This issue of Radical History Review coincides with the penultimate phase in Ireland’s “decade of centenaries,” recalling the turbulent period leading up to the partition of the island and the creation of an independent Irish state. Beginning in 1912 with the incipient armament of the Ulster Crisis, this year marks the ratification of the treaty that ended the War of Independence (1919–21) and saw the foundation of a twenty-six-county Free State, the forerunner to the modern Republic of Ireland. It is a truism that commemorations reveal more about the present than the past, but in Ireland’s case, this has also produced more than a few historical ironies. Thus, as the republic set out to celebrate its road to independence in 2012, it found itself temporarily stripped of its sovereignty by a troika of international institutions—the International Monetary Fund, European Central Bank, and European Commission—in the wake of a global financial crash. A decade on, the centenary of Northern Ireland did not prove the occasion of sectarian triumphalism many feared but was instead overshadowed by the fallout from Brexit and the internationalization of the peace process it has come to threaten. Both serve as reminders that contemporary Ireland remains enmeshed in a web of supranational contingencies, many related to its experiences of imperialism and evolving place in the global capitalist system. This issue is dedicated to interrogating Irish history in light of these wider structures.

Although national in focus, it would be a mistake to dismiss the commemorations—which have played out against the backdrop of the crash, Brexit, and Covid-19—as lacking a wider focus. This year’s agenda thus includes “Ireland and the Wider World” as a core theme, emphasizing the international dimension of politics, emigration, and the diaspora.1 What the historian Peter Gray has termed the “globalizing rhetoric” surrounding Irish commemoration has its origins in the sesquicentennial anniversary of the Great Famine (1845–52) at the outset of the Celtic Tiger boom (1994–2007), when the then president of Ireland, Mary Robinson, first spoke of the “global connections [it] made obvious” to both the diaspora and wider world.2 Avril Doyle, the government minister who presided over commemorations in the mid-1990s, could likewise frame the bicentenary of the 1798 rebellion as a moment “inseparable from a wider global setting” and a prompt to “rethink Ireland in a global society.”3 Governments have since used anniversaries of the 1916 Easter Rising to “present Ireland to the world,” tying this into the state’s first “Global Irish” diaspora policy by building on post-crash initiatives like the Global Irish Economic Forum of 2009, and “The Gathering” tourism festival from 2013.4 The state’s current foreign policy strategies—aptly entitled Global Ireland and Global Island—likewise wrap Irish and world histories around an essentially neoliberal vision. “We are at a moment in world history where we can turn inwards or open ourselves . . . on a global scale,” the then Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Leo Varadkar declares in Global Ireland. “One hundred years ago we were a small island on the periphery of Western Europe. In the next one hundred we will be . . . an island at the center of the world.”5

The profound internationalization of Ireland’s economy and society over the past quarter century—it has repeatedly been ranked the most globalized in the world—has unquestionably shaped this shift in historical self-perception. As one sociologist quipped at the height of the Celtic Tiger, “If an Ireland did not already exist, globalization theory would have to invent it.”6 Yet as the examples cited above suggest, this process has also witnessed the commodification and marketing of Irish history as a global consumer product in its own right, often instrumentalizing the diaspora, paying lip service to developing countries, “selling” the peace process, and monetizing heritage around sanitized and essentializing narratives.7 Liberal intellectuals have at times interpreted (and celebrated) this shift as marking a “post-nationalist” moment when, as Fintan O’Toole has argued, “extreme globalization led to an opening of the past in which history became current affairs.”8 For such figures, the passing of the insular and authoritarian society of their youth, alongside the cessation of the Troubles and collapse of the Catholic Church, has opened the way for newly cosmopolitan and comparative framings of the Irish past.9 A corollary commodification of non-redemptive history as antithetical to, and thus legitimating, a globalized (neo-)liberal present has been equally evident across some of the most fêted Irish theatre, fiction, film, and music since the 1990s.10 For the critic Luke Gibbons writing in 2002, such a superficial “global cure” to the complexities of Irish history often privileged identification with European and Anglo-American historical models over links to, and solidarity with, the postcolonial Global South.11 Two decades on, the urgent need to globalize Irish history now requires confronting a set of political orthodoxies for which “Global Ireland” has itself become official shorthand.

Any effort to critically reframe that history in global and transnational terms must thus confront a fundamentally contested ideological terrain. In Ireland, this is complicated by historians being relative latecomers to the debates surrounding globalization that raged throughout the 1990s and 2000s and engaged sociologists, economists, linguists, scientists, journalists, writers, filmmakers, playwrights, and artists, to name but a few.12 This is conventionally blamed on the hegemony of “revisionism” in Irish history writing, a tendency with roots in the foundation of the historical profession in the 1930s which aimed to pioneer empirically driven “objective” history in the face of “nationalist mythologies.”13 Ranged in part against a rising tide of postcolonial criticism from the 1990s, latter-day revisionist history exhibits a skepticism toward theory in general while reinforcing broadly Anglocentric framings of Irish history, in both spatial and intellectual terms. In this, it has ironically proved more methodologically nationalist than its putative adversaries.14 Yet those positing global and transnational history as a dialectical corrective to revisionism must be mindful that simply breaking “the mold of the nation” may not be enough. After all, revisionism is guilty of many of the shortcomings sometimes laid at the door of global and transnational histories more generally, namely top-down perspectives, ethical ambivalence, neoliberal and imperial apologetics, Eurocentrism, a repackaging of exceptionalism, a reproduction of modernization narratives, the glossing of historical complexity, and the categorical essentializing of nations and national identity as exclusive units of analysis.15

Navigating such potential pitfalls, scholars have begun to establish the basis for a more critical transnational and global history over the last decade, led largely by historians based outside of Ireland. The timing of this shift is significant, coming in the aftermath of the crash during a period of severe domestic crisis that saw the return of large-scale emigration, a temporary loss of sovereignty, and prolonged austerity. The latter reverberated through a heavily corporatized university system, complicating mechanisms of patronage and intellectual reproduction on a structural level within Ireland. In this context, the failure of an “island story” framework materialized precisely at the moment when a hegemonic narrative about a globalized Ireland at “the end of history” lay in tatters, and both transnational movement and global institutions assumed a potent new social reality. Thus, as Angela McCarthy has argued, the most radical new transnational histories go beyond celebrations of “motion” to explore the “social fields” linking migrants, polities, and economies.16 Kevin Kenny has likewise suggested a novel hybrid of comparative and transnational approaches to supersede the pitfalls of modernization with respect to the social formations of race, class, and gender.17 And Enda Delaney, in a landmark intervention, has called for new transnational Irish histories that challenge the profession’s “self-referential and introspective” gaze to confront a wider methodological conservatism.18

In the wake of a global pandemic that has exposed the hollowness of a profoundly uneven post-crash recovery, the prospects for new global and transnational histories are now once again in flux. While the issue’s cover image by Valérie Anex thus depicts one of the many “ghost estates” abandoned across Ireland since 2008, today the hauntology of global finance has returned in the form of “vulture funds” aggravating the worst housing crisis in living memory. Instigated in part by this crisis, an earthquake election in February 2020 saw the republic’s two historically dominant center-right parties reduced to less than half of the vote for the first time since the 1920s, while Northern Ireland’s unionist parties now face the imminent loss of their own century-long primacy. Meanwhile, an upsurge of internationalist, feminist, LGBT+, climate, housing, and migrant solidarity activism—with signal victories in the republic against water privatization and for marriage equality and abortion—has most recently presaged calls for racial and social justice associated with Black Lives Matter and a wider reckoning with structural racism.19 This issue emerges from the current conjuncture to connect the foundational work of Irish postcolonialism, world systems theory, and critical political economy with emerging scholarship on empire, intersectional and critical race theory, and new histories of capitalism. Reflecting these foci, the issue’s feature articles are divided into three broad sections: “Empire and After,” “Race and Whiteness,” and “Capital and Class.”

The first of these opens with Joe Cleary’s retrospective analysis of Irish postcolonial criticism, which also helps to frame the issue as a whole by stressing the need to more effectively synthesize each of the aforementioned themes. The article recounts how the rich, interdisciplinary legacies of the Field Day Theatre Company, from the groundbreaking work of the late Seamus Deane onward, has helped to transform Irish intellectual life in subverting revisionist and chauvinistic histories alike with a cosmopolitanism of thought that has broadened the vista of Irish studies globally. Far from liberal critiques of postcolonialism as abstruse or parochial, Cleary’s conspectus is a powerful reminder that perhaps this scholarship’s most significant legacy has been to challenge the hegemony of colonial and neoliberal modernization projects by positing an alternative pole of globality reverberating through Irish history and culture. Looking forward, Cleary urges the need for an even more historically minded integration of questions of culture and coloniality with those of gender, class, and capital, highlighting in particular the need to foreground the entanglement of Ireland within global regimes of capital as well as imperial and postimperial world systems.

Articles by José Brownrigg-Gleason, Kenneth Shonk, and Kerron Ó Luain make up the remainder of “Empire and After,” and elaborate further on the suggestive points of departure mapped out by Cleary, each analyzing complex instances of interaction between Irish and global peripheries at moments when Irish locations in the world system were themselves in motion. Brownrigg-Gleason’s analysis of Irish attitudes to independence movements in Spanish America in the 1820s goes beyond tropes of military intervention to interrogate how support for Hispanic republicans from Ireland and the Irish-American diaspora diverged significantly on the basis of differing geopolitical interpellations. For the latter—many former United Irishmen in exile—the threat of an encroaching “informal” British empire in the place of a receding Spanish ancien régime evoked a radical republican critique rooted in transnational experiences of the American and French Revolutions still echoing globally. Conversely, constitutional nationalists in Ireland seeking to advance Catholic Emancipation voiced support for both the Spanish liberal revolution and the new republics of South America in terms of their own claims to imperial citizenship. Although these contrasts reflect contradictions in Ireland’s own globalization as a metropolitan colony in these years, which included ongoing subordination, deindustrialization, and rising emigration, they also indicate a dynamic transnational conversation tied to shifts in and between global imperial peripheries.

Tackling the complexity of this dynamic at a much later but no less profound moment of global transformation, Kenneth Shonk’s article examines the reception of the many anti-colonial nationalists from the global South who chose to visit Ireland in the 1950s and 1960s. These included not only leading international figures such as Jawaharlal Nehru, who first visited Ireland in 1907 before returning again in 1949 and 1956 as the first prime minister of independent India, but also a range of representatives of anti-colonial movements from present-day Malawi, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Laos, Myanmar, Sudan, and Egypt, among others. Shonk adapts Jean-François Bayart’s notion of “postcolonial extraversion”—the process by which developing countries mobilize external resources in unequal contexts—to investigate how Ireland served as a model of “mimetic nation-building” to such visitors while also leveraging this notoriety to “recast its own Europeanness.” Departing from celebratory narratives of either internationalism or state modernization in this period, the article instead demonstrates how this sometimes jarring dialectic was not necessarily lost on either party nor wholly one-sided. Ireland could thus function as a “shadow metropole” where anti-colonial futures were imagined and legitimated, while the Irish state remained conscious of its own global intermediacy as a privilege to be maintained—or squandered—on the international stage.

If Brownrigg-Gleason and Shonk both offer case studies of Irish relationships to the global periphery at moments when Ireland’s own positionality lay in question, Kerron Ó Luain offers a reflexive study that extends this analysis inward. Addressing Irish language activists as a decolonizing subaltern movement from the 1970s, his article captures domestic struggles against, and eventual compromise within, a globalizing political economy of national development that cemented English as the hegemonic language while alienating Ireland’s geocultural periphery of Irish-speaking communities (Gaeltachtaí). Yet it was both the legacies of cultural imperialism and neoliberal development that helped to shape this backlash, birthing a movement led by a “buffer group” of urban activists focused on the provision of Irish-language schools (Gaelscoileanna) primarily in cities like Dublin, Belfast, and Galway and in middle- and working-class communities. The result has been a partial accommodation with forces otherwise hostile to the language, and a sharpening need to connect the diverging fortunes of peripheral Gaeltachtaí with a rising cohort of Irish speakers—many educated in Gaelscoileanna—located in metropolitan centers. Ó Luain hints that such hybrid revivalism, caught in the crosshairs of colonial and neoliberal globalization, may yet succeed in preserving a “glocal” incarnation of a language shorn of geographical indigeneity.

The central issues of divergence, intermediacy, and transition pertaining to Ireland and the Irish when viewed in imperial and postimperial global contexts gives rise to critical questions addressed in the issue’s second section: “Race and Whiteness.” Ebun Joseph, who recently founded the first Black Studies module in Ireland at University College Dublin, tackles these interlocking themes with a discussion of the historic relationship of domestic and diasporic Irishness to whiteness, encompassing the roots and workings of white “centrality,” “superiority,” “normativity,” and “supremacy.” Almost three decades after the publication of Noel Ignatiev’s widely criticized landmark study, How the Irish Became White (1995) Joseph draws on foundational histories of whiteness by David Roediger, Michael Omi, Howard Winant, and others, as well as critical race theorists like Cheryl Harris, to re-center the “cost,” “price,” and “wages” of whiteness as structurally fundamental to modern Irishness. Confronting rather than reifying whiteness and white supremacy as contemporary phenomena with distinctly Irish histories, Joseph urges, should lead Irish scholars to “have an Irish conversation on what racism means and how race is constructed,” which might ultimately prove critical to the decolonization of both Irish historical narratives and of “Irishness” itself.

Ciaran O’Neill, Jimmy Yan, and Sarah Townsend each examine questions of Irish whiteness raised by Joseph at different junctures in the twentieth century, reprising, respectively, a fin de siècle imperial gaze and views of the Irish as an ambiguous racial substratum in interwar America; the self-identity of Irish people as white settlers in Australia; and Irish postwar migrants to the United States as a “vested interest” group. Irish whiteness—whether framed as problematic or essential—emerges in all instances as a contingent but consistent feature of wider global discourses of race. In this vein, O’Neill’s interlinked case studies of the Dublin Anthropometric Lab, founded in Trinity College Dublin in 1892, and the physical anthropology strand of a study on Ireland carried out by researchers from Harvard University in the 1930s highlights the outsized place of the Irish as subjects in transnational debates surrounding the nascent field of “racial science.” The article argues that such abortive efforts to measure, define, and classify the “Irish race” were ultimately linked to doubts about the civility and modernity of “primitive” subjects at home in Ireland and the British Empire, as well as further afield in America as subnormal outliers among white Europeans. O’Neill thus concludes that the issue of Irish whiteness had, by the 1930s, become one with valency “out in the world, rather than simply in Ireland . . . that served a number of racialist agendas.”

While O’Neill notes such debates—dominated as they were by British and American elites—were “progressively lost control of” within Ireland, Jimmy Yan’s study of Irish-Australians as white settlers frames an alternative historiographical vantage point. His article opens with a reminder that throughout Ireland’s revolutionary decade (1912–23), white settlers in Australia killed at least 143 Indigenous people across nine frontier massacres. Yan juxtaposes these events to underline the ethical and methodological shortcomings of a transnational Irish history that might aim to undermine island-centric histories while uncritically embracing Irish white settler colonialism to produce a “nationalism writ large.” This critique does not imply a rejection of transnational history as such, but rather an effort to enrich the “global turn” in Irish historiography by placing it in conversation with Australian scholarship that prioritizes the need to “de-exceptionalize and denaturalize the settler nation.” For Yan, omitting this link also risks obscuring wider contexts of the type noted by O’Neill, particularly the ways settler-nativists used Irish nationalist narratives to affirm the idea of a “global color line” in the postwar era. A vital insight of this study is thus the rejection of transnational history as a “single field of translatable globality.” If uncritical conceptions of “global Ireland” merely recreate nationalism elsewhere, Yan concludes what is instead needed is greater intellectual engagement between “differently situated transnational turns.”

Engaging precisely such a nuanced approach, Sarah Townsend’s article on the changing politics of US immigration interrogates how Irish American pressure groups sought to renegotiate the terms of Irish whiteness in the post–civil rights era. Like the abandonment of the “white Australia policy” a decade later, the 1965 Hart-Celler Act abolished racist quotas that favored Irish migrants for an ostensibly race-blind system based on needs and rights. While the Irish lobby initially appropriated the notion of “reverse discrimination” to target non-European migrants now competing for entry to the United States on a more equal footing, Townsend charts a major reorientation in strategy by the 1980s. Irish advocates had, by then, dropped openly racist language in favor of “tentative solidarity” with their Asian American and Latinx counterparts, moved in part by a perceived need to “refurbish the public face” of Irish whiteness after episodes like the Boston busing crisis. This “strategic variety of whiteness” combined pan-immigrant cooperation with new and thinly coded narratives of white exceptionalism, championing Irish emigrants as Anglophone, educated, and connected. Townsend concludes in transnational terms, arguing the very same “strategic whiteness” undergirds the racism of Ireland’s current immigration regime and the profound ambivalence of the céad míle fáilte (hundred thousand welcomes) offered by a putatively global Ireland.

The transnational germination of structures of empire and race explored in foregoing sections are complemented and combined in the issue’s final theme, “Capital and Class.” The motifs that recur in every article and perhaps best capture the contradictions of Ireland’s global experience—divergence, intermediacy, and transition—sharpen further when we turn to the country’s role in the global capitalist system. Starting with the recent golden age of Irish globalization and working backward, Conor McCabe’s case study of the relationship between Ireland and Apple, the world’s richest company, reveals deep-set historic patterns. This amounts to more than the external image of Ireland as a simple tax haven; rather, McCabe describes the development of de facto state aid to corporations like Apple in terms of a developed comprador system preserved with “religious fervor” via consensus, even when it clashes with the public good. At the core of the system, he argues, are bureaucratic, managerial, and professional elites whose interests came to align with foreign investors from the early days of liberalization in the 1960s, a process which itself aimed to kick-start growth in a political economy incapable of fully severing colonial ties. The latter were social, in the form of dominant class groups; institutional, in terms of the fiscal and monetary conservativism of the state; and structural, as in Ireland’s place in the sterling zone up to 1979. The rise of the comprador elite with the Celtic Tiger, carrying with it an exponential growth in tax avoidance, can thus be repositioned as an offshoot of local class interests—and a reaction to long-term inertia—as much as slavishness to global capital.

Articles by Cathal Smith, Aoife O’Leary McNeice, and Patrick Doyle provide further context, color, and complexity to the historical dynamics of underdevelopment, liberalization, and globalization alluded to by McCabe, together with those of capital and class formation. Smith draws on the scholarly literatures of world ecology and the new history of capitalism associated with historians like Jason Moore and Sven Beckert to reconceptualize Ireland’s evolving role in the world system as an agrarian “commodity frontier.” The commodity frontier refers to transnational peripheral zones of environmental exploitation that act as markets for manufactured goods while producing food and raw materials—in Ireland’s case, grain, dairy, and beef—for export to and consumption in metropolitan core and semi-peripheral regions. Smith’s shift from the macro and meso levels of the global economy to a micro perspective via a case study of eastern County Galway in the west of Ireland provides a snapshot of how the dynamics of agri-environmental change, commercialization, and rationalization embraced many actors—from the gentry-turned-capitalists of “second landlordism” to farmers and laborers. This perspective thus allows us to conceive of globalization as a more or less continuous and constitutive feature of modern Irish history with distinctive ebbs and flows manifesting themselves through “constant negotiation between local, national, and transnational factors.”

O’Leary McNeice’s analysis of the birth of global humanitarianism amid the Great Famine likewise captures the reflexive nature of this process, describing how Ireland’s traumatic mid-century globalization—of people and commodities—also gave rise to new global practices. These were wrought from new connections between metropolitan centers, Irish society, and an entirely new array of global actors whose charity depended on elite networks, new technology, and mass media. Examining two organizations central to this process, the New York General Relief Committee and the London-based British Relief Association, her article details an early and formative moment of transnational middle-class formation in which a bourgeois conception of charitable giving—albeit one not solely limited to the rich—materialized class identities within and across national borders. Although vast in terms of its geographical reach, such moralization—and monetization—of what would become Europe’s most devastating famine of the nineteenth century proved both fleeting and shallow. What did emerge from this global conjuncture, however, was a new set of images, languages, and practices linked with individualized appeals to passive victimhood, and with these, McNeice concludes, novel moral justifications for inequality and empire.

In the issue’s final feature article, Doyle explores a powerful instance of transnational countermovement against the acceleration of global capitalism throughout the Age of Empire, namely the growth and institutionalization of the living-wage concept. Through interlocking studies of two Irish Catholic social theorists, Doyle illustrates how a ‘“left Catholic’ tendency” inspired by Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum novarum crystalized in the early twentieth century through Irish intellectual and diasporic networks. The first figure discussed, Edward Phelan, was a civil servant who served as secretary to the Labour Commission at the Paris Peace Conference and was a key architect of the International Labour Organization, while the second, the Irish American priest John Augustine Ryan, authored the 1906 book Living Wage and helped lead successful campaigns for minimum wage legislation in the United States. Both men proved central to the international mainstreaming of the living wage as a concept, yet their ideas were ultimately met with critical treatment by conservative clerics in Ireland. The result was a highly gendered embrace of a corporatist “breadwinner” model, one which would cast a long shadow across Irish social policy but fell short of the ideals of both figures in subordinating social and economic rights to the preservation of the patriarchal familial order. Doyle’s study thus complicates the notion that the Irish would have to wait until the late twentieth century for external infusion of progressive ideas, rebutting the myopia of a narrowly national focus and the monolithic conservativism it has tended to reify.

The two audio-visual artworks by filmmakers Megs Morley and Tom Flanagan in the Curated Spaces section likewise resist the straitjacket of historical convention to suggest creative, politically engaged, and globally conscious avenues for historical analysis. The first of these is a sixty-minute film installation entitled The Question of Ireland (2013), which engaged three interlocuters—the sociologist Kieran Allen, the political activist Bernadette Devlin McAliskey, and the playwright Grace Dyas—in responding to Karl Marx’s 1867 “Notes for an Undelivered Speech on Ireland” with a reflection on its relevance to the contemporary world. Each contributor explores Ireland’s past, present, and potential futures as what Marx termed a “revolutionary thunderbolt” in a moment when Marxist ideas are being explored with renewed interest. The section’s second feature, the twenty-minute film-essay A History of Stone, Origin and Myth (2016) likewise interrogates the politics of history in Ireland through the materiality of state monuments that have become increasingly visible amid the ongoing decade of centenaries. Foregrounding appropriations of the human body in particular, the work points toward a decolonial emphasis on confrontation and reappropriation with the potential to disrupt official narratives, collective memories, and political identities.

The issue closes with two critical essays that make up the (Re)Views section. Aidan Beatty explores what he terms the “absent Irish” in the work of the renowned Marxist cultural theorist Stuart Hall. Beatty suggests acknowledgement of this lacuna may provide a necessary and—for contemporary admirers of Hall—productive opportunity for reflexive critique of the wider cultural and geopolitical blind spots of the British New Left. Michaela Appeltová’s essay reviews recent works on Irish gender history and interrogates the prospect for new and genuinely intersectional positionings of gender across axes of capital, class, and coloniality in the Irish historical experience. While the challenge of mainstreaming gender history continues, the essay draws on global and transnational historiographical contexts to suggest fresh points of departure across the field.

We would like to thank Radical History Review’s managing editor, Thomas Harbison, for his help throughout the process of bringing this issue into being, and Conor McGrady for invaluable assistance in compiling “Curated Spaces.”

Notes

3.

Avril Doyle, in Seanad Éireann debates, December 9, 1998, vol. 157, no. 13.

4.

Charlie Flanagan, in Dáil Éireann debates, April 21, 2015, vol. 875, no. 1.

15.

Though such criticism is broad, ranging from debates between postcolonial and world historians to those within literary criticism, anthropology, gender, and migration studies, many grapple with the same fundamental issue: the potential for global, transnational, and allied “turns” to open rather than obscure new and effective forms of political critique. See, for example, on the dangers of ethical ambivalence, Kalliney, “East African Literature,” 4; and Calhoun, “Class Consciousness.” Against exceptionalism writ large, see Pérez, “We Are the World.” For a transnationalism “from below,” see Waldinger, Cross-Border Connection, 11–36; and Levitt, Transnational Villagers, 6–7. On the pitfalls of synthesis, see Monkkonen, “Dangers of Synthesis,” 1149–50; Trivellato, “Is There a Future?”; Pomper, Elphick, and Vann, World History, 1–27; Dunn, New World History, 11–26; and Bell, “Questioning the Global Turn.” Against essentialism, see Hickman, “On the Redundancy,” 269–70; Wong, “Denationalization Reconsidered,” 25–27; and Pomper, “World History,” 7–6. On the problem of Eurocentrism, see Dirlik, “Confounding Metaphors”; Dirlik, “History without a Center?”; and Goody, Theft of History, 267–86. On reproducing an imperial gaze, see Nandy, “History’s Forgotten Doubles,” 65–66; Lal, “World History and Its Politics”; and Ngai, “Promises and Perils.” And against neoliberal apologetics, see Kumar, World Bank Literature, xvii–xxxii; and Traister, “Object of Our Study,” 16–17.

References

Bell, David A.
Questioning the Global Turn: The Case of the French Revolution,
French Historical
Studies
37
, no.
1
(
2014
):
1
24
.
Calhoun, Craig. “
The Class Consciousness of Frequent Travelers: Toward a Critique of Actually Existing Cosmopolitanism
.”
South Atlantic Quarterly
101
, no.
4
(
2002
):
869
97
.
Coulter, Colin. “
The End of Irish History? An Introduction to the Book
.” In
The End of Irish History? Critical Reflections on the Celtic Tiger
, edited by Coulter, Colin and Coleman, Steve,
1
32
.
Manchester
:
Manchester University Press
,
2003
.
Cronin, Michael, and O’Connor, Barbara. Introduction to
Irish Tourism: Image, Culture, and Identity
, edited by Cronin, Michael and O’Connor, Barbara,
1
22
.
Clevedon
:
Channel View Publications
,
2003
.
Curtin, Nancy J.
‘Varieties of Irishness’: Historical Revisionism, Irish Style
.”
Journal of British Studies
35
, no.
2
(
1996
):
195
219
.
Delaney, Enda. “
Our Island Story? Towards A Transnational History Of Late Modern Ireland
.”
Irish Historical Studies
37
, no.
148
(
2011
):
599
621
.
Dirlik, Arif. “
Confounding Metaphors, Inventions of the World: What Is World History For?
” In
Writing World History, 1800–2000
, edited by Stuchtey, Benedikt and Fuchs, Eckhardt,
91
133
.
Oxford
:
Oxford University Press
,
2003
.
Dirlik, Arif. “
History without a Center? Reflections on Eurocentrism
.” In
Across Cultural Borders: Historiography in Global Perspective
, edited by Fuchs, Eckhardt and Stuchtey, Benedikt,
247
84
.
Lanham, MD
:
Rowman and Littlefield
,
2002
.
Dunn, Ross E., ed.
The New World History: A Teacher’s Companion
.
Boston
:
Bedford/St. Martins
,
1999
.
Fagan, G. Honor. “
Globalization and Culture: Placing Ireland
.”
Annals of the American Academy of Political Science
58
, no.
1
(
2002
):
133
43
.
Gibbons, Luke. “
The Global Cure? History, Therapy, and the Celtic Tiger
.” In
Reinventing Ireland: Culture, Society, and the Global Economy
, edited by Kirby, Peadar, Gibbons, Luke, and Cronin, Michael,
89
106
.
London
:
Pluto Press
,
2002
.
Gilmartin, Mary, and White, Allen, eds.
Migrations: Ireland in a Global World
.
Manchester
:
Manchester University Press
,
2013
.
Gkotzaridis, Evi.
Trials of Irish History: Genesis and Evolution of a Reappraisal, 1938–2000
.
London
:
Routledge
,
2006
.
Goody, Jack.
The Theft of History
.
Cambridge
:
Cambridge University Press
,
2006
.
Government of Ireland
.
Decade of Centenaries 2012–2023: 2021 Programme
.
Dublin
:
Stationery Office
,
2021
.
Government of Ireland
.
Global Ireland: Ireland’s Global Footprint to 2025
.
Dublin
:
Stationery Office
,
2018
.
Government of Ireland
.
The Global Island. Ireland’s Foreign Policy for a Changing World
.
Dublin
:
Stationery Office
,
2015
.
Gray, Peter. “
Memory and the Commemoration of the Great Irish Famine
.” In
The Memory of Catastrophe
, edited by Gray, Peter and Oliver, Kendrick,
46
64
.
Manchester
:
Manchester University Press
,
2004
.
Hickman, Jared. “
On the Redundancy of Transnational American Studies
.” In
The Oxford Handbook of Nineteenth-Century American Literature
, edited by Castronovo, Russ,
269
90
.
Oxford
:
Oxford University Press
,
2012
.
Inglis, Tom.
Global Ireland: Same Difference
.
London
:
Routledge
,
2008
.
Kalliney, Peter. “
East African Literature and the Politics of Global Reading
.”
Research in African Literatures
39
, no.
1
(
2008
):
1
23
.
Kearney, Richard.
Postnationalist Ireland: Politics, Culture, Philosophy
.
London
:
Routledge
,
1997
.
Kenny, Kevin. “
Diaspora and Comparison: The Global Irish as a Case Study
.”
Journal of American History
90
, no.
1
(
2003
):
134
62
.
Kumar, Amitava, ed.
World Bank Literature
.
Minneapolis
:
University of Minnesota Press
,
2003
.
Lal, Vinay. “
World History and Its Politics
.”
Economic and Political Weekly
46
, no.
46
(
2011
):
40
47
.
Lentin, Ronit, and McVeigh, Robbie.
After Optimism? Ireland, Racism, and Globalisation
.
Dublin
:
Metro Eireann Publications
,
2006
.
Levitt, Peggy.
The Transnational Villagers
.
Berkeley
:
University of California Press
,
2001
.
Lonergan, Patrick.
Theatre and Globalization: Irish Drama in the Celtic Tiger Era
.
London
:
Palgrave
,
2009
.
Loyal, Steven.
Understanding Immigration in Ireland: State, Capital, and Labour in a Global Age
.
Manchester
:
Manchester University Press
,
2011
.
Mac Giolla Chríost, Diarmait.
The Irish Language in Ireland: From Gíodel to Globalisation
.
London
:
Routledge
,
2004
.
McCarthy, Angela. Introduction to
Ireland in the World: Comparative, Transnational, and Personal Perspectives
, edited by McCarthy, Angela,
1
14
.
London
:
Routledge
,
2015
.
McLoone, Martin, and Rockett, Kevin, eds.
Irish Films, Global Cinema
.
Dublin
:
Four Courts Press
,
2007
.
Michael, Lucy, and Joseph, Ebun. “
Introduction: Black Lives Matter
.” In
The Sociological Observer: Black Lives Matter
, edited by Michael, Lucy and Joseph, Ebun,
6
10
.
Maynooth
:
Sociological Association of Ireland
,
2021
.
Monkkonen, Eric H.
The Dangers of Synthesis
.”
American Historical Review
91
, no.
5
(
1986
):
1146
57
.
Moriarty, Máiréad.
Language and Globalization: An Irish Language Perspective
.
Basingstoke
:
Palgrave
,
2015
.
Motherway, Susan.
The Globalization of Irish Traditional Song Performance
.
London
:
Routledge
,
2013
.
Nandy, Ashis. “
History’s Forgotten Doubles
.”
History and Theory
34
, no.
2
(
1995
):
44
66
.
Ngai, Mae M.
Promises and Perils of Transnational History
.”
Perspectives on History
,
December
1
,
2012
.
Ó Riain, Seán.
The Politics of High-Tech Growth: Developmental Network States in the Global Economy
.
Cambridge
:
Cambridge University Press
,
2004
.
O’Toole, Fintan.
The Ex-isle of Erin: Images of a Global Ireland
.
Dublin
:
New Island Books
,
1997
.
O’Toole, Fintan. Foreword to
Cultural Perspectives on Globalisation and Ireland
, edited by Maher, Eamon,
i
xx
.
Oxford
:
Peter Lang
,
2009
.
Pérez, Louis A.Jr.
We Are the World: Internationalizing the National, Nationalizing the International
.”
Journal of American History
89
, no.
2
(
2002
):
558
66
.
Pilny, Ondrej, and Wallace, Clare. Introduction to
Global Ireland: Irish Literatures in the New Millennium
, edited by Pilny, Ondrej and Wallace, Clare,
1
16
.
New York
:
Syracuse University Press
,
2005
.
Pomper, Philip. “
World History and Its Critics
.”
History and Theory
34
, no.
2
(
1995
):
1
7
.
Pomper, Philip, Elphick, Richard T. and Vann, Richard T., eds.
World History: Ideologies, Structures, and Identities
.
London
:
Wiley
,
1998
.
Quigley, Mark.
Empire’s Wake: Postcolonial Irish Writing and the Politics of Modern Literary Form
.
New York
:
Fordham University Press
,
2013
.
Robinson, Mary. “
Cherishing the Irish Diaspora: An Address to the Houses of the Oireachtas on a Matter of Public Importance
.”
Dublin
,
February
2
,
1995
.
Scally, Derek.
The Best Catholics in the World: The Irish, the Church, and the End of a Special Relationship
.
London
:
Penguin
,
2021
.
Smith, Nicola Jo-Anne.
Showcasing Globalisation? The Political Economy of the Irish Republic
.
Manchester
:
Manchester University Press
,
2005
.
Sweeney, John, ed.
Global Change and the Irish Environment
.
Dublin
:
Royal Irish Academy
,
1997
.
Tonra, Ben.
Global Citizen and European Republic: Irish Foreign Policy in Transition
.
Manchester
:
Manchester University Press
,
2007
.
Traister, Bryce. “
The Object of Our Study; or, Are We Being Transnational Yet?
Journal of Transnational American Studies
2
, no.
1
(
2010
):
1
28
.
Trivellato, Francesca. “
Is There a Future for Italian Microhistory in the Age of Global History?
California Italian Studies
2
, no.
1
(
2011
). https://doi.org/10.5070/C321009025.
Waldinger, Roger.
The Cross-Border Connection: Immigrants, Emigrants, and Their Homelands
.
Cambridge, MA
:
Harvard University Press
,
2015
.
Whelehan, Niall. “
Playing with Scales: Transnational History and Modern Ireland
.” In
Transnational Perspectives on Modern Irish History
, edited by Whelehan, Niall,
7
22
.
London
:
Routledge
,
2014
.
Wong, Sau-ling C.
Denationalization Reconsidered: Asian American Cultural Criticism at a Theoretical Crossroads
.”
Amerasia Journal
21
, nos.
1–2
(
1995
):
1
27
.
This content is made freely available by the publisher. It may not be redistributed or altered. All rights reserved.