Activist conceptualisations at the migration-welfare nexus: Racial capitalism, austerity and the hostile environment

Tom Vickers

doi:10.1177/0261018320948026

Abstract

In recent years British welfare policy and immigration policy have intertwined in new ways, with widespread cuts alongside increasing conditionality, rationing, and differentiation of rights. This article explores perspectives among activists attempting to resist these developments, with a focus on those that go beyond narrow reactions and engage in systemic critiques. It draws on in-depth qualitative interviews with activists from a variety of campaigns in England. The article presents a conceptual framework, synthesising these activists’ ideas and comprising three elements: racialised profit-seeking as a driver of policy; ‘situated universalism’ as a counter-hegemonic basis for unity; and a theory of change through grassroots campaigns.

Highlights

This article addresses the migration-welfare nexus in social policy (Jørgensen and Thomsen, 2016), with a focus on England, using ideas developed by activists trying to influence change
The interconnections between welfare and borders have been intensified in Britain in recent years by a policy environment marked by austerity and a ‘hostile environment’ for migrants
Britain’s welfare policies and immigration policies have provoked criticism and opposition on the basis of their negative impact on human welfare. By itself such moral opposition is a limited guide to how these policies might be changed; a conceptual framework and analysis is needed

Summary

Introduction

This article addresses the migration-welfare nexus in social policy (Jørgensen and Thomsen, 2016), with a focus on England, using ideas developed by activists trying to influence change. Following a brief outline of the context in which these ideas developed, the article reports the research methodology followed by a conceptual synthesis of activists’ ideas. This connects with and builds on Marxist, anti-racist, feminist, and postcolonial traditions, which share a concern with exposing and challenging oppressive power relations in social policy and developing a systemic analysis to inform struggles for change. Severe welfare cuts have combined with differentiation among welfare recipients along the lines of immigration status. These policy developments have prompted academic analyses and a range of activist responses, seeking to influence policy agendas

Background

Methodology

Conclusion