufacturing in the Global North in order to stretch our understanding of deindustrialization and go beyond the analyses of so called 'advanced,' post-industrial economies. In doing so, Rodrik challenges existing literature which can tend to reduce the Global South to merely being the new home of outsourced industrial production.

Funded by a British Academy/ Leverhulme Small Research Grant, this research project provides a re-framing of the increasingly dominant political narrative of the ‘left behind’ that had gained ground in light of the initial rise of UKIP, but also in the general aftermath of the EU Referendum result.

As we discuss this discourse generally invokes a ‘White working class’ constituency, which it is suggested has suffered uniquely from processes of deindustrialisation, globalisation, and rising inequality and insecurity more broadly.

Within this narrative, the privileging of an imagined ‘White working class’ works to cast this group as the primary, if not the exclusive, victim of these deleterious processes.

While undoubtedly many ‘White working class’ communities have been marginalised through these developments, our research problematises some of the racist and nationalist assumptions and silences that the ‘left behind’ framework rests upon and reinforces.

Drawing on in-depth interviews with local residents in Oldham, we pay critical attention to the way wider economic struggles are adversely connected within the ‘left behind’ narrative to processes of immigration and multiculturalism. This research also draws attention to the impact of racism on the lives of our participants.

Abstract: This article tells the hitherto untold story of how different Pakistani organisations mobilised in response to racist violence and harassment in the east London Borough of Tower Hamlets (1968–1970). In telling this story, the authors analyse the problematic nature of official and public understandings of, and responses to, racist violence, and how it distorted the lives of racialised minorities.  Drawing on original archival research carried out in 2014, this piece identifies the emergence of two distinct political repertoires from within the Pakistani community: the integrationist approach and the autonomous approach. The integrationist approach involving the Pakistani Welfare Association (PWA) and
the National Federation of Pakistani Associations (NFPA) tried to address the problem through existing local state ‘race relations’ apparatuses and mainstream political channels, while at the same time re-establishing consent for the police as the agents of law and order. In contrast, a network of Black Power groups, antiimperialists and socialists led by the Pakistani Progressive Party (PPP) and the Pakistani Workers’ Union (PWU) challenged both the local political leadership and the authority of the police in Tower Hamlets, while also undermining the stereotype of Asian people as ‘weak’ and ‘passive’. In recovering this lost episode of resistance to ‘Paki-bashing’, unleashed in the aftermath of Enoch Powell’s inflammatory speeches, this essay makes a contribution to the history of autonomous anti-racist collective action undertaken by racialised minorities in Britain.

e. Moreover, this term has
been used by scholars to explore a diverse range of topics such as:

• Black politics (Enck-Wazner, 2011: Cohen, 2017);
• Changing social formations of race (Goldberg, 2009);
• Securitisation and the ‘war on terror’ (Kapoor, 2011);
• State repression and refugee governance (Bhagat, 2019);
• Restorative justice (O’Brien & Nygreen, 2010);
• Food justice (Sbicca & Myers, 2016);
• Militarism, corporatism and the evolving nature of capitalism and socio-economic and
politico-cultural relations (New Dawn, 2018); and,
• Racism in education (Giroux, 2010) and sport (Burdsey, 2014).

In the wake of Black Lives Matter protests in summer 2020, the Prime Minister announced an inquiry. The cross-governmental ‘Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities’, led by Number 10 adviser Munira Mirza, would look into discrimination against black, Asian and minority ethnic people in education, health and criminal justice. Over the past 40 years, numerous other inquiries have looked at racial inequalities across British society.

This new review, written by Stephen D. Ashe for the Stuart Hall Foundation in partnership with Centre on the Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE), with additional support from Hollick Family Foundation, summarises the findings of these previous inquiries. The aim, in setting out the story so far, is to ensure that any new inquiry does not simply go over old ground; but builds on what went before. As Sue Woodford-Hollick, SHF patron said, “We look forward to the day when actions speak louder than words.”

(Taken from the Stuart Hall Foundation website)

In this chapter I provide a reflective account of my doctoral research on the electoral rise and fall of the British National Party (BNP)-a party with its ideological and organizational origins in neo-Nazism and neo-fascism. In doing so, I will offer an account of the dialectical interplay of theory, method and data. Moreover, I will throw light on the way in which my research design evolved during the course of this study, thus demonstrating the ways in which it, and the decisions taken once in 'the field', were shaped by my personal biography and sociological training, as well as a range of other institutional, political, cultural and ethical factors. In doing so, I will draw attention to the significance of whiteness and class when negotiating the contours of the local 'communicative community' (Hewitt, 2005) through three overlapping periods of data collection on my journey towards a political ethnographic study of the BNP in the outer-East London Borough of Barking and Dagenham. I then conclude with a discussion which addresses a criticism that I (and others) have faced while presenting their work in this area: namely, that there is no place for ethnographic academic research involving the far right. Drawing on Back's (2002) concept of 'active listening', I will suggest that there is an important role for anti-racist, anti-fascist activist-scholarship in a field largely dominated by white people, and often susceptible to the pitfalls of 'white logic' and 'white methods' (see Zuberi and Bonilla-Silva, 2008).

In this piece I critically reflect on my thinking and process when it comes to writing recommendations. In addition to discussing some of the dilemmas that I have encountered, I will also chart how my thinking and process has evolved in recent times.

It is thought that the term ‘racial capitalism’ was first used in a pamphlet published by the anti-Apartheid movement in London (Kundnani, 2020). Interestingly, Cedric J. Robinson was in England around this working on his ground-breaking text, Black Marxism: The Making of the Black Radical Tradition (1983). During this period Robinson published several essays in Race & Class, the journal of the London-based Institute for Race Relation’s journal. Robinson would later join Ambalavaner Sivanandan and others on the journal’s editorial board. As a previous Global Social Theory entry shows, Sivanandan himself had a distinctive perspective on the relationship between racism and capitalism.

The Combahee River Collective (CRC) was a Black feminist lesbian organization active in Boston, United States, from 1974 to 1980. The CRC emerged as a radical alternative to the National Black Feminist Organization, taking its name from a raid led by Harriet Tubman at the Combahee River in South Carolina in 1853 which freed some 750 enslaved people. As Barbara Smith, one of the original founding members, explains, ‘My perspective, and I think it was shared, was let’s not name ourselves after a person. Let’s name ourselves after an action. A political action. And that’s what we did. And not only a political action but a political action for liberation’ (quoted in Taylor, 2017: 30-31).

Indigenous research ethics is a collective and diverse set of responses to the way in which research has historically been, and continues to be, something that has been done to, rather than with, Indigenous peoples and communities. More specifically, the wide range of writings on Indigenous research methods is a call for a critical rethinking of the way that research has and continues to contribute to ‘ongoing experiences of colonisation, theft of lands and resources, disruption to societies and families, and the suppression of culture and identity’ (the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2020: 11).

Indigenous research ethics is a collective and diverse set of responses to the way in which research has historically been, and continues to be, something that has been done to, rather than with, Indigenous peoples and communities. More specifically, the wide range of writings on Indigenous research methods is a call for a critical rethinking of the way that research has and continues to contribute to ‘ongoing experiences of colonisation, theft of lands and resources, disruption to societies and families, and the suppression of culture and identity’ (the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2020: 11).

At its most basic, the social contract is an agreement pertaining to the political and moral obligations between the state and the individual. It grants the state both authority over the individual and responsibility for maintaining social order. At the same time, the individual is granted certain rights. However, despite being founded upon a discourse of universalism, Charles W. Mills (1997) contends that the social contract was in fact, from its very inception, inherently racialised.

This report is concerned with the place of race and ethnicity in the teaching of British Sociology. More specifically, the report examines the place of race and ethnicity in undergraduate Sociology degree courses and considers the issues and barriers to the teaching of race and ethnicity.

This October marks Black History Month (BHM), a moment in the academic calendar where universities (hopefully) offer a series of events to celebrate and commemorate Black life. Whilst the offerings vary greatly between institutions, and often become the responsibility of a few individuals, BHM offers a brief opportunity to correct what is often forgotten or erased.

As BHM approaches, and with BLM protests ongoing, we want to draw attention to our British Sociological Association (BSA) commissioned report on Race and Ethnicity in British Sociology.

The longstanding neglect of colonialism in mainstream criminology has resulted in ahistorical and decontextualised accounts of crime and criminal justice system. This is arguably most evident in mainstream criminological accounts of Indigenous criminality and victimisation in white settler colonial societies. As well as acknowledging its complicity in obfuscating Indigenous peoples’ experiences of dispossession, genocide and social control, it is imperative that mainstream criminology recognises both the value of using colonialism and Indigeneity as part of its theoretical and conceptual frameworks when trying to understand contemporary crime and justice issues and the contribution made by Indigenous scholars.

Amartya Kumar Sen is an economist and philosopher who has made a distinctive contribution to the study of political economy, inequality, poverty, famines, and welfare. In 1988, Sen was awarded a Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Upon hearing the news, the late renowned Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm, a long-time friend of Sen, remarked, ‘It was only political reasons which prevented him getting it earlier … Ever since the mid-70s the Swedish committee has been strongly committed to free-market theory, until it took a real punch in the midriff in 97/98 with the Asian crisis.’

Why am I talking to white trade unionists about racism? The answer's pretty simple – the latest survey evidence strongly suggests that there are serious problems in the trade union movement requiring urgent attention. The Trade Union Congress (TUC) ran the Racism at Work survey between December 2016 and February 2017. Almost 5,200 people took part. 82.4% of whom were trade union members. 65% of non-white British participants reported that they had experienced racial harassment at work in the past 5 years, while less than half said that they were treated unfairly by their employer because of their race. Equally worrying is the fact that less than one third of non-White British participants who had experienced workplace racism had reported that they had sought support from their trade union. Why?

'Against the left nationalist myth of rootless cosmopolitans and the rooted working class, this excellent article by @sd_ashe and @RentonJE on antisemitism and work shows the real reality is deep institutional racism and a powerful culture of denial' (Bob From Brockley, @bobfrombrockley)

This short piece provides an overview of Ambalavaner Sivanandan's writings on: 1) race and class; 2) capitalism and imperialism; 3) institutional, structural and xeno-racism; 4) racial awareness training; 5) 'The liberation of the black intellectual’; and 6) anti-racism and the shift away from class politics and towards ‘a fight for culture’ during the 1980s.

The report provides a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the 2016-2017 Trade Union Congress Racism at Work Survey. 5,191 people took part in the survey, providing slightly less than 5,000 responses to open-ended questions. As well as showing that the forms of racial thinking that once underpinned imperialism, slavery and scientific racism continues to shape people's experiences of racism at work, this report also documents that workplace racism is also shaped by broader media and political discourses in and around Brexit.

Much of the academic, media and political discourse in recent months has focussed on how the Conservative and Labour parties ought to respond to the electoral challenge posed by the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP). At a series of conferences and workshops over the past year I have frequently heard it been suggested that the minute that 'You start using the terms racist and racism they [UKIP voters] won't listen to you, they'll shut the door', thus preventing any meaningful discussion of the 'drivers' of UKIP's electoral support. Alongside this suggestion, it has also been argued that the last twenty years has proven that the strategy of condemning extreme right-wing and radical right-wing populist parties does not work. I want to look at the electoral challenge posed by UKIP in terms of what this might mean for those who are looking to oppose UKIP from an anti-racist standpoint. Below I highlight that some of the ways in which UKIP seek to deflect accusations of racism are hardly new. Moreover, it is suggested that we must grasp the forms of 'race talk' and the ways in which certain notions racism operate in the public sphere. Thus, highlighting the ways in which talk around racism is narrowed to the point where structural and systemic racism, as well as everyday and cultural racisms, are denied. Moreover, it is suggested that such denials further contribute to the entrenchment of racial inequality and white privilege.

Stephen Ashe, co-ordinator of the Racism at Work project, looks in detail at the many-fold examples of workplace racism in the UK recent surveys have reaveled, and argues that comedian Russell Howard’s attempt to laugh at a booklet aimed at tackling this is borne out of ignorance about the extent of the problem

Neoliberal orthodoxy rests on the belief that 'human well-being can be best advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade'.[1] The role of the state at this time is to establish and sustain forms of governance that realise these principles.[ii] Thus, emphasis is placed on 'deregulation, privatisation, and the withdrawal of the state from many areas of social provision'.[iii] Neoliberal common-sense also demands that minimal state intervention in the affairs of the market is necessary because the state does not possess the knowledge and expertise required to do so. However, as the discussion below will show, there is one particular sector of British labour market where recent governments have not been shy in their interventions – the public sector. The present conjuncture is also characterised by widening disparities in both wealth and power. Indeed, it is commonly argued that such inequalities are the result of the decisions taken by individuals, rather than being the outcome of structural processes and institutional arrangements. Political-economic orthodoxy dictates that while not everyone is born equal, individuals have the agency to make choices that will enable them to work their way out of material disadvantage. Individual responsibility and accountability are integral to this orthodoxy.

In recent years, Business in the Community (BITC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) have commissioned two of the largest surveys ever conducted in relation to workplace racism in this country. Some 24,457 people took part in BITC's 2015 Race at Work survey, with more than 5,000 participants providing personal statements. 5,191 people took the TUC's 2016/2017 Racism at Work survey. No fewer than 4,833 participants used the open-ended questions in the survey to share their experiences of workplace racism. In effect, both surveys archive the nature and scale of workplace racism in Britain during the hegemonic crisis that is Brexit (see Virdee and McGeever, 2016). What is more, thousands of workers have used these surveys to catalogue the extent to which the legacy of colonialism, imperialism and scientific racism continues to shape their everyday working lives. Quantitative analysis of the 2015 BITC survey found 30% of participants had witnessed or experienced racist harassment or bullying from managers, colleagues, customers or suppliers in the past year. This was an increase in the levels of racist harassment and bullying reported 1-2 years ago and 3-5 years ago. Quantitative analysis of the 2016/2017 TUC survey found that over 70% of Asian and Black workers had experienced racial harassment at work in the last five years. Moreover, around 60% of Asian and Black workers, and almost 40% of employees from a Mixed heritage background, reported that they had been treated unfairly by their employer because of their 'race'. One of the things that immediately strikes you when you start to read the testimonies gathered by the BITC and TUC surveys is that many participants situated their personal experiences in the broader context of EU Referendum, Brexit and, to a lesser extent, Donald Trump taking office in the White House. Indeed, this is the political backdrop against which many participants suggested that racist ideas have been legitimised and the people subscribing to such ideas emboldened. Statements suggesting that we have gone back to the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s were also commonplace. And not just in terms of racism. A considerable number of people used both surveys to share their experiences of workplace sexism, homophobia, transphobia, disablism and class domination. I have argued in an earlier Discover Society piece that imperial nostalgia was at the very core of the EU Referendum campaign. Nadine El-Enany has also shown that fond memories of empire have also been at heart of much political discussion since the referendum. In fact, some Brexiteer's continue to argue that Britain's return to prosperity and greatness is to be achieved through trade deals with our 'Kith and Kin' in the 'Commonwealth', while Whitehall officials have even invoked the term ' Empire 2.0' to describe their vision of post-Brexit Britain. Both during and after the EU Referendum, repeated references were made to 'our friends' in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa. Each of which are white settler colonies which came into existence through the violent replacement and subjugation of indigenous peoples. Racism justified such endeavours. However, a meaningful discussion of the state and street-level violence that greeted Britain's 'Kith & Kin' once they had migrated to the colonial 'Motherland' after the Second World War has been largely absent from discussions around Brexit (See Ashe, Virdee & Brown 2016). Bearing this in mind, it can be argued that survey participants' references to 'going back' to the

Brendan McGeever’s rapid response piece in Discover Society contends that the ongoing strike action in defence of our pensions ‘needs to be more attentive to the ways race, borders and nation are reproduced within higher education itself’.

This is urgent. Not only do these issues feature prominently on placards and during rallies, teach-ins and teach-outs around the country, on February 28th University College Union (UCU) held yet another day of action against workplace racism. This year’s theme was ‘Decolonising Education’.

This report builds on the Race at Work report that was published in 2015. The Race at Work survey was conducted between 28 July and 17 September 2015. In this report we explore further the voices of 24,457 ethnic minority and White British employees aged over 16 years old, currently living in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. 6,076 people took part in the research via the YouGov panel survey, while some 18,381 respondents participated via the public open survey.3
Building on the 2015 report, we offer a qualitative analysis of responses given to open-ended survey questions designed to explore the following:

(1) employee accounts of experiencing and/ or witnessing racist harassment or bullying at work; and
(2) How, if at all, employers promote equality, diversity and fairness in the workplace.

In doing so, this report provides further insights into the nature, scale and human impact of racist bullying and harassment in the workplace. In addition to this, we draw further attention to some of the specific barriers that prevent the realisation of equality, diversity and fairness at work.

This report builds on the Race at Work report that was published in 2015. The Race at Work survey was conducted between 28 July and 17 September 2015. In this report we explore further the voices of 24,457 ethnic minority and White British employees aged over 16 years old, currently living in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. 6,076 people took part in the research via the YouGov panel survey, while some 18,381 respondents participated via the public open survey.3
Building on the 2015 report, we offer a qualitative analysis of responses given to open-ended survey questions designed to explore the following:

(1) employee accounts of experiencing and/ or witnessing racist harassment or bullying at work; and
(2) How, if at all, employers promote equality, diversity and fairness in the workplace.

In doing so, this report provides further insights into the nature, scale and human impact of racist bullying and harassment in the workplace. In addition to this, we draw further attention to some of the specific barriers that prevent the realisation of equality, diversity and fairness at work.

Is the SNP failing on race, just like the Westminster parties? The Scottish National Party (SNP) has held the reins of power at Holyrood since 2007. By the end of the SNP's third term in office they will have been in government for more than a decade. With the opinion polls suggesting that victory was all but assured, BBC Newsnight facilitated a discussion prior polling day about whether the SNP had become part of the 'political establishment'. This debate gathered more pace following the First Minister Nicola Sturgeonbeing photographed with a copy of The Sun. In considering this question there is an important area of debate, which is all too often relegated to the periphery of Scottish politics that we might want to consider: the SNP's record on tackling both racism and ethnic inequality. Here there are several ways that we can assess whether the SNP are similar to Labour and the Conservatives: the party's rhetoric; racism within the SNP; ethnic minority representation in the party and the Scottish government; and the progress the SNP have made in terms of tackling both racism and ethnic inequality after two full terms in office. In the years preceding the 2015 referendum on Scottish independence, Alex Salmond and the SNP have sought to articulate an inclusive Scottish nationalism which is all too often contrasted to a 'backward-looking' ethnic sense of Britishness. Such a contrast must be treated with considerable caution. Not only is the SNP's inclusive vision of Scottish nationalism a relatively recent phenomenon, it cannot be completely or cleanly separated from a historically founded imagining that equates Scottishness with whiteness. This can be traced back to the Scotland's role in Slavery and Empire. However, asBrendan McGeever notes, research has shown that 'Scottishness can indeed be imagined as something other than 'white'. In recent times the SNP have offered an important critical voice amidst the desperation and despair of the ongoing refugee crisis. This, of course, should be welcomed, if not commended. This has again reinforced the distinction between the SNP and the Conservative government's inhumane response which, if anything, has only stoked the flames of anti-immigrant political discourse. The SNP's opposition to the Conservative's was again evident after parliament voted down the attempt by MPs to force the British government to offer sanctuary to 3,000 unaccompanied child refugees in Europe. It is in this context that it is regrettable that the current constitutional setup sees Westminster retain control over immigration. Had the 2001 Scotland Act devolved control over immigration to the Scottish parliament, would the SNP maintain or dismantle the racist immigration laws introduced by Conservative and Labour governments in Westminster? Internal party racism and ethnic minority representation is another one terrain upon which we might consider whether the SNP are part of the 'establishment'. Over the last few weeks and months, the Conservatives have used Zac Goldsmith's London Mayoral election campaign to reveal their own deep-seated Islamophobia. At the same time, Labour has been engulfed by accusations of

The Prime Minister's recent visit to Jamaica with the latter government's claim for reparations and high-profile student-led campaigns at both Oxford and Cambridge have ensured that Britain's colonial past has been a prominent feature of recent political and media discussion. At the same time, recent elections and the build up to the EU referendum on 23 June have seen UKIP and Conservative Eurosceptics weave an altogether different narrative about that past. Over the last few years, UKIP have argued that we should leave the EU, set up trade relationships with the Commonwealth and install an Australian points-based migration policy. These arguments are also being made by leading Conservative Eurosceptics. Such arguments depend upon re-imagining the finer details of Britain's colonial past and by denying the realities of the present, especially those of 'race'.

This summary sets out key findings from a multi-method study into the community impact of
public processions in Scotland carried out in 2013. The research objectives were to identify
which organisations regularly take part in processions, the aims and cultural significance of
the events, the impact on communities, and factors which may contribute to, or may mitigate,
the disruption of community life.
The mixed methods study included:
 Collection and analysis of local authority statistics on procession notifications from
across Scotland, and analysis of police incident data for the beat areas in which the
processions took place;
 Documentary analysis of relevant policies, guidelines and research reports;
 Qualitative and quantitative data collection across case-study sites selected on the
basis that they hosted prominent key processions;
 Interviews and focus groups with procession organisers, procession participants and
public authorities (primarily the police and local authority officers);
 Residential, street and telephone surveys with local residents in „live‟ case-study
areas, both before and after selected processions;
 On-street and business mini-surveys with bystanders, supporters and local retail
businesses;
 Structured and unstructured ethnographic observations of processions in live casestudy
sites.
In total, extensive ethnographic research (including participant observation, formal and
informal dialogue across the fieldwork sites) was carried out at 12 processions; 713 surveys
and mini surveys of residents and businesses were collected across five live case-study
sites (Coatbridge, Govan, Parkhead, Bridgeton and Airdrie). In addition, in-depth formal
interviews were conducted with 40 respondents. Ten focus groups were carried out with key
stakeholders (including police, local authority and community representatives; and members
of processing organisations).
Survey responses were based on convenience sampling approaches and the statistical data
explores the issue of community impact rather than measuring it in a way that is readily
generalizable to specific places or broader populations. Statistical and ethnographic data
form a triangulated set of research methods that examine the issue of impact on a casestudy
basis, with the case-studies focussed primarily on particular processions rather than
particular places. The study explores experiences and perceptions of public processions
within communities, recognising that the concept of homogenous and distinct „communities‟
existing within specific geographic locales was rare.

Robert Miles has made a significant contribution to the field of racism and ethnic studies. In his early work, Miles drew upon structuralist Marxist theorizations of capitalism to offer a historically informed analysis of racism and migrant labour (Miles 1982). This perspective placed political economy at the centre of the study of racism. In addition, Miles' critical discussions with other influential contemporaries such as Paul Gilroy and Stuart Hall (Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) 1982) raised crucial issues concerning the construction of ‘race’ as a social and political relation in Britain (Back and Solomos 2000). However, Miles became most renowned for his critique of the ‘race relations’ paradigm and his insistence that sociologists employ the concept of ‘racialization’ rather than ‘race’ (Miles 1982, 1989, 1993). Overall, Miles' work was rich both in its theoretical clarity and historical depth, and his contributions warrant critical analysis today. The following interview was conducted in December 2009.

Edited by Kasper Braskén, David Featherstone and Nigel Copsey, Anti-Fascism in a Global Perspective presents a series of ‘interlinked case studies’ which spotlight a variety of anti-fascist traditions embedded in different local and national spaces during the interwar period. This collection simultaneously reveals the depth of interconnectedness that existed between local anti-fascisms and their connections and commitment to global movements. Key to this collection’s mission is an attempt draw attention to anti-fascist resistance in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Latin America and the Middle East, which as editors point out,
‘have often been ignored or rendered peripheral in histories of anti-fascism’ (p. 1). In doing so, the editors have brought together a collection of essays further highlighting traditions of anti-fascism in which transnational alliances were forged between communists, anarchists, socialists, democrats, liberals and anti-colonialists

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the cc by 4.0 license.