作为霍利战争的移民警察:庇护斗争中的联系环、致命缺口和国家漏洞

0 ANTHROPOLOGY
Sociology Lens Pub Date : 2023-03-14 DOI:10.1111/johs.12406
J. Brent Crosson
{"title":"作为霍利战争的移民警察:庇护斗争中的联系环、致命缺口和国家漏洞","authors":"J. Brent Crosson","doi":"10.1111/johs.12406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article uses the concept of holes rather than borders to articulate the space that US immigration policing engenders. In contradistinction to borders—lines or zones that can be mapped, walled, or policed to delimit sovereign bodies—holes are strategic exceptions to mappable sovereignties. Rather than fixed, mappable boundaries, holes are mutable and in flux, thriving on the shifting potential to appear or disappear and to make people disappear as legal subjects. If US immigration policing operates, to a large extent, through holes distributed across borders and long-distance spaces, then any mapping of this power that centers national borders or bounded nation-states alone is insufficient. I show how the policing of Venezuelan migration centers the distribution of holes from South and Central America to spaces within the US that are far from “the border.” Against a discursive focus on “the border” and the border wall in US rhetoric on immigration, I argue that the actual practices of impeding flows of immigration or channeling them through spaces of death have increasingly operated through holey space. If holy space has been defined in studies of religion as a sacred space set apart from mundane rules, then the hol(e)y spaces of immigration are set apart from fixed conceptions of “the rule of law.” A focus on holes shows how the legal order of immigration depends more on exceptions, personalized or arbitrary power, and the instability of interim extra-legal executive orders than a dichotomy of legal/illegal. Despite their necropolitical power, holes do not create an entirely striated, hierarchical space. Holes are also rings of connection and passageways, highlighting the creativity and agency of asylum seekers in forging dignity under extremely difficult conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":101168,"journal":{"name":"Sociology Lens","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immigration Policing as Holey War: Rings of Connection, Deadly Gaps, and State Loopholes in the Struggle for Asylum\",\"authors\":\"J. Brent Crosson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/johs.12406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article uses the concept of holes rather than borders to articulate the space that US immigration policing engenders. In contradistinction to borders—lines or zones that can be mapped, walled, or policed to delimit sovereign bodies—holes are strategic exceptions to mappable sovereignties. Rather than fixed, mappable boundaries, holes are mutable and in flux, thriving on the shifting potential to appear or disappear and to make people disappear as legal subjects. If US immigration policing operates, to a large extent, through holes distributed across borders and long-distance spaces, then any mapping of this power that centers national borders or bounded nation-states alone is insufficient. I show how the policing of Venezuelan migration centers the distribution of holes from South and Central America to spaces within the US that are far from “the border.” Against a discursive focus on “the border” and the border wall in US rhetoric on immigration, I argue that the actual practices of impeding flows of immigration or channeling them through spaces of death have increasingly operated through holey space. If holy space has been defined in studies of religion as a sacred space set apart from mundane rules, then the hol(e)y spaces of immigration are set apart from fixed conceptions of “the rule of law.” A focus on holes shows how the legal order of immigration depends more on exceptions, personalized or arbitrary power, and the instability of interim extra-legal executive orders than a dichotomy of legal/illegal. Despite their necropolitical power, holes do not create an entirely striated, hierarchical space. Holes are also rings of connection and passageways, highlighting the creativity and agency of asylum seekers in forging dignity under extremely difficult conditions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology Lens\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology Lens\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/johs.12406\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology Lens","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/johs.12406","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文使用漏洞而非边界的概念来阐明美国移民监管所产生的空间。与边界不同,漏洞是可绘制地图的主权国家的战略例外。漏洞不是固定的、可绘制的边界,而是可变的、不断变化的,随着出现或消失的可能性的变化而蓬勃发展,并使人们作为法律主体而消失。如果美国移民警察在很大程度上是通过分布在边境和远距离的漏洞来运作的,那么任何以国家边界或有边界的民族国家为中心的权力地图都是不够的。我展示了委内瑞拉移民的监管如何将漏洞从南美洲和中美洲集中到美国境内远离“边境”的地方。反对美国移民言论中对“边境”和边境墙的随意关注,我认为,阻碍移民流动或引导他们通过死亡空间的实际做法越来越多地通过多孔空间运作。如果在宗教研究中,神圣空间被定义为与世俗规则不同的神圣空间,那么移民的神圣空间则与“法治”的固定概念不同。对漏洞的关注表明,移民的法律秩序更多地取决于例外、个性化或任意的权力,以及临时法外行政命令的不稳定性,而不是合法/非法的二分法。尽管有着致命的政治力量,但漏洞并没有创造出一个完全有条纹的等级空间。孔也是连接和通道的环,突出了寻求庇护者在极其困难的条件下创造尊严的创造力和能动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Immigration Policing as Holey War: Rings of Connection, Deadly Gaps, and State Loopholes in the Struggle for Asylum

This article uses the concept of holes rather than borders to articulate the space that US immigration policing engenders. In contradistinction to borders—lines or zones that can be mapped, walled, or policed to delimit sovereign bodies—holes are strategic exceptions to mappable sovereignties. Rather than fixed, mappable boundaries, holes are mutable and in flux, thriving on the shifting potential to appear or disappear and to make people disappear as legal subjects. If US immigration policing operates, to a large extent, through holes distributed across borders and long-distance spaces, then any mapping of this power that centers national borders or bounded nation-states alone is insufficient. I show how the policing of Venezuelan migration centers the distribution of holes from South and Central America to spaces within the US that are far from “the border.” Against a discursive focus on “the border” and the border wall in US rhetoric on immigration, I argue that the actual practices of impeding flows of immigration or channeling them through spaces of death have increasingly operated through holey space. If holy space has been defined in studies of religion as a sacred space set apart from mundane rules, then the hol(e)y spaces of immigration are set apart from fixed conceptions of “the rule of law.” A focus on holes shows how the legal order of immigration depends more on exceptions, personalized or arbitrary power, and the instability of interim extra-legal executive orders than a dichotomy of legal/illegal. Despite their necropolitical power, holes do not create an entirely striated, hierarchical space. Holes are also rings of connection and passageways, highlighting the creativity and agency of asylum seekers in forging dignity under extremely difficult conditions.

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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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