Irish Journal of Sociology

The purpose of this paper is to shed much needed light on lived experience in the context of worklessness coupled with welfare receipt in Ireland. In doing so, the work ethic is presented as an objective social force that can be imposed externally and in a number of social and administrative contexts. Coupled with this, receiving welfare is argued as being a ‘problematic’ and potentially shameful social position. On this basis, it will be shown how worklessness and welfare receipt can coalesce to form a ‘toxic symbiosis’, something which can deeply and negatively affect those who experience it. The claims made in this paper are based on original research conducted in Ireland, in which 22 people were interviewed about their general experiences of being welfare recipients and their interactions with the Irish welfare state. Drawing on rich qualitative data, epistemic integrity is offered through depth of understanding meaning that what is presented here sheds lights on the social implications of the continuous denigration of welfare recipiency coupled with the continuous valorisation of work. In a practical sense, this suggests that, on the one hand, a new, less corrosive societal relationship with work is both desirable and necessary in respect to the well-being of persons, while on the other, a more holistic approach to the administration of welfare, in which a return to work is only one part of an overall approach, is both needed and ultimately more humane.

This paper uses oral history to consider the relative merits of symbolic interactionism in revealing new insights regarding the Irish immigration experience in England during the 1950s and 1960s. Using a variety of rubrics attributed to Canadian sociologist Erving Goffman, I critically examine the nature of identity work performed by Irish men and women when in their new host country. The paper highlights the interface between citizenship and sociocultural identity epitomised by both the use props (corporeal modifications) and the power of sign vehicles, notably Irish accents in shaping the nature of social interactions. The extent to which Goffman neglects sensory driven constructs of identity is highlighted. The way in Irish immigrants negotiated two simultaneous worlds front and back stage in response to the anticipated reaction of the given audience evokes the metaphor of a revolving door of identity fluid and chameleon like in nature. Actions were at times driven the anticipated reactions of others following presentation but then reclaimed elsewhere manifested by front and back stage behaviours. The Irish men and women worked inside and alongside systems of control where their identities were contested, ambiguous, or problematised to create a fluid sense of self (selves).

This article draws on empirical data collected through in-depth interviews conducted with Irish and migrant activists from the Take Back the City housing coalition to incite the debate about the potential of interracial class coalitions and to point out the challenges of migrant activism in Ireland. Take Back the City was a movement from below, which through the praxis aimed to challenge common sense with good sense. It questioned the commodification of housing in Ireland by reframing the housing crisis as a result of political and economic decisions, as well as in its strategy of occupying empty buildings. Claiming Homes For All, activists noticed that this slogan was not all-encompassing and as such was insufficient to help recognise that it also referred to those who came to Ireland to study, work or seek asylum. As the hegemonic narrative understands the world through concepts such as the nation-state, borders and citizenship, it automatically excludes non-nationals as the people, the subject of rights within a nation-state. This article locates Take Back the City experience within the discussion on race and class dynamics addressed by anti-racist and anti-capitalist scholars and activists.

This paper presents theoretically informed commentary on the concept of hegemony. This is achieved through recourse to the work of hegemony’s originator, the Sardinian social theorist Antonio Gramsci. There is renewed interest in Gramsci’s work within social theory. To date, existing social work literature makes the case for a more direct engagement with Gramscian theorisation. In this paper, the proposition is that Gramsci’s work holds the potential to progress contemporary practice. In seeking to realise this, however, at least one obstacle is encountered. It is argued that a degree of dialectical opposition exists between two themes prevailing in social work practice and pedagogy. This can be problematic for practitioners who are seeking to create civil society change. In the first instance, critical postmodern epistemologies support practitioners to uncover embedded hegemonic assumptions. In the second instance, more conservative managerial–technicist epistemologies also vie for space in wider social work pedagogy and practice. In this context, it is argued that better ideological and theoretical integration of these competing themes would be beneficial for social workers seeking counterhegemonic practice. Overall critical commentary in this paper rearticulates the importance of Gramsci’s hegemony for social workers in the present time.