Pub Date : 2022-04-25DOI: 10.1177/02637758221090968
Wassim Ghantous, M. Joronen
This paper examines the eliminatory speed of Israeli settler colonialism, particularly the ways in which settler organizations aim to accelerate the pace of elimination at the colonial frontiers in Palestine. We show, by focusing on the settler NGO Regavim, how such settler entrepreneurs constantly develop new techniques that challenge the slow and creeping eliminatory pace of state’s administrative, legal and security bodies with an intensifying eliminatory speed we call ‘dromoelimination’. By closely elaborating the ongoing events in the West Bank village of Susiya, we argue that dromoelimination operates, firstly, through accelerative state-settler dynamics that traverses beyond the eliminatory functions of the state while at the same time fundamentally reconfiguring them; and secondly, by turning Palestinian life and struggle against dispossession, forced displacement and destruction increasingly vulnerable to intensified temporalities of ‘depleting time’. Settler colonialism, we contend, becomes comprehensible in a more tangible, complex and spatially nuanced terms when looked through the speed and pace of its movement: that is, through intensified and accelerated eliminatory rhythms – of dromoelimination.
{"title":"Dromoelimination: Accelerating settler colonialism in Palestine","authors":"Wassim Ghantous, M. Joronen","doi":"10.1177/02637758221090968","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221090968","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the eliminatory speed of Israeli settler colonialism, particularly the ways in which settler organizations aim to accelerate the pace of elimination at the colonial frontiers in Palestine. We show, by focusing on the settler NGO Regavim, how such settler entrepreneurs constantly develop new techniques that challenge the slow and creeping eliminatory pace of state’s administrative, legal and security bodies with an intensifying eliminatory speed we call ‘dromoelimination’. By closely elaborating the ongoing events in the West Bank village of Susiya, we argue that dromoelimination operates, firstly, through accelerative state-settler dynamics that traverses beyond the eliminatory functions of the state while at the same time fundamentally reconfiguring them; and secondly, by turning Palestinian life and struggle against dispossession, forced displacement and destruction increasingly vulnerable to intensified temporalities of ‘depleting time’. Settler colonialism, we contend, becomes comprehensible in a more tangible, complex and spatially nuanced terms when looked through the speed and pace of its movement: that is, through intensified and accelerated eliminatory rhythms – of dromoelimination.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"84 1","pages":"393 - 412"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77140251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-21DOI: 10.1177/02637758221093070
Hanno Brankamp, Zoltán Glück
This article examines the enduring entanglements of counterterror governance and refugee encampment in Kenya. The spectre of “terrorism” and its supposed remedy—“counterterrorism”—have loomed large in Kenyan politics since the 1990s and gained further traction since the country’s military invasion and occupation of southern Somalia in 2011. Few other spaces have been associated as persistently with threats to Kenya’s national security and sovereignty as the Dadaab and Kakuma refugee camps in the country’s Northern belt, which are popularly depicted as “wombs” of terror. In this article, we analyze the transformation of refugee governance in Kenya under the auspices of the War on Terror and consider how counterterrorism has become a way of governing both refugees and precarious ethnoracialized citizens. We provide a multi-scalar analysis that moves between the scales of global militarization, Kenyan state governance, as well as securitized spaces of camps, checkpoints, and policing. The article concludes that refugee camps are not only gateways for imported global counterterror initiatives, but key sites of locally defined state-making processes in which Kenya’s counterterror state is (re)assembled as part of a planetary architecture of humanitarian containment and militarized apartheid.
{"title":"Camps and counterterrorism: Security and the remaking of refuge in Kenya","authors":"Hanno Brankamp, Zoltán Glück","doi":"10.1177/02637758221093070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221093070","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the enduring entanglements of counterterror governance and refugee encampment in Kenya. The spectre of “terrorism” and its supposed remedy—“counterterrorism”—have loomed large in Kenyan politics since the 1990s and gained further traction since the country’s military invasion and occupation of southern Somalia in 2011. Few other spaces have been associated as persistently with threats to Kenya’s national security and sovereignty as the Dadaab and Kakuma refugee camps in the country’s Northern belt, which are popularly depicted as “wombs” of terror. In this article, we analyze the transformation of refugee governance in Kenya under the auspices of the War on Terror and consider how counterterrorism has become a way of governing both refugees and precarious ethnoracialized citizens. We provide a multi-scalar analysis that moves between the scales of global militarization, Kenyan state governance, as well as securitized spaces of camps, checkpoints, and policing. The article concludes that refugee camps are not only gateways for imported global counterterror initiatives, but key sites of locally defined state-making processes in which Kenya’s counterterror state is (re)assembled as part of a planetary architecture of humanitarian containment and militarized apartheid.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"20 1","pages":"528 - 548"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85045308","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1177/02637758221081142
Érin Collins, S. Nam
This article complements and complicates Bhandar’s discussion of ‘racial regimes of ownership’ (2018) by examining the relational co-constitution of notions of racial and property formations in the ‘non-settler’ colonial context of Cambodia. Working through the record of intra-colonial correspondence relating to the control of non-white but also non-Khmer property interests in Cambodia, this article documents racialization’s powerful disruptive impact on liberal property formation. Colonial failure as property formation indexes, first, how the racialized categories of ethnic difference that underpinned the rationalities of French colonial rule simultaneously undermined French colonial programs to alienate land. Second, it positions the failure to reconcile a confusing array of property laws and logics as integral to maintaining paternalistic colonial (and post-colonial) authority to sort racialized populations via the privilege of property. Through the lens of French attempts to control property claims, we show how the French colonial property regime, supposedly based on universal liberal norms, was in fact also deeply racialized, requiring it to be managed in a highly localized manner, in accordance with each territory’s existing set of ethnic property relations—or the practical racial hierarchy of colonialism would unravel.
{"title":"Between the law and the actual situation: Failure as property formation in French colonial Indochina","authors":"Érin Collins, S. Nam","doi":"10.1177/02637758221081142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221081142","url":null,"abstract":"This article complements and complicates Bhandar’s discussion of ‘racial regimes of ownership’ (2018) by examining the relational co-constitution of notions of racial and property formations in the ‘non-settler’ colonial context of Cambodia. Working through the record of intra-colonial correspondence relating to the control of non-white but also non-Khmer property interests in Cambodia, this article documents racialization’s powerful disruptive impact on liberal property formation. Colonial failure as property formation indexes, first, how the racialized categories of ethnic difference that underpinned the rationalities of French colonial rule simultaneously undermined French colonial programs to alienate land. Second, it positions the failure to reconcile a confusing array of property laws and logics as integral to maintaining paternalistic colonial (and post-colonial) authority to sort racialized populations via the privilege of property. Through the lens of French attempts to control property claims, we show how the French colonial property regime, supposedly based on universal liberal norms, was in fact also deeply racialized, requiring it to be managed in a highly localized manner, in accordance with each territory’s existing set of ethnic property relations—or the practical racial hierarchy of colonialism would unravel.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"6 1","pages":"227 - 244"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86642563","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1177/02637758221084101
Malini Ranganathan, Anne Bonds
It should be stressed, as Marxists have long done, that property, as an exchange commodity, is secured not simply through state, market, and so-called legal interventions - the price, the title, the deed, the survey, the land registry, the police, and so on - but also informal, unwritten, and coercive forces of looting and fraud ([46]). Two years into the COVID 19 pandemic, lockdowns and closures have left millions of the global majority out of work, hungry, facing eviction, and desperately navigating hollowed out, underfunded health and social service agencies and a patchwork of woefully inadequate tenant protection programs. The French used property as a barometer of civilizational status: a lack of private property norms among the ethnic Khmer was seen as backwards and called for paternalistic protection by colonizers, while high rates of property ownership among the Chinese were viewed as an economic threat and called for elimination by colonizers. Using the settler-colonial contexts of Canada, Australia, and Israel/Palestine, Brenna [4] tracks regimes of property law - the juridical formation underpinning capital accumulation - that unfolded together with racial schemas and state violence to produce colonial subjects. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Environment & Planning D: Society & Space is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
{"title":"Racial regimes of property: Introduction to the special issue","authors":"Malini Ranganathan, Anne Bonds","doi":"10.1177/02637758221084101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221084101","url":null,"abstract":"It should be stressed, as Marxists have long done, that property, as an exchange commodity, is secured not simply through state, market, and so-called legal interventions - the price, the title, the deed, the survey, the land registry, the police, and so on - but also informal, unwritten, and coercive forces of looting and fraud ([46]). Two years into the COVID 19 pandemic, lockdowns and closures have left millions of the global majority out of work, hungry, facing eviction, and desperately navigating hollowed out, underfunded health and social service agencies and a patchwork of woefully inadequate tenant protection programs. The French used property as a barometer of civilizational status: a lack of private property norms among the ethnic Khmer was seen as backwards and called for paternalistic protection by colonizers, while high rates of property ownership among the Chinese were viewed as an economic threat and called for elimination by colonizers. Using the settler-colonial contexts of Canada, Australia, and Israel/Palestine, Brenna [4] tracks regimes of property law - the juridical formation underpinning capital accumulation - that unfolded together with racial schemas and state violence to produce colonial subjects. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Environment & Planning D: Society & Space is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"66 1","pages":"197 - 207"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80064032","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-31DOI: 10.1177/02637758221090250
Hassan Ould Moctar
This article contributes to debates about the autonomy of migration (AoM) by ethnographically detailing the EU border regime's external operations in Nouadhibou, Mauritania. In showing how the EU border regime is entangled within the political economy and social relations of the city, it offers three contributions to AoM discussion. Firstly, it nuances and reframes the interplay between illegalised migrants and the border regime by showing that it can take multiple forms, some less antagonistic than others. Secondly, it contextualises this interplay by situating it within the historical trajectory and social relations of the political economy in which it unfolds. Thirdly, it highlights the relevance of the Global South context of this analysis to AoM debate, much of which has been concerned with European contexts and Europe-bound movement.
{"title":"Autonomy within entanglements: Illegalised migrants, the EU border regime, and the political economy of Nouadhibou, Mauritania","authors":"Hassan Ould Moctar","doi":"10.1177/02637758221090250","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221090250","url":null,"abstract":"This article contributes to debates about the autonomy of migration (AoM) by ethnographically detailing the EU border regime's external operations in Nouadhibou, Mauritania. In showing how the EU border regime is entangled within the political economy and social relations of the city, it offers three contributions to AoM discussion. Firstly, it nuances and reframes the interplay between illegalised migrants and the border regime by showing that it can take multiple forms, some less antagonistic than others. Secondly, it contextualises this interplay by situating it within the historical trajectory and social relations of the political economy in which it unfolds. Thirdly, it highlights the relevance of the Global South context of this analysis to AoM debate, much of which has been concerned with European contexts and Europe-bound movement.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"33 1","pages":"56 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73131392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-31DOI: 10.1177/02637758221083312
Paul Sylvestre, H. Castleden
Critiques of settler colonial urbanism have paid close attention to the political work that property and racism do in materializing settler colonial cities and naturalizing settler control over urban land and resources. We contribute to these debates by examining how the co-production of property and race intersects with jurisdiction to secure white possession against the demands of an urban Indigenous land reclamation in Canada’s national capital. Drawing on an analysis of government records obtained using Access to Information and Privacy requests, key informant interviews, and a three-year engagement with land defenders and allies, we demonstrate how property and jurisdiction carved the contested space into distinct spheres of settler governing authority. The need to confront the singularity of each governing authority on its own terms made it impossible to directly contest ongoing dispossession as a singular process involving the entire site. Instead, organizers and activists were forced to fight for separate pieces of land, dividing limited time, energy, and resources across multiple facets of a settler colonial structure of invasion. We argue that this process of jurisdictional fragmentation, which organized the co-production of property and race in defence of white possession, can be productively understood as a process of fortification.
{"title":"Refusing to relinquish: How settler Canada uses race, property, and jurisdiction to undermine urban Indigenous land reclamation","authors":"Paul Sylvestre, H. Castleden","doi":"10.1177/02637758221083312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221083312","url":null,"abstract":"Critiques of settler colonial urbanism have paid close attention to the political work that property and racism do in materializing settler colonial cities and naturalizing settler control over urban land and resources. We contribute to these debates by examining how the co-production of property and race intersects with jurisdiction to secure white possession against the demands of an urban Indigenous land reclamation in Canada’s national capital. Drawing on an analysis of government records obtained using Access to Information and Privacy requests, key informant interviews, and a three-year engagement with land defenders and allies, we demonstrate how property and jurisdiction carved the contested space into distinct spheres of settler governing authority. The need to confront the singularity of each governing authority on its own terms made it impossible to directly contest ongoing dispossession as a singular process involving the entire site. Instead, organizers and activists were forced to fight for separate pieces of land, dividing limited time, energy, and resources across multiple facets of a settler colonial structure of invasion. We argue that this process of jurisdictional fragmentation, which organized the co-production of property and race in defence of white possession, can be productively understood as a process of fortification.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"33 1","pages":"413 - 431"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74792095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-28DOI: 10.1177/02637758221088868
E. McElroy, Manon Vergerio
This paper focuses on surveillance technologies that New York City landlords have been installing in low-income, public, and affordable tenant housing over the last decade. It looks at how new forms of biometric and facial recognition-based landlord technology automate gentrification and carcerality, reproducing racist systems of recognition and displacement. We offer these systems a genealogy and geography, looking at intersections of zoning, gentrification, eviction, and policing that have historically solidified to dispossess and incarcerate tenants of color. Additionally, this paper addresses how and why New York City has emerged as the world’s epicenter of “landlord tech,” mapping out several decades of urban datafication that have rendered low-income, nonwhite majority housing complexes as laboratories for surveillance experimentations today. We observe how processes of “catching” tenants for lease violations automate a longer history of racist surveillance and property-making. Yet we also highlight tenant-led resistance that has successfully thwarted facial recognition deployment and that continues to organize for landlord tech abolition today. Through affective organizing, grounded relationality, and alliance-building, tenants have created vital abolitionist space and knowledge to curb landlord technologies and the carceral logics they encode.
{"title":"Automating gentrification: Landlord technologies and housing justice organizing in New York City homes","authors":"E. McElroy, Manon Vergerio","doi":"10.1177/02637758221088868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221088868","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on surveillance technologies that New York City landlords have been installing in low-income, public, and affordable tenant housing over the last decade. It looks at how new forms of biometric and facial recognition-based landlord technology automate gentrification and carcerality, reproducing racist systems of recognition and displacement. We offer these systems a genealogy and geography, looking at intersections of zoning, gentrification, eviction, and policing that have historically solidified to dispossess and incarcerate tenants of color. Additionally, this paper addresses how and why New York City has emerged as the world’s epicenter of “landlord tech,” mapping out several decades of urban datafication that have rendered low-income, nonwhite majority housing complexes as laboratories for surveillance experimentations today. We observe how processes of “catching” tenants for lease violations automate a longer history of racist surveillance and property-making. Yet we also highlight tenant-led resistance that has successfully thwarted facial recognition deployment and that continues to organize for landlord tech abolition today. Through affective organizing, grounded relationality, and alliance-building, tenants have created vital abolitionist space and knowledge to curb landlord technologies and the carceral logics they encode.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"359 1","pages":"607 - 626"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82634064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-17DOI: 10.1177/02637758221088865
A. Secor, Patricia Ehrkamp, Jenna M. Loyd
How do the lost futures of forced displacement converge with the impasse of being resettled to a “post-future” society such as the U.S.? Based on interviews conducted between 2016 and 2019 with resettlement agents, service providers and Iraqis resettled in the U.S., we argue that the condemnation of “expectations” (that is, realistic hope) coupled with the demand for refugees’ gratitude means that Iraqis resettled to the U.S. are asked to sustain a “hope against hope” for the fullness of American futurity, even in the face of its collapse. We argue that this prescribed structure of feeling distorts the affective realities of those for whom resettlement has meant at once the loss of past futures (e.g. professional qualifications, career trajectories, social status, or intergenerational cycles of care) and the running aground of capacities for futurity – especially as these capacities are bound up with transnationally stretched and reconfigured familial relations. What is at stake is the recognition of the crisis of futurability in the spacetime of resettlement and the rightfulness of refugee expectations for a more humane and fulfilling resettlement.
{"title":"The problem of the future in the spacetime of resettlement: Iraqi refugees in the U.S.","authors":"A. Secor, Patricia Ehrkamp, Jenna M. Loyd","doi":"10.1177/02637758221088865","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221088865","url":null,"abstract":"How do the lost futures of forced displacement converge with the impasse of being resettled to a “post-future” society such as the U.S.? Based on interviews conducted between 2016 and 2019 with resettlement agents, service providers and Iraqis resettled in the U.S., we argue that the condemnation of “expectations” (that is, realistic hope) coupled with the demand for refugees’ gratitude means that Iraqis resettled to the U.S. are asked to sustain a “hope against hope” for the fullness of American futurity, even in the face of its collapse. We argue that this prescribed structure of feeling distorts the affective realities of those for whom resettlement has meant at once the loss of past futures (e.g. professional qualifications, career trajectories, social status, or intergenerational cycles of care) and the running aground of capacities for futurity – especially as these capacities are bound up with transnationally stretched and reconfigured familial relations. What is at stake is the recognition of the crisis of futurability in the spacetime of resettlement and the rightfulness of refugee expectations for a more humane and fulfilling resettlement.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"48 1","pages":"508 - 527"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89072644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-25DOI: 10.1177/02637758211056342
L. Montange
During the presidency of Donald Trump, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) targeted migrant justice activists, journalists, and advocates with deportation proceedings. The recent political repression has a revanchist character that appears to be a new pattern introduced by Trump but is part of a longer project of securing the smooth functioning of economic and racial social control in the US. I read the recent political repression of activists in relation to texts produced by radical intellectuals who endured political repression in two prior historical moments: the detention and deportation of radicals in the McCarthy era through the words of C.L.R. James; the policing and imprisonment of Black radicals in the early 1970s through the words of Angela Davis. In a third moment, I situate the recent pattern of Trump-era political repression in a context of ongoing contestation over interior immigration enforcement. The struggle over immigration enforcement is not only about legality, but also about the politics of race and class marginalization in the US.
{"title":"Political Detentions, Political Deportations: Repressive Immigration Enforcement in Times of Trump","authors":"L. Montange","doi":"10.1177/02637758211056342","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758211056342","url":null,"abstract":"During the presidency of Donald Trump, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) targeted migrant justice activists, journalists, and advocates with deportation proceedings. The recent political repression has a revanchist character that appears to be a new pattern introduced by Trump but is part of a longer project of securing the smooth functioning of economic and racial social control in the US. I read the recent political repression of activists in relation to texts produced by radical intellectuals who endured political repression in two prior historical moments: the detention and deportation of radicals in the McCarthy era through the words of C.L.R. James; the policing and imprisonment of Black radicals in the early 1970s through the words of Angela Davis. In a third moment, I situate the recent pattern of Trump-era political repression in a context of ongoing contestation over interior immigration enforcement. The struggle over immigration enforcement is not only about legality, but also about the politics of race and class marginalization in the US.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"16 1","pages":"332 - 350"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75101654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-25DOI: 10.1177/02637758221081144
Mia Karisa Dawson
This article considers the significance of disrespecting property as a long-standing practice of abolition. As an organizer, observer and participant, I consider a series of Black Lives Matter protests in Sacramento that transgress the dictates of property in the city. I apply Cedric Robinson’s under-examined theory of the terms of order to understand these transgressions as fundamental threats to assemblages of capitalism, whiteness and policing. As the ruptures caused by protests and riots reveal, property is neither static nor infallible as an arrangement of space. Rather, it is relational and contingent on state force and self-disciplined social behavior. I argue that transgressing the physical markers of property reflects a more revolutionary practice of destabilizing the ideologies of social order upon which property depends. Such interruptions desanctify property by refusing its legitimacy as an arbiter of social life and movement in space. Desanctifying property practices the forms of collectivity, autonomy, and deviant kinship that abolition demands. In situating my methods in this work, I offer a framework of abolition geography as a way of study that participates in social movement, focuses on everyday practices of revolution, and refutes hegemonic ideas of social life and scale.
{"title":"The Kings ain't playin’ no one tonight: Desanctifying property as an abolitionist practice in Sacramento","authors":"Mia Karisa Dawson","doi":"10.1177/02637758221081144","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221081144","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the significance of disrespecting property as a long-standing practice of abolition. As an organizer, observer and participant, I consider a series of Black Lives Matter protests in Sacramento that transgress the dictates of property in the city. I apply Cedric Robinson’s under-examined theory of the terms of order to understand these transgressions as fundamental threats to assemblages of capitalism, whiteness and policing. As the ruptures caused by protests and riots reveal, property is neither static nor infallible as an arrangement of space. Rather, it is relational and contingent on state force and self-disciplined social behavior. I argue that transgressing the physical markers of property reflects a more revolutionary practice of destabilizing the ideologies of social order upon which property depends. Such interruptions desanctify property by refusing its legitimacy as an arbiter of social life and movement in space. Desanctifying property practices the forms of collectivity, autonomy, and deviant kinship that abolition demands. In situating my methods in this work, I offer a framework of abolition geography as a way of study that participates in social movement, focuses on everyday practices of revolution, and refutes hegemonic ideas of social life and scale.","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"20 1","pages":"319 - 331"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90979955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：