Anglican missionaries took advantage of the spread of the empire to prosleytise to Native Americans and African Americans. Motivated by a desire to bring the gospel to so-called heathens and halt the spread of Catholicism, Cambridge men travelled to North America, the Caribbean, West Africa, and India to spread Protestantism. If they chose not to head abroad, they instead provided donations to missionary organisations, such as the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, or assisted in the administration of plantations owned by these organisations. As Cambridge missionaries and dergymen encountered enslavement, prominent University figures became increasingly interested in debates concerning and morality the efficacy of Indigenous and African slavery. Some fellows were actively sceptical of the moral grounds for slavery, whilst others believed that enslavement was grounded in Christian belief. Rather than emerging in the era of abolition, scepticism and debate about the moral foundations of enslavement were consistent features of British intellectual life for over a century.

In 1237, having conquered much of the Central Asian steppes, a massive force of Mongols led by the third generation of Chinggis Khan’s descendants launched a campaign into eastern Europe, taking Kiev (1240) and sweeping westward into Poland and Hungary. News of this invasion quickly reached as far west as England. After more than 130 years of crusading, Latin Christians were passably familiar with the political and cultural complexities of the eastern Mediterranean; knowledge of the lands farther east, however, remained a hazy blend of ancient authors, Biblical lore, the Alexander Romance, and the legend of Prester John. Within short order, however, western European leaders took the initiative in their own hands, dispatching exploratory missions to the Mongols, like those of the Franciscans John of Plano Carpini in the mid-1240s and William of Rubruck in the early 1250s. Thanks to the detailed accounts of their travels they wrote on their return, the Mongols emerged from the fog of apocalyptic terror that had first surrounded them and, like a gradually-developing Polaroid, took on the contours of people with their own history, customs, and institutions

This chapter assesses the critique of Indian anticolonial nationalism by A. R. Desai, a Marxist sociologist during the post-independence period (1950s to 1990s). By initiating a debate on the class orientation of Indian nationalism and analyzing the exploitative capitalist processes by the nation-state in post-independence India, Desai overturned the complex and convoluted relationship between anticolonial thought, nationalism, coloniality, and social science scholarship in India. He confronted the existing social anthropological and structural functionalist school of thought dominating sociology in the early years after independence while his project of Marxist historical sociology contributed to the creation of new areas of research for sociology in India. The chapter also highlights some of the limitations in Desai’s scholarship and suggests that his sociology was about opening up new areas of research rather than doing a rigorous Marxist analysis of class relations.

Juristocratic reckoning is observable not only “from below.” Collective struggles that employed law animated by the idea that the state should be a vehicle of social justice have provoked a reckoning “from above.” This chapter suggests three dynamics: namely, authoritarian legalism, the dispersion of law, and the tribunalization of law. They reflect differently on the reaction by states and powerful economic actors to what the editors of this volume call “legal apotheosis” but which we would rather refer to as “organic constitutionalism” (Schwöbel 2010). Within these three pathways the chapter observes an active diminishment of the already limited possibilities of law to be mobilized for social justice. In the first modality – the incremental implementation of authoritarian legalism in India – legal measures have been systematically introduced in recent years to “legalize” a dual-law situation long in the making. In a second step, the chapter outlines the dispersion of law in relation to the borders of Europe, where the access to the laws that would nominally regulate these borders (e.g., asylum law) is thwarted by the creation of new legal zones and jurisdictional responsibilities. Third, the chapter observes the tribunalization of law with relation to the regulation of global capitalism, where seemingly egalitarian procedures increase asymmetries and “singularize” injuries. Taken together, the three cases point toward the emergence of a constitutional order that is averse to political conflict being carried out through law. The pathways described in this chapter have hegemonic tendencies; they ensure that political orders are authoritatively institutionalized through law but cannot be contested through it anymore.

Land and forests are integral to India’s Adivasi (Indigenous) Peoples. Lands provide sustenance and livelihoods, are a symbol of social status and dignity, and are central to the Adivasi “philosophy of life.” This chapter analyzes the various nuances of Adivasi land rights in India. It discusses the Adivasi land tenure systems, legal measures for protecting and allocating land, land holding patterns, the nature and scale of Adivasi land dispossession, and the strategies that the Adivasis have adopted to advance and safeguard their land rights. It is argued that, despite constitutional and statutory provisions and various policy measures to protect, promote, and secure Adivasi land rights, they increasingly experience land dispossession in different forms – reflecting an “implementation gap” in practice. This chapter concludes with recommendations for safeguarding Adivasi land rights, such as collaboration between Adivasi movements and civil society organizations, consistent governance measures for different land rights regimes (such as Sixth Schedule in Fifth Schedule Areas), and independent monitoring agencies to maintain accountability on land rights duties.

1. Reflect on the intersectionality of poverty and child labour as highlighted in the story. How do social and economic factors contribute to the perpetuation of child labour globally? 2. Considering the complexities of defining child labour, particularly concerning domestic chores and family-based work, how might this ambiguity impact efforts to address and eradicate child labour effectively? 3. Reflect on social constructs around children and childhood to develop actions that can give voices to children who are usually unheard and unseen. What are these constructs? 4. Think about actions that social workers can undertake to maintain a balance between promoting social protection of the most vulnerable groups of children while ensuring the agency of children and families. What would be priority actions for you? 5. Considering the diversity of experiences among working children, how can policies and interventions be tailored to meet the specific needs of individual children and their families? 6. Keeping in mind the attitude of society where a large number of people prefer to turn a blind eye to child labour, what can social workers do to evolve a society where the duty of care for children is the responsibility of every adult, regardless of whether the child is part of his/her family? 7. Reflect on the challenges faced in the reintegration and rehabilitation of rescued child workers, as discussed in the story. What strategies and initiatives could be implemented to support these children and prevent them from returning to work?

The Introduction starts by considering stand-up in Mort Sahl’s terms, as ‘a primitive form of theatre’. Using a quote by Tony Allen to pin down its key feature, it argues that stand-up is defined by centring on the performer themself, a direct relationship between performer and an active audience, and the appearance and possibility of spontaneity. After briefly considering the history of stand-up in the USA and UK, it goes on to recount the less familiar story of how it developed in Australia, from the emergence of Rod Quantock to the rise of the modern comedy club in the 1980s. It then considers its rapid expansion around the world in the last 30 years – paying particular attention to India, Estonia, and Belgium – and its continuing relationship with the English language even in non-anglophone countries. It finishes with an explanation of the scope and structure of the rest of the book.

This chapter discusses the variegated dynamics of English-language rap in the complex, stratified, and multilingual sociolinguistic environment of India. The first section provides a brief overview of the historical and sociocultural positioning of English in India. The following section lays out a genealogy of English rap in India, discussing its evolution over the past three decades. The third and final section, which forms the analytical crux of the chapter, uses examples from lyrics and an interview to contextually analyze how the choice to rap in English reproduces as well as contests the intersections between sociolinguistic dynamics, politics of regionalism and marketability, caste identities, and racialization. The chapter concludes with a discussion on how English rap in India is simultaneously rife with possibilities for artists while also transcending the oversimplifications associated with English usage in India.

The institutional design of NJMs varies considerably in the manner they enable, empower or constrain worker and community struggles. Whereas the UNGPs effectiveness criteria, along with other key contributions to the NJM design literature, emphasise the importance of procedural fairness, across the cases we studied purely procedural efforts were insufficient to address the deep imbalances of power between business actors and aggrieved communities. However, in some cases, these imbalances were ameliorated by aspects of institutional design that the UNGPs effectiveness criteria leave implicit: the financial and human resources the NJM can mobilise, the authority it can command and the extent to which its design enhances its capacity to exercise leverage in support of human rights redress. Even where the NJM’s design provides leverage, NJM staff frequently hesitate to flex institutional muscle for fear of jeopardising crucial resources and relationships. As such, the usefulness of transnational NJMs’ interventions often depends crucially also on factors beyond institutional design, namely the extent to which aggrieved communities are able to draw on and effectively deploy other forms of leverage and influence.

Ten case studies form the empirical and analytical core of the book. Chapter 1 introduces these cases, detailing the arduous journeys marginalised workers and communities pursue in seeking redress for grievances arising from harmful business practices. Their aims vary, some wanting to improve working conditions or pursue compensation for past wrongs, others attempting to block planned business projects or create pressure for broader change to prevent recurring patterns of human rights abuse. Their efforts, together with worker and civil society allies, to gain meaningful outcomes are marked by creativity and diversity in the sheer multitude of methods utilised. Critically, transnational NJMs are only one avenue they pursue. Despite their vast efforts, significant human rights breaches persist alongside small victories. The cases provide compelling evidence that NJMs are best understood as but one actor within broader systems of transnational business regulation.