000			01957nam a22002177a 4500
001			47957
003			OSt
005			20250514121108.0
008			250514b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aNAHABOO Zaki _eAuthor
245			_aUnforeignness: _bCommonwealth rule and imperial citizenship/ _cZaki Nahaboo
264			_c2024
520			_aThis article introduces Anglocentric unforeignness and postcolonial unforeignness as organising signifiers and objects of historical inquiry. Expressions of unforeignness offer terms of Commonwealth pluralism-solidarism by configuring, rather than overcoming, imperial citizenship and colonial self-government. Anglocentric unforeignness strived for common political agendas and affective unity across, and for, the “White” British Empire. In contrast, postcolonial unforeignness projected Commonwealth agendas that were irreducible to Anglocentric ends. These articulations of unforeignness are traced through divergent ways of imagining India as part of a Commonwealth. The first section of the article develops the parameters for inquiry by drawing upon Colin Koopman’s notion of ‘problematisation’. Second, Ramchandra Ghanesh Pradhan’s critique of Lionel Curtis’s imperial federation is discussed. The critique reveals an early twentieth century iteration of postcolonial unforeignness. Third, the article investigates when Jawaharlal Nehru’s terms of Commonwealth association and dominion state building preserved imperial administration. This illustrates a configuration of postcolonial unforeignness during India’s dominion period.
598			_aUNFOREIGNNESS, RULE, IMPERIAL CITIZENSHIP
650			_aUNFOREIGNNESS
650			_aCOMMONWEALTH
650			_aCITIZENSHIP
773			_gCambridge Review of International Affairs, Volume 37, Number 3, 2024, Page: 296-314
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2023.2165902 _zClick here for full text
942			_2ddc _cJOURNAL _n0
999			_c47957 _d47957