A Diaspora in Diaspora? Russian Returnees Confront the “Homeland”

The term “Russian diaspora” is used to refer to the twenty-five million ethnic Russians who in 1991 found themselves politically displaced beyond the borders of the Russian Federation and resident within newly independent states. This paper firstly reviews the problematic “classification” of these communities as a “diaspora.” More specifically, by drawing on narratives of “home” and “homeland” among those Russians “forced” to return to the Russian Federation since 1991, it focuses on a central pillar of diasporic identity: the relationship to “homeland.” By exploring the everyday interactions with and articulated narratives of Russia on “return,” the paper argues that it is upon confrontation with “the homeland” that Russian returnees develop a sense of “otherness” from local Russian residents and a connection with other “returning Russians.” The question is raised as to whether, rather than “coming home,” Russians returning from the other former Soviet republics become a “diaspora in diaspora"?On utilise l’expression « diaspora russe » en référence aux 25 millions de Russes provenant d’ethnies différentes qui, à l’échelle politique en 1991, se sont trouvés déplacés audelà des frontières de la Russie et sont devenus des résidants d’États nouvellement indépendants. L’article s’attarde d’abord à la problématique liée à la « classification » de ces groupes en tant que « diaspora ». À partir d’anecdotes se rapportant aux notions de « foyer » et de « patrie » parmi ces Russes forcés de revenir en Russie depuis 1991, l’article se penche plus particulièrement sur le pilier de l’identité de la diaspora : la relation à la « patrie ». Grâce à l’exploration des interactions quotidiennes avec la Russie et des faits racontés sur le « retour », l’article défend le point de vue suivant : c’est par la confrontation avec la « patrie » que les rapatriés russes se sensibilisent à la notion de l’« autre » vis-à-vis des résidants russes et qu’ils tissent des liens avec d’autres « rapatriés russes ». La question qui se pose alors est de savoir jusqu’à quel point les Russes qui reviennent d’autres Républiques soviétiques ne deviennent-ils pas une « diaspora dans la diaspora » plutôt que de simplement retourner chez eux

Beyond ‘peer pressure’: rethinking drug use and ‘youth culture’

The study of drug use by young people in the West has been transformed over the last decade by the development of sociological approaches to drug use which take serious account of the cultural context in which young people encounter drugs. One consequence is that the notion of ‘peer pressure’, as the primary articulation of the engagement between youth culture and drug use, has been displaced by that of ‘normalisation’, which envisages ‘recreational’ drug use as one expression of consumer-based youth cultural lifestyles. In stark contrast, academic discussion of drug use in Russia remains primarily concerned with the prevalence and health consequences of (intravenous) drug use while explanations of rising rates of drug use focus on structural factors related to the expansion of drugs supply and, to a lesser extent, post-Soviet social and economic dislocation. In this article, original empirical research in Russia is used to develop an understanding of young people's drug use that synthesises structural and cultural explanations of it. It does this by situating young people's narratives of their drugs choices in the context of local drugs markets and broader socio-economic processes. However, it attempts to go beyond seeing structural location as simply a ‘constraint’ on individual choice by adopting an understanding of ‘youth culture’ as a range of youth cultural practices and formations that simultaneously embody, reproduce and negotiate the structural locations of their subjects

Not entitled to talk: (mis)recognition, inequality and social activism of young Muslims

This article considers the relationship between (mis)recognition, inequality and social activism through the lens of young Muslims’ response to their positioning as ‘suspect communities’. It draws on qualitative empirical research to suggest that the institutionalisation of misrecognition, including through the preventative (‘Prevent’) arm of UK counter-terrorism strategy, may mobilise young Muslims to resist ‘suspect’ status and make claims to the right to equal esteem. This forms part of the motivation towards social activism that mitigates the harm inflicted by misrecognition. However, the particular historical and cultural form of the institutionalisation of misrecognition, which renders ‘preventing Prevent’ a priority for young Muslims, may compound their status subordination. Drawing on critiques of the politics of recognition, and contextualising findings in debates on racism, anti-Muslim attitudes and societal securitisation, the article concludes that fighting misrecognition with recognition politics mis-places the role of power in subject formation and constrains young Muslims’ political agency

Why wouldn't you consult us? Reflections on preventing radicalisation among actors in radical(ising) milieus

This article engages the situated knowledge of actors in radical(ising) milieus to enhance our understanding of radicalisation and how to counter it. The article draws on interviews and observations from two ethnographic case studies in the UK –one with young people from an ‘Islamist’ and one from young people in an ‘extreme-right’ milieu –as well as three mediated dialogue events organised with participants from these milieus. The article explores how actors in these two milieus themselves understand what ‘drives’ and what might ‘prevent’ radicalisation and the degree to which such emic understandings concur with, or deviate from, etic (academic, policy, practice) conceptualisations –in particular on actors’ understandings of the role of the state, and its counter-terrorism policies and agencies, in driving radicalisation. We outline the views and experiences of Preventing or Countering Violent Extremism (P/CVE) interventions among milieu actors, which they encounter through the ‘Prevent’ arm of the UK’s counter-terrorism strategy but also in the form of curtailment of their activity (prevention from attending events and bans on social media). Finally, we consider how these emic understandings and personal experiences are expressed in milieu actors’ own practices of preventing or constraining trajectories into extremism and the openness of research participants themselves to engaging with agencies involved in P/CVE employing dialogic approaches. The article brings new insight to the field by considering the understandings and experiences of counter-extremism policies and practices among those targeted by them and argues for the importance of engaging with individuals as subjects not objects of counter-extremism policy and practice

A manually annotated Actinidia chinensis var. chinensis (kiwifruit) genome highlights the challenges associated with draft genomes and gene prediction in plants

Most published genome sequences are drafts, and most are dominated by computational gene prediction. Draft genomes typically incorporate considerable sequence data that are not assigned to chromosomes, and predicted genes without quality confidence measures. The current Actinidia chinensis (kiwifruit) 'Hongyang' draft genome has 164\ua0Mb of sequences unassigned to pseudo-chromosomes, and omissions have been identified in the gene models

When is a kettle not a kettle? When it is on slow boil…

For the past few months, Hilary Pilkington (University of Manchester) has been attending demonstrations and other events organised by the English Defence League (EDL) as part of ethnographic research conducted for the MYPLACE project. Travelling with members of the organisation (who are aware of their status as researchers) to these events has allowed project members to experience demonstrations from the perspective of EDL members themselves. This article documents the policing of a particular EDL demonstration that might be experienced by members of a wide range of organisations

Why wouldn't you consult us? Reflections on preventing radicalisation among actors in radical(ising) milieus

This article engages the situated knowledge of actors in radical(ising) milieus to enhance our understanding of radicalisation and how to counter it. The article draws on interviews and observations from two ethnographic case studies in the UK – one with young people from an ‘Islamist’ and one from young people in an ‘extreme-right’ milieu – as well as three mediated dialogue events organised with participants from these milieus. The article explores how actors in these two milieus themselves understand what ‘drives’ and what might ‘prevent’ radicalisation and the degree to which such emic understandings concur with, or deviate from, etic (academic, policy, practice) conceptualisations – in particular on actors’ understandings of the role of the state, and its counter-terrorism policies and agencies, in driving radicalisation. We outline the views and experiences of Preventing or Countering Violent Extremism (P/CVE) interventions among milieu actors, which they encounter through the ‘Prevent’ arm of the UK’s counter-terrorism strategy but also in the form of curtailment of their activity (prevention from attending events and bans on social media). Finally, we consider how these emic understandings and personal experiences are expressed in milieu actors’ own practices of preventing or constraining trajectories into extremism and the openness of research participants themselves to engaging with agencies involved in P/CVE employing dialogic approaches. The article brings new insight to the field by considering the understandings and experiences of counter-extremism policies and practices among those targeted by them and argues for the importance of engaging with individuals as subjects not objects of counter-extremism policy and practice