公民身份的局部化(和局部化)?

IF 1.2 3区社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Citizenship Studies Pub Date : 2022-06-27 DOI:10.1080/13621025.2022.2091237

Eleanor Knott

{"title":"公民身份的局部化(和局部化)?","authors":"Eleanor Knott","doi":"10.1080/13621025.2022.2091237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In 2016, Turner argued that ‘we are all denizens now’. Taking this argument and the proliferation of quasi-citizenship as a starting point, this article argues that such an argument masks the enduring importance and exclusionary power of citizenship. This article considers quasi-citizenship as a more precarious and less secure status than citizenship, but less precarious and more secure status than non-citizenship. Taking the UK EU Settlement Scheme as a case-study, the article exposes the realities of quasi-citizenship as an intermediary status that seeks to exclude migrants from citizenship. Overall, the article argues that expanding quasi-citizenship policies suggest 1) the weakening of citizenship as a status, via offering increasingly lesser and fewer rights (partialization), 2) the hardening borders of citizenship, and 3) the parcelization of citizenship, with the gulf of differentiation increasing between those who have secure access to the rights and status of full citizenship and those who do not.","PeriodicalId":47860,"journal":{"name":"Citizenship Studies","volume":"26 1","pages":"539 - 549"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The partialization (and parcelization) of citizenship?\",\"authors\":\"Eleanor Knott\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13621025.2022.2091237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In 2016, Turner argued that ‘we are all denizens now’. Taking this argument and the proliferation of quasi-citizenship as a starting point, this article argues that such an argument masks the enduring importance and exclusionary power of citizenship. This article considers quasi-citizenship as a more precarious and less secure status than citizenship, but less precarious and more secure status than non-citizenship. Taking the UK EU Settlement Scheme as a case-study, the article exposes the realities of quasi-citizenship as an intermediary status that seeks to exclude migrants from citizenship. Overall, the article argues that expanding quasi-citizenship policies suggest 1) the weakening of citizenship as a status, via offering increasingly lesser and fewer rights (partialization), 2) the hardening borders of citizenship, and 3) the parcelization of citizenship, with the gulf of differentiation increasing between those who have secure access to the rights and status of full citizenship and those who do not.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Citizenship Studies\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"539 - 549\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Citizenship Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2022.2091237\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Citizenship Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2022.2091237","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

2016年，特纳提出“我们现在都是居民”。本文以这种观点和准公民身份的扩散为出发点，认为这种观点掩盖了公民身份的持久重要性和排他性力量。本文认为准公民身份是一种比公民身份更不稳定、更不安全的身份，但比非公民身份更不稳定、更安全。本文以英国欧盟解决方案为个案，揭示了准公民身份作为中介身份的现实，这种中介身份试图将移民排除在公民身份之外。总体而言，本文认为，不断扩大的准公民政策表明:1)通过提供越来越少的权利(部分化)，公民身份作为一种地位的弱化;2)公民身份的边界越来越硬;3)公民身份的分割化，那些能够安全获得完全公民身份的权利和地位的人与那些不能安全获得完全公民身份的人之间的差距越来越大。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The partialization (and parcelization) of citizenship?

ABSTRACT In 2016, Turner argued that ‘we are all denizens now’. Taking this argument and the proliferation of quasi-citizenship as a starting point, this article argues that such an argument masks the enduring importance and exclusionary power of citizenship. This article considers quasi-citizenship as a more precarious and less secure status than citizenship, but less precarious and more secure status than non-citizenship. Taking the UK EU Settlement Scheme as a case-study, the article exposes the realities of quasi-citizenship as an intermediary status that seeks to exclude migrants from citizenship. Overall, the article argues that expanding quasi-citizenship policies suggest 1) the weakening of citizenship as a status, via offering increasingly lesser and fewer rights (partialization), 2) the hardening borders of citizenship, and 3) the parcelization of citizenship, with the gulf of differentiation increasing between those who have secure access to the rights and status of full citizenship and those who do not.

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

Citizenship Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

3.60

自引率

11.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Citizenship Studies publishes internationally recognised scholarly work on contemporary issues in citizenship, human rights and democratic processes from an interdisciplinary perspective covering the fields of politics, sociology, history and cultural studies. It seeks to lead an international debate on the academic analysis of citizenship, and also aims to cross the division between internal and academic and external public debate. The journal focuses on debates that move beyond conventional notions of citizenship, and treats citizenship as a strategic concept that is central in the analysis of identity, participation, empowerment, human rights and the public interest.