We now have a good understanding of how race, class, religion and gender structure immigration experiences, and their impact on British culture, society and economy.

We now have a good understanding of how race, class, religion and gender constructs immigration experiences and their impact on British culture, society and economy.

But as Nancy Green (Nancy Green) pointed out nearly two decades ago, scholars studying immigration must pay attention to exit and entry, and this call for " exit politics " is particularly suitable in the UK.

Study how immigration affects our understanding of immigration history? At the same time, study how immigration changes our understanding of the chronological order and geographical boundaries of modern Britain? This article answers these questions through the research of Allen Boucher , Marjori Harper, Bill Schwartz and Jean Smith .

All these scholars show how immigration from UK to Australia, South Africa, Canada, Zimbabwe and New Zealand Otyarova influenced the social policy of the UK and the concept of race and nationality . These works read together show that long before 950s and 1960s Commonwealth immigration sparked debates about race, identity and citizenship, immigration from UK to the Commonwealth has changed the UK state and its borders.

We can think that men and women who arrived in Britain in the decades after the war immigrated to in the opposite direction, which can be said to be a long-term cycle of outbound immigration, leading to the emergence of a transnational British country and identity politics centered on the so-called race supremacy among British immigrants.

Connect the history of immigration and immigration in this way. The history of "global color line ", "Anglo world" and the history of British immigration history. Therefore, this analysis brings the academic debate on immigration history beyond the " methodological nationalism " framework, which on the one hand assumes that the relevant related entity is a nation , and on the other hand is an immigrant from outside this country .

adopts this concept for the immigration history of Britain between 1850 and 1970, obviously misleading , because according to a certain historical summary, the UK does not seem to be a "container" of a country, but more like a bucket full of holes. This broader and porous conceptualization of the British border will also prompt us to reimagine the history of the formation of modern countries.

On this issue, scholars usually focus on welfare, war, bureaucracy and expertise within the geographical boundaries of Britain after 1922. By combining academic research on state and immigration, this article focuses on the transnational links of people, power and policies that constitute the modern British country.

In order to study this argument, a new concept is now proposed: "Immigration Country"! What is an immigration country?

Immigration state is a country that turns its citizens' immigration into an imperialist policy that connects the core of the metropolis and the edge of settlers. This concept follows the call of James Holyfield , and reintegrates the state into immigration research .

However, Hollyfield proposes an paradox , that is, Western countries have been working hard to compare their national form with transnational (immigration) since 1945, and "immigration country" premise is that the modern state of Britain originated from imperial immigration . Imperial immigration has always been transnational, and transnational immigration has not challenged the British state. On the contrary, manages transnational immigration is the core way Britain projected power and defined its citizenship law throughout the modern era.

In this sense, the control of immigrant countries over immigration within the empire has created some of the main characteristics of the modern state, including the scope of the border territory and the possession of a passport and citizenship as the definition of nationality or race. Another potential advantage of the concept of

"Immigration Country" is that it provides scope for comparative analysis. Since the mid-nineteenth century, subsidized immigration has been an important part of the governing strategy despite relatively inadequate research, as political scientist Aristide Zolberg "The whole of Europe and other countries were called by him in the nineteenth century" Exit the revolution "changed."

Similarly, Eastern European historian Tara Zahra wrote: Realizing that Immigration can act as a policy tool like a steam valve on a teapot, serves domestic and international goals. It is one of the most important political discoveries of European countries in the nineteenth century .

In short, in terms of the metaphor of extending Tara Zahra , compared with other European countries, the UK (including Irish before 1922) emitted the largest amount of "steam". Not only that, it was ruled by generations of politicians, who almost always wanted to increase the popularity and take the metaphor of Zahra further.

Back to British historiography, pay attention to how immigration reconstructs our understanding of immigration history?

The number and degree of immigration subsidies for state has had a recognized impact on the drafting of the UK Citizenship and Nationality Law. Focusing on the long history of Immigration control can help solve Kenita Hammond PerryKennita Hammond Perry l4 refers to as part of “the work of revoking the narrative of wind ”, focusing on the wider areas of depriving citizens, injustice and denying , which historically shape the relationship between black people and British citizen identity.

When we study immigration from the UK and immigrants from India and Caribbean, and relatively long-term immigrants in the world, we see immigration countries in the UK , as an unbalanced trans-imperial immigration system , ultimately how to provide different status and value according to the origin and destination of the immigrants, the high value and high status of immigrants who travel across the empire to settler colonies, and the low status and low value of those who move from so-called "affiliated" empires to settler colonies and the UK, "Immigration State" named these priorities in the process of legal, policy, infrastructure and ideological development.

Before elaborating this argument, it is important to pay attention to the trade-offs involved in jumping to this level of abstract analysis over such a long span, and the state-centered narrative given below has been widely studied by sociologists since at least the 1970s and 1980s by sociologists in explaining the role of in the development of hostile immigration systems in the UK.

However, how coherent is this state?

The tension between the core of the metropolis and settler colonies or autonomous territories requires more research. Canada, Australia Immigration policies At the same time, changes occurred in 1921 and 1922 through English Treaty and 1948 The founding of the Republic of Ireland .

So, how "British" are the immigrant countries in the UK?

Irish immigrants have their own rich historiography. According to the social and political history of modern Ireland, we need to pay special attention to the impact of 845-1852 famine . In addition, Irish immigration has never been an extension of British state power, especially Ireland itself is the theme of the long history of settlers colonial requisition of , and because some expatriates provide material and ideological support for republicism or local autonomy .

For all these reasons, immigration policy has the risk of geographical problems in some countries, small population, large hegemony, and small resistance.

However, despite these problems, over such a long period of time, research on immigration, citizenship and state can obtain the explanatory advantages and analytical returns of . This dependence on what historians call secondary literary works has brought problems on immigration into the field of historical sociology.

research method is theoretically related to William H. The " eventful sociology " is consistent, which is a process of analyzing the process of forming the so-called "long chain" of open events. In this sense, I am not saying that " Immigration Country " is a "thing", but we should understand it as a social and political process , or a formation that is always controversial, arising from competing priorities and adaptations.

This form is Immigration state , because its core focus is to grant citizenship , and because it is the power given by politicians , who seek subsidies and guide people to use state power and state funds to pursue strengthening state capabilities.

Considering the concept of " Immigration Country ", the history of modern Britain can be viewed from a new perspective, and we no longer see the story of liberalism entering social democracy and then entering neoliberalism. As James Vernon argued, we also did not transform from a more globalized country to a more national country in the 1950s, as David Egerton recently suggested.

UK citizen legislation constructed a transnational country related to the federal federal settlements, from late Victorian to at least the 1970s, this state exceeded the reference framework of “country” (until 1999, the Australian High Court accepted that the UK should be considered a “foreign” country legally).

In this sense, Britain is not a nation-state that "owned" empires, and is a kind of modular extension of previous state units. On the contrary, Britain is the dominant part of an empire state , which is called by John Torpey as the control of " legal mobile means ".

The impact of immigration on British politics and society has been underestimated. Between the two World Wars , immigration was related to white people and "autonomousness". The British government's decision to subsidize immigration to the colonies in "Imperial Settlement Act" , and another part shows how " Autonomous Dominion " rejects Indian for the so-called transferable imperial citizenship, explaining the racialization logic of British immigrant countries.

For immigrant countries, not only subsidize immigration from the UK, but also implies that other forms of mobility should be blocked or reduced, and finally focuses on immigration control in the twentieth century, as well as the continued and tightening of measures to counter the decolonization and subsidy of immigrants .

When the 1980s British law abolished the principle of citizenship with the right to birth , it reached a certain deification. At the same time, the descendants of many immigrants who went to Canada, Australia and New Zealand have been protected when providing "parent" citizenship with .

Due to these priorities, many British citizens have changed their citizenship in the so-called "wind scandal". In this sense, Decolonization means that it takes decades to go through a process that lasts . In this process, the global color line needs to enter the domestic color bar before it is written into the British citizenship law,

I think that this is why I call Britain a "immigrant country" here, and immigration has also had a great impact on the history of the UK.