Statelessness: A Radical Rethinking of the Dominant Citizenism Paradigm

D. Kochenov
{"title":"Statelessness: A Radical Rethinking of the Dominant Citizenism Paradigm","authors":"D. Kochenov","doi":"10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-041822-045326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A new approach to statelessness has emerged in the literature on the topic. Taking citizenism as a starting point and pioneered by Swider and Bloom, this approach offers a completely fresh paradigm for studying and understanding the statelesseness phenomenon. In the contemporary global context where citizenships are deeply unequal and racialized, the focus on rights invites us to dismiss the baseless presumption that fighting statelessness is always in the interests of the populations concerned, let alone that it is directly connected to the protection of human and citizenship rights. It is the world's inequitable neo-feudal citizenism arrangement that is a problem, not the fact that some people do not fit neatly into the citizenism hierarchy and find themselves in a position of statelessness. Shedding light on the role of citizenship and statelessness in the world today as tools of preservation of racialized hierarchies and inequitable exclusion of most of the world's population from rights at home and abroad, the new scholarship questions the UN High Commissioner for Refugees's mission and actions in this domain and takes issue with the self-serving parochialism of dominant Western citizenship and statelessness literatures.","PeriodicalId":47338,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Law and Social Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Law and Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-041822-045326","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A new approach to statelessness has emerged in the literature on the topic. Taking citizenism as a starting point and pioneered by Swider and Bloom, this approach offers a completely fresh paradigm for studying and understanding the statelesseness phenomenon. In the contemporary global context where citizenships are deeply unequal and racialized, the focus on rights invites us to dismiss the baseless presumption that fighting statelessness is always in the interests of the populations concerned, let alone that it is directly connected to the protection of human and citizenship rights. It is the world's inequitable neo-feudal citizenism arrangement that is a problem, not the fact that some people do not fit neatly into the citizenism hierarchy and find themselves in a position of statelessness. Shedding light on the role of citizenship and statelessness in the world today as tools of preservation of racialized hierarchies and inequitable exclusion of most of the world's population from rights at home and abroad, the new scholarship questions the UN High Commissioner for Refugees's mission and actions in this domain and takes issue with the self-serving parochialism of dominant Western citizenship and statelessness literatures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
无国籍状态:对占主导地位的公民权范式的彻底反思
关于无国籍问题的文献中出现了一种新的方法。这种方法以公民权为出发点,由斯韦德和布鲁姆首创,为研究和理解无国籍现象提供了一种全新的范式。在公民权极度不平等和种族化的当代全球背景下,对权利的关注促使我们摒弃那种毫无根据的假定,即与无国籍状态作斗争总是符合相关人群的利益,更不用说它与保护人权和公民权利直接相关了。问题在于世界上不公平的新封建主义公民制度安排,而不是有些人不符合公民制度的等级制度,发现自己处于无国籍状态。新的学术研究揭示了公民身份和无国籍状态在当今世界中的作用,它们是维护种族化等级制度的工具,不公平地将世界上大多数人排除在国内外的权利之外,新的学术研究对联合国难民事务高级专员在这一领域的使命和行动提出了质疑,并对西方主流公民身份和无国籍状态文献中自私自利的狭隘主义提出了异议。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Empirical Disability Legal Studies Statelessness: A Radical Rethinking of the Dominant Citizenism Paradigm Revolutions and Law Neo-Institutional Analyses of Criminal Legal Organizations and Policies Abortion Law Illiberalism and Feminist Politics in Comparative Perspective
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1