This article is an outcome of a search for the Tamil plantation woman in Malaysia and her voice—her stories and memories, in her own words. Through the plantation songs of Tamil workers in Malaysia, first collated and published in the 1980s, we explore the experiences and memories of these women, singing about their lives and work in the Malayan plantations. As memory-work, these songs constitute an oral history that provides an uneasy counter to hegemonic discourses like that of the colonial planters who employed the women, or the nationalist historiography of India and Malaysia where they are sidelined and reduced to figures of abject victimhood in the clutches of colonial capitalism, or the post-colonial discourse where their memories and experiences constitute a shameful past that obstructs optimism for the future. Tamil plantation songs call for a comparative approach to history and memory—between the position of the woman and that of the man, or the labourer and the supervisor/planter, as well as more problematic and shifting positionalities like seducer and the seduced, or the victim and the perpetrator.

This article explores the development of the Safari Rally in the context of intertwined trends in mobility, sports, and consumerism at local, global and intermediate levels. The first section briefly presents the Safari Rally. The second section discusses the significance and development of the sport of rallying in the context of global automobility and changes in the motor industry, highlighting in particular the professionalisation of sport and the forces driving it. The third section analyses why the Safari became relevant to so many stakeholders in Africa and across the globe, and how these shaped its development from its colonial origins through decolonisation and beyond. Highlighting the factors accounting for the rise, and decline, of the Safari as a sporting event of global significance contributes to understanding how mobility, sports, and consumerism were interlinked across continents in the second half of the 20th century.

The Habsburg Empire has typically been understood as a continental power with few overseas aspirations, or as Robert Musil waxed nostalgically in his fictional Kakania: “A Ship would now and then be sent off to South America or East Asia, but not too often.” It is mostly true, of course, that Austria did not have “ambition for world markets or world power,”1 but recently historians have begun to explore the role colonial fantasy played in an empire with no actual overseas colonies to speak of.2 The Empire did support a series of oceanic voyages in the 19th century. None resulted in permanent settlement of course, but the voracious enthusiasm with which a Habsburg public responded to them is a testament to the weight colonial discourse had even in continental empires like Austria's.3 A small, but exciting literature has sprung up around these expeditions, situating them in their broader political contexts.4 The exercise has been fruitful at situating Habsburg history in a broader global context and has done much to de-provincialize what was once a relatively insular field.

The formalisation of informal security-providers has important consequences for citizenship, the rule of law, and human rights. We examine these policies in Burkina Faso, where formalisation has led to concerns about vigilante justice and ethnic targeting. Although African governments' reliance on informal security provision is well-documented, less is known about the origins of formalisation policies. To advance theory-building in this domain, this paper examines the political logic of empowering self-defence groups through the study of Burkina Faso's 2022 junta government, with comparisons to two prior regimes. We argue that formalisation is not only a mechanism for overcoming vexing security challenges, but is a tool used by leaders to build legitimacy and strengthen the regime's grip on power. In doing so, the article contributes insights into the origins of governmental policies towards self-defence groups, with implications for the study of political legitimacy, security provision and citizen–state relations.

Cancel culture, a phenomenon where norm-transgressing individuals are named and ostracized on social media and elsewhere, receives both public approval and disdain. Recently, it manifested among Chinese fans of the danmei genre of homo-romantic literature. In the “227 Incident,” actions taken by fans of the actor-singer Xiao Zhan allegedly led to the banning of the free literary repository, Archive of Our Own (AO3), in early 2020. Enraged, AO3's other users retaliated by attempting to cancel Xiao both online and off. Both sides of the dispute exhibit what we term “cancel culture with Chinese characteristics.” While there is a lofty social justice behind the original intent of cancel culture, some Chinese fans advocate the cis-heteropatriarchy. Additionally, fan fervour has merged with cyber-nationalism, which complicates the region's geopolitics.

The legislative coalition responsible for passing the 1964 Civil Rights Act did not set out to use busing as a means to end school segregation. When it came time to implement relevant portions of the law, however, busing became the primary method for reversing “separate but equal” education. In this paper, we provide a legislative policy history detailing the unanticipated, but nearly two-decade long, congressional battle over busing. Through a detailed examination of congressional hearings, floor debate, and roll-call votes, we shed light on the collapse of the pro-civil rights coalition responsible for the landmark achievements of the early 1960s. In its place emerged a new, bipartisan, and interregional bloc of lawmakers—led by southern Democrats and Republicans but joined by a pivotal group of (ostensibly liberal) northern Democrats—who were opposed to efforts by the Supreme Court and administrative state to end school segregation in the North as well as the South.