This article investigates the unexpected re-emergence of race in both the rhetoric and activities of the British radical-right. In doing so it seeks to better understand the reasons why race has re-emerged, how race has been contemporarily deployed by the radical-right, and the extent to which the re-emergence of race will force the radical right’s recent ideological focus on religion – more specifically, the religion of Islam and Muslims as adherents – begin to retreat. It does this first by setting out the methods and approaches used throughout. From here, necessary and appropriate context is provided about the British radical-right generally and the decades old ideological turn more specifically. Next, the circumstances and reasons for the re-emergence of race are critically engaged: focusing on the immediate aftermath of 2020’s Black Lives Matter protests as also the wider socio-political landscape of contemporary Britain. Taking into account both established and newly formed groups and movements from within the British radical right, the role and function played by race is considered next. As part of this, an in-depth analysis of the role and function of race in the rhetoric and activities of Patriotic Alternative is included. In conclusion, this article reflects on a number of arguments about why the re-emergence of race among the British radical-right is - albeit to varying degrees - a cause for concern.

In the British setting, the deployment of the phrase ‘doing god’ has become increasingly common to refer to an emerging trend whereby religion has acquired an increasingly prominent role in political spaces and discourses. This was particularly prominent while David Cameron was Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party. While historically, religion has not had a prominent place in either the former Prime Minister David Cameron. Here, the findings from critical analyzing a series of Cameron’s public pronouncements about religion—and Christianity in particular—is set out to try and better understand his own adherence to Christianity (the personal) how this intersected with his politics and role as Prime Minister (the political), and more importantly how this shaped his views about Britain being a Christian country (the national). Contextualised within the embryonic scholarly literature relating to the phenomenon of ‘doing god’ in the contemporary British setting, this article concludes by considering alternative and analogous frames through which greater elucidation of the true motivations of his pronouncements might be understood.

The creation of the National Muslims Women’s Advisory Group (NMWAG) in 2008 by Britain’s New Labour Government was part of a strategy which sought to engage different levels of Muslim communities beneath an overarching focus on reducing ‘Islamic extremism’. To do so however, Government acknowledged that it would need to support Muslim women to overcome some of the constraints it believed were placed on Muslim women in contemporary Britain. Deeming theology and religious interpretation to be one of those constraints, Government saw the need to empower Muslim women to ‘influence and challenge’ religious and theological discourses as a priority. This article therefore offers a case study on a project that was commissioned by Government that sought to empower Muslim women to ‘influence and challenge’ theological interpretations in collaboration with the NMWAG. Having gained unprecedented access to the NMWAG, its activities and engagement with Government, this article presents previously unpublished findings from that project to focus on two key themes: Muslim women, their identity and position; and theology, leadership and the participation of women. Having explored these in detail, this article concludes by critically reflecting on the way in which Government engaged and interacted with Muslim women, the role and relative success of the NMWAG and, most importantly, the extent to which the NMWAG was able to ‘influence and challenge’ interpretations of Islamic theology.

Soon after the Conservative-led Coalition government came to power in 2010, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi announced that Islamophobia had passed the ‘dinner-table test’ in contemporary Britain. Resultantly, the need to address Islamophobia was identified as a priority for the Coalition. This article critically analyses how the Coalition sought to achieve this and the extent to which it was successful. Focusing on the period 2010-5, this article initially frames what is meant by Islamophobia before briefly setting out how it had been responded to by previous British governments. As regards the Coalition, a threefold approach is adopted that considers the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia, the Cross-Government Working Group on Anti-Muslim Hate and the political discourses used by the Coalition about Muslims and Islam more generally. Concluding that the Coalition failed to meet the high expectations set by Warsi’s speech, this article considers why this might have been so.

This article responds to an identified and significant gap in the existing scholarly canon to consider the extent to which cinematic representations construct heroin users—the ‘junkie’—as a criminalised ‘Other’ which confer legitimacy on the notion that such are criminogenic and deviant. Positioned within the disciplinary bounds of cultural criminology, this article focuses on five films - Sid and Nancy (1986); The Basketball Diaries (1995); Trainspotting (1996); Requiem for a Dream (2000); and, T2 Trainspotting (2017). Drawing together Hall’s (1997) theories of representation and Hjelm’s (2014) theories of social constructionism, the findings from a narrative analysis of each of the films—individually and comparatively—explores the following themes, junkies: as criminogenic; as dangerous underclass; as embodying decay and depravity; and in relation to female junkies, as junkie whores. In doing so, this article elucidates new thinking and ideas about cinematic representations of junkies and how this shapes and influences social norms and mores.