声称自己是后殖民时期的差别公民。苏里南独立后荷兰家庭移民权利之争

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY
E (Eline) Westra, S A (Saskia) Bonjour, F F (Floris) Vermeulen
{"title":"声称自己是后殖民时期的差别公民。苏里南独立后荷兰家庭移民权利之争","authors":"E (Eline) Westra, S A (Saskia) Bonjour, F F (Floris) Vermeulen","doi":"10.1093/migration/mnad013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Political struggles over national belonging often involve ideas on what a ‘proper’ family looks like. This article connects this important insight from the field of family migration politics to the study of postcolonial citizenship. Rather than focusing on dominant (State) perspectives, we ask: how do citizens from formerly colonised territories themselves conceptualise ‘the family’ and ‘the nation’ in the former metropole? We do so in a historical exploration of the political claims that three different Surinamese–Dutch organisations made regarding family migration rights, in the wake of Suriname’s independence (1975). We find that the organisations collectively claimed the recognition of Suriname-specific family forms in Dutch migration policy, such as unmarried coupledom (konkubinaat) and temporary foster children (kweekjes). Thereby they put forward a vision of postcolonial citizenship which challenged dominant conceptions of nationhood in the Netherlands, assuming instead that formerly colonised subjects and their ‘difference’ inherently and inevitably belong to Dutch national history and identity. In this vision, they reframed the Dutch nation’s spatio-temporal boundaries (the colonial past did not end at independence and there are ongoing transnational ties), and cultural boundaries (‘Surinamese difference’ is a constitutive element of Dutch postcolonial citizenship). In view of contemporary calls for decolonisation of European societies and scholarship, these claims represent important and inspiring contributions to ongoing debates on citizenship in a postcolonial nation.","PeriodicalId":46309,"journal":{"name":"Migration Studies","volume":"408 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Claiming a postcolonial differential citizenship. Contestation of family migration rights in the Netherlands in the wake of Suriname’s independence\",\"authors\":\"E (Eline) Westra, S A (Saskia) Bonjour, F F (Floris) Vermeulen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/migration/mnad013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Political struggles over national belonging often involve ideas on what a ‘proper’ family looks like. This article connects this important insight from the field of family migration politics to the study of postcolonial citizenship. Rather than focusing on dominant (State) perspectives, we ask: how do citizens from formerly colonised territories themselves conceptualise ‘the family’ and ‘the nation’ in the former metropole? We do so in a historical exploration of the political claims that three different Surinamese–Dutch organisations made regarding family migration rights, in the wake of Suriname’s independence (1975). We find that the organisations collectively claimed the recognition of Suriname-specific family forms in Dutch migration policy, such as unmarried coupledom (konkubinaat) and temporary foster children (kweekjes). Thereby they put forward a vision of postcolonial citizenship which challenged dominant conceptions of nationhood in the Netherlands, assuming instead that formerly colonised subjects and their ‘difference’ inherently and inevitably belong to Dutch national history and identity. In this vision, they reframed the Dutch nation’s spatio-temporal boundaries (the colonial past did not end at independence and there are ongoing transnational ties), and cultural boundaries (‘Surinamese difference’ is a constitutive element of Dutch postcolonial citizenship). In view of contemporary calls for decolonisation of European societies and scholarship, these claims represent important and inspiring contributions to ongoing debates on citizenship in a postcolonial nation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46309,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Migration Studies\",\"volume\":\"408 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Migration Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnad013\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Migration Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnad013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于民族归属的政治斗争常常涉及到“合适的”家庭是什么样子的问题。本文将这一来自家庭移民政治领域的重要见解与后殖民公民身份的研究联系起来。与其关注主导(国家)的观点,我们的问题是:来自前殖民领土的公民自己如何概念化前大都市的“家庭”和“国家”?在苏里南独立(1975年)之后,我们对三个不同的苏里南-荷兰组织就家庭移民权利提出的政治主张进行了历史探索。我们发现,这些组织共同声称在荷兰移民政策中承认苏里南特有的家庭形式,例如未婚夫妇(konkubinaat)和临时寄养儿童(kweekjes)。因此,他们提出了一种后殖民公民权的愿景,挑战了荷兰国家地位的主流观念,相反,他们假设以前被殖民的主体及其“差异”固有地、不可避免地属于荷兰的民族历史和身份。在这一愿景中,他们重新定义了荷兰民族的时空边界(殖民历史并未因独立而结束,而且存在着持续的跨国联系)和文化边界(“苏里南差异”是荷兰后殖民公民身份的构成要素)。鉴于当代对欧洲社会和学术非殖民化的呼吁,这些主张代表了对正在进行的后殖民国家公民身份辩论的重要和鼓舞人心的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Claiming a postcolonial differential citizenship. Contestation of family migration rights in the Netherlands in the wake of Suriname’s independence
Abstract Political struggles over national belonging often involve ideas on what a ‘proper’ family looks like. This article connects this important insight from the field of family migration politics to the study of postcolonial citizenship. Rather than focusing on dominant (State) perspectives, we ask: how do citizens from formerly colonised territories themselves conceptualise ‘the family’ and ‘the nation’ in the former metropole? We do so in a historical exploration of the political claims that three different Surinamese–Dutch organisations made regarding family migration rights, in the wake of Suriname’s independence (1975). We find that the organisations collectively claimed the recognition of Suriname-specific family forms in Dutch migration policy, such as unmarried coupledom (konkubinaat) and temporary foster children (kweekjes). Thereby they put forward a vision of postcolonial citizenship which challenged dominant conceptions of nationhood in the Netherlands, assuming instead that formerly colonised subjects and their ‘difference’ inherently and inevitably belong to Dutch national history and identity. In this vision, they reframed the Dutch nation’s spatio-temporal boundaries (the colonial past did not end at independence and there are ongoing transnational ties), and cultural boundaries (‘Surinamese difference’ is a constitutive element of Dutch postcolonial citizenship). In view of contemporary calls for decolonisation of European societies and scholarship, these claims represent important and inspiring contributions to ongoing debates on citizenship in a postcolonial nation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Migration Studies
Migration Studies DEMOGRAPHY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Migration shapes human society and inspires ground-breaking research efforts across many different academic disciplines and policy areas. Migration Studies contributes to the consolidation of this field of scholarship, developing the core concepts that link different disciplinary perspectives on migration. To this end, the journal welcomes full-length articles, research notes, and reviews of books, films and other media from those working across the social sciences in all parts of the world. Priority is given to methodological, comparative and theoretical advances. The journal also publishes occasional special issues.
×
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