The Family Migration Visa in the History of Marriage Restrictions: Postcolonial Relations and the UK Border

IF 2.1 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Joe Turner
{"title":"The Family Migration Visa in the History of Marriage Restrictions: Postcolonial Relations and the UK Border","authors":"Joe Turner","doi":"10.1111/1467-856X.12059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>This article: \n </p><ul>\n \n <li>Provides a necessary critical reflection on the changes to the UK family migration visa 2012;</li>\n \n <li>Responds to the recent call made by Nick Vaughan-Williams and Victoria M. Basham in <i>BJPIR</i> for Critical Border Studies to better appreciate the interlocking elements of race, gender, class in border practices. It does this by also paying attention to sex;</li>\n \n <li>Challenges the presentism in the recent literature on border practices/immigration by situating the family migration visa in a broader history;</li> \n <li>Makes a strong contribution to the cross-over debates which are taking place in International Relations and governmentality literature regarding the postcolonial. It offers a Foucauldian analysis of government which takes colonial and postcolonial relations seriously.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>This article explores the changes to the family migration visa (2012) through a history of postcolonial government. It explores how the visa shares a familiar function to previous forms of rule which targeted the household and family as a site of regulation. Under Empire, ‘marriage restrictions’ were used to manage the ‘intimate’ connections between coloniser and colonised. Over the course of the 20th century UK border regimes also targeted the intimate and the familial to regulate racial proximity. In tracing this history, I argue that the family migration visa works as a similar technique. The visa manages the intimate space of the couple, family and household through an ideal domesticity; in line with certain raced, gendered and class norms. It highlights how government techniques make claims over whom can live with, raise a family with, be intimate with whom in Britain.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51479,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Politics & International Relations","volume":"17 4","pages":"623-643"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-856X.12059","citationCount":"28","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Politics & International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-856X.12059","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

Abstract

This article:

  • Provides a necessary critical reflection on the changes to the UK family migration visa 2012;
  • Responds to the recent call made by Nick Vaughan-Williams and Victoria M. Basham in BJPIR for Critical Border Studies to better appreciate the interlocking elements of race, gender, class in border practices. It does this by also paying attention to sex;
  • Challenges the presentism in the recent literature on border practices/immigration by situating the family migration visa in a broader history;
  • Makes a strong contribution to the cross-over debates which are taking place in International Relations and governmentality literature regarding the postcolonial. It offers a Foucauldian analysis of government which takes colonial and postcolonial relations seriously.

This article explores the changes to the family migration visa (2012) through a history of postcolonial government. It explores how the visa shares a familiar function to previous forms of rule which targeted the household and family as a site of regulation. Under Empire, ‘marriage restrictions’ were used to manage the ‘intimate’ connections between coloniser and colonised. Over the course of the 20th century UK border regimes also targeted the intimate and the familial to regulate racial proximity. In tracing this history, I argue that the family migration visa works as a similar technique. The visa manages the intimate space of the couple, family and household through an ideal domesticity; in line with certain raced, gendered and class norms. It highlights how government techniques make claims over whom can live with, raise a family with, be intimate with whom in Britain.

婚姻限制史上的家庭移民签证:后殖民关系与英国边境
本文:对2012年英国家庭移民签证的变化进行必要的批判性反思;回应最近由尼克·沃恩·威廉姆斯和维多利亚·m·巴沙姆在BJPIR提出的关键边境研究的呼吁,以更好地理解边境实践中种族、性别、阶级的连锁因素。它还通过关注性来做到这一点;通过将家庭移民签证置于更广泛的历史中,挑战最近关于边境实践/移民的文献中的现实性;对有关后殖民的国际关系和治理文学中正在进行的跨界辩论作出了重大贡献。它对政府进行了福柯式的分析,认真对待殖民和后殖民关系。本文通过后殖民政府的历史来探讨家庭移民签证(2012)的变化。它探讨了签证如何与以前针对家庭和家庭作为监管场所的规则形式共享一个熟悉的功能。在帝国统治下,“婚姻限制”被用来管理殖民者和被殖民者之间的“亲密”关系。在20世纪的整个过程中,英国的边境制度也以亲密关系和家庭关系为目标,以规范种族接近。在追溯这段历史的过程中,我认为家庭移民签证也是一种类似的技术。visa通过理想的家庭生活,管理夫妻、家庭和家庭的亲密空间;符合特定的种族、性别和阶级规范。它凸显了政府的手段是如何决定在英国谁可以和谁一起生活,一起抚养家庭,和谁保持亲密关系的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: BJPIR provides an outlet for the best of British political science and of political science on Britain Founded in 1999, BJPIR is now based in the School of Politics at the University of Nottingham. It is a major refereed journal published by Blackwell Publishing under the auspices of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom. BJPIR is committed to acting as a broadly-based outlet for the best of British political science and of political science on Britain. A fully refereed journal, it publishes topical, scholarly work on significant debates in British scholarship and on all major political issues affecting Britain"s relationship to Europe and the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信