Resistance, detainment, asylum: the onto-political limits of border crossing in North America (original) (raw)
Related papers
Debating Biopolitics, 2022
This chapter explores the notion of the border from two perspectives, both contributing to a critical approach to identitarian politics. Firstly, the theoretical perspective as seen from semiotic and anthropological theory, which construct the border as making possible a dialogue across cultures and recognizing otherness. The border is a primary site of uncertainty from which political practice and negotiation stem. Secondly, from a contemporary historico-sociological perspective, for which the paradigmatic manifestation of the border is the securitised border that constantly works to identify people and their motivations. Curiously, the securitised border also produces insecurity: it makes people wait for inclusion into a society while not outright excluding them. In this way securitization, in turn, produces the necessity of political practices as it places people into conflictual, uncertain situations. Proceeding from this discussion, the chapter will lastly consider some theoretical possibilities for conceptualizing resistance to power on the border.
Engendering Borders : some critical thoughts on theories of borders and migration
Klagenfurter Geographische Schriften, 2013
This paper examines migration from the perspective of border theory. It is argued that in the changed contexts of border situation, whereby modern concepts of national territoriality and cultural boundaries are being dismantled by processes of globalization, the usual view at migration as involving border crossing between two sedentary (state) entities no long-er is theoretically adequate. To the contrary, notions of migration and rootedness, mobility and stillness, fluidity and permanence have lost their power of concepts by which to frame the debates on migration. Moreover, while the modern nation-states are being transformed from culturally homogenous to ‘liquefied’ societies, discourses on immigrants, aliens and foreigners face a serious challenge in terms of how they organize their reference point. Namely: who, or what, is the norm against which the immigrant is conceptualized as another subject, an Other, no longer is a self-evident realm. Final-ly, if the borders themselves have become moving objects, either as extraterritorial administrative points of control (e.g. Frontex) or as tools of social segregation and exclusion within a given territory (e.g. zoning), what are the conditions by which one becomes a migrant: is the legal status of citizenship still the proper means of describing one’s relationship towards the state, or have other factors, such as economic, social or cultural capital and possessions, become more rele-vant in defining the status of belonging and identity?
The Border as a Life Experience: Indentity, Assymetry and Border Crossing
Frontera Norte, 2014
This article analyzes the effects of the Mexico-United States geopolitical border in social and cultural differentiation, using the crossing experience as the analytical core. Based in 60 life histories of residents of the Mexico-USA border region, a typology of life experiences structured around border crossing is developed, including a wide range of life experiences, from those that involve never having crossed the border to those that are precisely the product of border crossing. The experienced border encompasses the subjectified experience of the region, integrating both the meaning of crossing and the structural elements that historically have defined the border: proximity, asymmetry, and interaction.
The Narratives, Laws and Policies of Crossing Borders
AmeriQuests, 2017
This issue, edited by Robert F. Barsky, features a broad array of border crossings, in narrative, literature, law and in geographical spaces all around the world. The genres, approaches and methods are as diverse as the problems named, and are tackled first by a major article by Thomas Spijkeboer that makes a provocative parallel between the irregularization and eviction of non-white in South Africa during the Apartheid, and the refugee policies carried out in Europe in recent times. Several researchers have also answered the call for 'commentaries', an effective way of interjecting critical voices at this juncture, when the rate of new policies and actions on borders worldwide seems to be moving at break neck (sometimes literally) speed. Finally, AmeriQuests is pursuing with vigor the task of reviewing recent and new works on border crossing, in part because of the urgency of issues discussed therein, and in part because of the lamentable dearth of venues for such reviews, particularly venues that are open access and easily accessible, worldwide. The image for this issue is part of an on-going effort to create BorderQuests/Global Stories, a new platform linked to AmeriQuests that features articles, stories, videos and commentaries devoted to the crossing of borders. Published: 12-13-2017
Immigration Policy and Identification Across Borders
Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 2017
According to the traditional state sovereignty view in the ethics of immigration literature, societies have a great deal of latitude in determining and implementing their immigration policies. This view is typically defended by appealing to the rights of members of societies, for instance to political self-determination. Opponents of the view have often criticized its partiality to members, arguing that nonmembers can also make stringent demands on societies to be admitted and given the same treatment in matters of immigration policy as other nonmembers. In this paper, I take a different approach to responding to the state sovereignty view. I argue that even if we grant the premise that the rights of members generally trump the rights of nonmembers in matters of immigration policy, societies are greatly constrained in setting their immigration policies by considerations of domestic justice. The considerations that I focus on involve relationships between members and nonmembers that hold due to a shared quality or set of qualities on the basis of which members identify with nonmembers. The argument appeals to premises and principles that defenders of the state sovereignty view are committed to but concludes that this view cannot serve as a satisfactory framework for the normative assessment of immigration policies.