Produktive „Parallelgesellschaften“. Migration und Ordnung in der (neoliberalen) „Stadt der Vielfalt“. Productive „Parallel Societies“. Migration and Order in the (neoliberal) „City of Diversity“

Mathias Rodatz
{"title":"Produktive „Parallelgesellschaften“. Migration und Ordnung in der (neoliberalen) „Stadt der Vielfalt“. Productive „Parallel Societies“. Migration and Order in the (neoliberal) „City of Diversity“","authors":"Mathias Rodatz","doi":"10.1515/BEHEMOTH.2012.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Urban administrations in Germany have been governing districts as “concentrations of foreigners”, problematizing them as signs of disintegration and urban decay and introducing policies aiming at their dissolution. Recently, however, programs of city development and migration policy are suggesting that German cities should give up their policies of desegregation and start to view migrant districts as productive sites of “diversity” featuring resources for the “local economy” and “civil society”. The paper argues that the effects of this shift in policies may be twofold: on the one hand, neoliberal forms of governance result in the delegetimization of national-social (i.e. ethno-centric) conceptions of urban order and thereby of a systematic notion of urban state-racism in Germany. On the other hand the details of the new strategies show how the conceptions of “ethnicity”, migrant “networks” or “economies” are to be managed as orders of resources and risks. Under these conditions of neoliberalization, “diversity” may spell out an uncertainty of urban belonging for specific categories of “migrant communities”, whose otherness must continuously be proven not to be a risk to the neighborhood, but a means of productivity.","PeriodicalId":30203,"journal":{"name":"Behemoth a Journal on Civilisation","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behemoth a Journal on Civilisation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/BEHEMOTH.2012.006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Urban administrations in Germany have been governing districts as “concentrations of foreigners”, problematizing them as signs of disintegration and urban decay and introducing policies aiming at their dissolution. Recently, however, programs of city development and migration policy are suggesting that German cities should give up their policies of desegregation and start to view migrant districts as productive sites of “diversity” featuring resources for the “local economy” and “civil society”. The paper argues that the effects of this shift in policies may be twofold: on the one hand, neoliberal forms of governance result in the delegetimization of national-social (i.e. ethno-centric) conceptions of urban order and thereby of a systematic notion of urban state-racism in Germany. On the other hand the details of the new strategies show how the conceptions of “ethnicity”, migrant “networks” or “economies” are to be managed as orders of resources and risks. Under these conditions of neoliberalization, “diversity” may spell out an uncertainty of urban belonging for specific categories of “migrant communities”, whose otherness must continuously be proven not to be a risk to the neighborhood, but a means of productivity.
生产性Parallelgesellschaften " .“多元之城”里的移民和秩序。再见了移民和监管在“多元化之城”
德国的城市行政当局一直把这些地区当作“外国人的集中”来管理,把它们视为解体和城市衰败的迹象,并提出旨在解散这些地区的政策。然而,最近的城市发展计划和移民政策建议德国城市应该放弃其废除种族隔离的政策,并开始将移民区视为具有“多样性”的生产场所,为“地方经济”和“公民社会”提供资源。本文认为,这种政策转变的影响可能是双重的:一方面,新自由主义的治理形式导致了国家-社会(即民族-中心)城市秩序概念的非合法性,从而导致了德国城市国家-种族主义的系统概念。另一方面,新战略的细节表明如何将“种族”、移民“网络”或“经济”的概念作为资源和风险的秩序加以管理。在这些新自由主义化的条件下,“多样性”可能会为特定类别的“移民社区”阐明城市归属的不确定性,他们的差异性必须不断被证明不是对邻里的风险,而是一种生产力手段。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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