Bordering intimacy is a study of how borders and dominant forms of intimacy, such as family, are central to the governance of postcolonial states such as Britain. The book explores the connected history between contemporary border regimes and the policing of family with the role of borders under European and British empires. Building upon postcolonial, decolonial and black feminist theory, the investigation centres on how colonial bordering is remade in contemporary Britain through appeals to protect, sustain and make family life. Not only was family central to the making of colonial racism but claims to family continue to remake, shore up but also hide the organisation of racialised violence in liberal states. Drawing on historical investigations, the book investigates the continuity of colonial rule in numerous areas of contemporary government – family visa regimes, the policing of sham marriages, counterterror strategies, deprivation of citizenship, policing tactics, integration policy. In doing this, the book re-theorises how we think of the connection between liberal government, race, family, borders and empire. In using Britain as a case, this opens up further insights into the international/global circulations of liberal empire and its relationship to violence.
The border is one of the most urgent issues of our times. We tend to think of a
border as a static line, but recent bordering techniques have broken away from
the map, as governments have developed legal tools to limit the rights of
migrants before and after they enter a country’s territory. The consequent
detachment of state power from any fixed geographical marker has created a new
paradigm: the shifting border, an adjustable legal construct untethered in
space. This transformation upsets our assumptions about waning sovereignty,
while also revealing the limits of the populist push toward
border-fortification. At the same time, it presents a tremendous opportunity to
rethink states’ responsibilities to migrants. This book proposes a new,
functional approach to human mobility and access to membership in a world where
borders, like people, have the capacity to move.
(B)ordering Britain argues that Britain is the spoils of empire, its immigration law is colonial violence and irregular immigration is anti-colonial resistance. In announcing itself as post-colonial through immigration and nationality laws passed in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, Britain cut itself off symbolically and physically from its colonies and the Commonwealth, taking with it what it had plundered. This imperial vanishing act cast Britain’s colonial history into the shadows. The British Empire, about which Britons know little, can be remembered fondly as a moment of past glory, as a gift once given to the world. Meanwhile immigration laws are justified on the basis that they keep the undeserving hordes out. In fact, immigration laws are acts of colonial seizure and violence. They obstruct the vast majority of racialised people from accessing wealth amassed in the course of colonial conquest. Regardless of what the law, media and political discourse dictate, people with personal, ancestral or geographical links to colonialism, or those existing under the weight of its legacy of race and racism, have every right to come to Britain and take back what is theirs.
Materiality has long been tied to the political projects of nationalism and capitalism. But how are we to rethink borders in this context? Is the border the limit where the capitalist nation-state, contested and re-created at its centre, becomes fixed? Or is it something else? Is the border something, or does it instead do things? This volume brings questions of materiality to bear specifically on the study of borders. These questions address specifically the shift from ontology to process in thinking about borders. The political materialities of borders does not presume the material aspect of borders but rather explores the ways in which any such materiality comes into being. Through ethnographic and philosophical explorations of the ontology of borders and its limitations from the perspective of materiality, this volume seeks to throw light on the interaction between the materiality of state borders and the non-material aspects of state-making. This enables a new understanding of borders as productive of the politics of materiality, on which both the state project rests, including its multifarious forms in the post-nation-state era.
Can reading make us better citizens? This book sheds light on how the act of reading can be mobilised as a powerful civic tool in service of contemporary civil and political struggles for minority recognition, rights, and representation in North America. Crossing borders and queering citizenship reimagines the contours of contemporary citizenship by connecting queer and citizenship theories to the idea of an engaged reading subject. This book offers a new approach to studying the act of reading, theorises reading as an integral element of the basic unit of the state: the citizen. By theorising the act of reading across borders as a civic act that queers citizenship, the book advances an alternative model of belonging through civic readerly engagement. Exploring work by seven US, Mexican, Canadian, and Indigenous authors, including Gloria Anzaldúa, Dorothy Allison, Gregory Scofield, Guillermo Gómez-Peña, Erín Moure, Junot Díaz, and Yann Martel, the book offers sensitive interpretations of how reading can create citizenship practices that foreground and value recognition, rights, and representation for all members of a political system.
From the Great Wall of China to the Berlin Wall, fortified manifestations of the border have long served as a powerful symbol of sovereignty, real and imagined. 1 In 1989, the fall of the Berlin Wall led many to predict that barbed wire and sealed entry gates would become relics of a bygone era. Over a quarter of a century later, we find a very different reality. Today, new walls are erected at an unprecedented pace the world over. 2 Around Spanish enclaves in Morocco, between South Africa and Zimbabwe, India and Bangladesh, Hungary and Turkey, and along the
This book tells the story of British imperial agents and their legal powers on the British-Chinese frontiers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It offers new perspectives on the British presence in Yunnan and Xinjiang in western China and the legal connections to the British colonies of India and Burma. It examines how the mobility of people across borders forced consuls to adapt and shape law to accommodate them. Salt and opium smugglers, Indian and Afghan traders, and itinerant local populations exposed the jurisdictional gaps between consular and colonial authority. Local and transfrontier mobility defined and shaped British jurisdiction across the frontier in complex ways. It argues that frontier consular agents played key roles in creating forms of transfrontier legal authority in order to govern these migratory communities. Consular legal practices coexisted alongside, and often took advantage of, other local customs and legal structures. The incorporation of indigenous elites, customary law and Chinese authority was a distinctive feature of frontier administration, with mediation an important element of establishing British authority in a contested legal environment. The book is essential reading for historians of China, the British Empire, and socio-legal historians interested in the role of law in shaping semicolonial and colonial societies.
Borders as ghosts
Two chapters in this volume precede and inform, or, I should rather say, ‘haunt’ this
piece of writing. One is Sarah Green’s discussion of the ‘border-ness’ of borders,
that is, their distinctive quality. Green argues that what is distinct about borders is
their quality of creating, embodying, and demonstrating ‘difference’, on both the
level of space and that of time (Green, Chapter 5 above). She reads this notion of
difference first through the Derridean ‘trace’ and then through Massey’s discussion
of difference as intrinsic
EU cross-border Passagenwerk
Olivier Thomas Kramsch
For us, the solution was in the direction of the horizon. We were those who scrutinised the horizon. We looked forward, not back. To the question, ‘What is thinking?’
we didn’t respond, ‘Being’ [like Heidegger] but with ‘the possible’. (Henri Lefebvre,
cited in Hess 1988: 54)
Thoughts from a deckchair in Wyler, Germany
Walking through the village of Wyler, the last German settlement before the border
crossing into the Netherlands, one drifts past cavernous, odoriferous farmhouses,
fleeting images of green
Ontologies of borders:
the difference of Deleuze and Derrida
This chapter is about the concept of border. I will not approach border as if I was
going to conceptualize something that we already empirically know about, and
nor will I concentrate solely on geographical and political borders. Instead, I will
take a step back and consider border in an abstract sense: as a separation of one
into two dissimilar entities. This means that I will take the study of border into the
area of philosophy and, in particular, into problems of ontology and