Markets, Sovereignty, and Racialization

IF 2.6 1区 社会学 Q1 LAW Journal of International Economic Law Pub Date : 2022-07-08 DOI:10.1093/jiel/jgac021
Michael Fakhri
{"title":"Markets, Sovereignty, and Racialization","authors":"Michael Fakhri","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgac021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The 2009 European Union (EU) Seal Regime banning the importation of seal products on moral grounds and the series of cases before the EU courts and World Trade Organization provide an opportunity to understand how capitalism relies on racial categories. The EU Seal Regime is racist since it constructs an Indigenous identity based on abstract European definitions of subsistence hunting. It also has a unique racializing dynamic that proports to protect Indigenous identity from afar but in effect decimates Indigenous communities in their homeland. In this struggle over seals and the trade laws that constitute the global seal market, the concept of sovereignty in this instance helps clarify what is at stake. What is at stake is a contest over who has jurisdiction over seal bodies: whoever has the power to create the market rules that determine the taking and selling of seals in effect determines the sovereign power in the Arctic. Ultimately, what is problematic with the Seal Regime is that the definition of European morals used to justify the ban of seal products relied on a relationship that simultaneously ignored and threatened Indigenous existence.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Economic Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgac021","RegionNum":1,"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: 1

Abstract

The 2009 European Union (EU) Seal Regime banning the importation of seal products on moral grounds and the series of cases before the EU courts and World Trade Organization provide an opportunity to understand how capitalism relies on racial categories. The EU Seal Regime is racist since it constructs an Indigenous identity based on abstract European definitions of subsistence hunting. It also has a unique racializing dynamic that proports to protect Indigenous identity from afar but in effect decimates Indigenous communities in their homeland. In this struggle over seals and the trade laws that constitute the global seal market, the concept of sovereignty in this instance helps clarify what is at stake. What is at stake is a contest over who has jurisdiction over seal bodies: whoever has the power to create the market rules that determine the taking and selling of seals in effect determines the sovereign power in the Arctic. Ultimately, what is problematic with the Seal Regime is that the definition of European morals used to justify the ban of seal products relied on a relationship that simultaneously ignored and threatened Indigenous existence.
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
市场、主权和种族化
2009年欧洲联盟(欧盟)基于道德理由禁止进口印章产品的印章制度,以及欧盟法院和世界贸易组织审理的一系列案件,为了解资本主义如何依赖种族类别提供了机会。欧盟海豹制度是种族主义的,因为它基于欧洲对自给狩猎的抽象定义构建了土著身份。它还有一种独特的种族化动态,主张从远处保护土著身份,但实际上却摧毁了家乡的土著社区。在这场关于印章和构成全球印章市场的贸易法的斗争中,主权的概念有助于澄清利害关系。利害关系在于谁对海豹机构拥有管辖权:谁有权制定决定海豹买卖的市场规则,谁就决定了北极的主权。最终,印章制度的问题在于,用来证明禁止印章产品正当性的欧洲道德定义依赖于一种同时忽视和威胁土著生存的关系。
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
4.80
自引率
9.70%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The Journal of International Economic Law is dedicated to encouraging thoughtful and scholarly attention to a very broad range of subjects that concern the relation of law to international economic activity, by providing the major English language medium for publication of high-quality manuscripts relevant to the endeavours of scholars, government officials, legal professionals, and others. The journal"s emphasis is on fundamental, long-term, systemic problems and possible solutions, in the light of empirical observations and experience, as well as theoretical and multi-disciplinary approaches.
期刊最新文献
Dynamic diffusion The automatic termination clause in the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement—brinkmanship for future negotiation or a time bomb for self-destruction? The utility of appellate review at the WTO and its optimal structure Rethinking the ‘Full Reparation’ standard in energy investment arbitration: how to take climate change into account Regulatory autonomy in digital trade agreements
×
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