Abstract Human rights can be seen as a means to improve people's lived realities. Yet the language and practice of human rights are not always moored in these realities. What happens to the meaning of human rights when these are expressed in (partly non‐verbal) ways that are deeply rooted in lived—embodied, material, and cultural—realities, and how does that practice transform ideas about rights? In this article, we describe how women from Syrian refugee communities living in the Shatila refugee camp in Beirut use the skilled practice of embroidery to express and negotiate what they consider to be their rights and what they are entitled to. In doing so, they foreground a deeply indivisible, multi‐layered, and multi‐perspectival understanding of justice and more specifically of how they understand their rights. These perspectives, we argue, are intrinsically rooted in the embodied, material, and cultural practice through which they emerge, and offer avenues for enriching human rights debates.
{"title":"Stitching a rights narrative: How Syrian women in Shatila use embroidery to express ideas about social justice","authors":"Sofie Verclyte, Tine Destrooper","doi":"10.1111/plar.12544","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12544","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Human rights can be seen as a means to improve people's lived realities. Yet the language and practice of human rights are not always moored in these realities. What happens to the meaning of human rights when these are expressed in (partly non‐verbal) ways that are deeply rooted in lived—embodied, material, and cultural—realities, and how does that practice transform ideas about rights? In this article, we describe how women from Syrian refugee communities living in the Shatila refugee camp in Beirut use the skilled practice of embroidery to express and negotiate what they consider to be their rights and what they are entitled to. In doing so, they foreground a deeply indivisible, multi‐layered, and multi‐perspectival understanding of justice and more specifically of how they understand their rights. These perspectives, we argue, are intrinsically rooted in the embodied, material, and cultural practice through which they emerge, and offer avenues for enriching human rights debates.","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"143 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135758520","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article opens a discussion about how temporalities in spatial and legal spheres are interlinked and shape both policymaking and governance mechanisms and resistance practices. Taking a case study from Eskişehir, Turkey, the research examines several urban renewal attempts of a municipality on the same urban lands over two decades that used different laws and policy tools in each case while all of which were annulled by court suits. From a perspective of legal anthropology, the analysis shows the limits of lawfare discussions that remain incapable of explaining cases that cannot be categorized with domination and resistance. Instead of focusing on detecting who wins or loses, the article claims that such complex cases could be understood better by scrutinizing temporal dynamics: how do legal, spatial, and social temporalities intertwine and impact policymaking? More specifically, how does the law's temporality (re)shape urbanization? Even further, what political work do temporalities generate? The article offers Russian‐doll urbanization as an analogy and ethnographic metaphor to examine several layers and endlessness of renewal initiatives within the broader process of urbanization. Studying the revelation of each layer unravels entangled temporalities of law and socio‐spatial dynamics and their consequences in policymaking and resistance.
{"title":"Beyond lawfare: An analysis of law's temporality through Russian‐doll urbanization from Turkey","authors":"Cansu Civelek","doi":"10.1111/plar.12543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12543","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article opens a discussion about how temporalities in spatial and legal spheres are interlinked and shape both policymaking and governance mechanisms and resistance practices. Taking a case study from Eskişehir, Turkey, the research examines several urban renewal attempts of a municipality on the same urban lands over two decades that used different laws and policy tools in each case while all of which were annulled by court suits. From a perspective of legal anthropology, the analysis shows the limits of lawfare discussions that remain incapable of explaining cases that cannot be categorized with domination and resistance. Instead of focusing on detecting who wins or loses, the article claims that such complex cases could be understood better by scrutinizing temporal dynamics: how do legal, spatial, and social temporalities intertwine and impact policymaking? More specifically, how does the law's temporality (re)shape urbanization? Even further, what political work do temporalities generate? The article offers Russian‐doll urbanization as an analogy and ethnographic metaphor to examine several layers and endlessness of renewal initiatives within the broader process of urbanization. Studying the revelation of each layer unravels entangled temporalities of law and socio‐spatial dynamics and their consequences in policymaking and resistance.","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135146228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract A 2016 fire at a landfill near the western city of L'viv instigated a political crisis around the issue of waste management in Ukraine. The ensuing debates among the L'viv city government, the national government, and local stakeholders show how waste management becomes a mechanism through which to interrogate questions of state‐citizen relations and what it means to be part of Europe. This article argues that processes of Europeanization rely on the arbitrary application of standards and result in a hierarchy in which countries such as Ukraine are considered not‐yet‐fully European. However, this does not prevent pro‐European Ukrainians, who ground their vision of Ukraine's European future in the 2013–2014 Euromaidan protests, from advocating for Ukraine to adopt European standards. This article homes in on the shifting relationship between citizens and state representatives and the development of ecological consciousness as key points by which interlocutors measured Ukraine's path toward Europe, showing how the crisis around waste management in L'viv allows for the contestation of Europeanness itself. While not all Ukrainians have adopted these ideas about European Ukraine, in the context of Russia's devastating invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Ukrainians have become increasingly united around the idea of a European future.
{"title":"From garbage wars to green city: Defining Ukraine's European identity","authors":"Emily Channell‐Justice","doi":"10.1111/plar.12537","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12537","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A 2016 fire at a landfill near the western city of L'viv instigated a political crisis around the issue of waste management in Ukraine. The ensuing debates among the L'viv city government, the national government, and local stakeholders show how waste management becomes a mechanism through which to interrogate questions of state‐citizen relations and what it means to be part of Europe. This article argues that processes of Europeanization rely on the arbitrary application of standards and result in a hierarchy in which countries such as Ukraine are considered not‐yet‐fully European. However, this does not prevent pro‐European Ukrainians, who ground their vision of Ukraine's European future in the 2013–2014 Euromaidan protests, from advocating for Ukraine to adopt European standards. This article homes in on the shifting relationship between citizens and state representatives and the development of ecological consciousness as key points by which interlocutors measured Ukraine's path toward Europe, showing how the crisis around waste management in L'viv allows for the contestation of Europeanness itself. While not all Ukrainians have adopted these ideas about European Ukraine, in the context of Russia's devastating invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Ukrainians have become increasingly united around the idea of a European future.","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135251464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper introduces the term zones of compounded informality to demarcate locations wherein regulatory exclusions in distinct domains interact to escalate the impact of exclusions for people who live and work in these areas. Based upon a study of India's Delhi, National Capital Region (Delhi‐NCR), I explain how the interaction of flexible planning and employment in particular locales produce zones of compounded informality as a technique of governance. Circular migrant workers in Delhi‐NCR overwhelmingly live and work in these zones, wherein unstable employment and housing contribute to nomadic migration. Legal exclusion from housing protections interacts with other procedural pathways, creating barriers to accessing social protection and citizenship rights. Based on ethnographic fieldwork, including participant observation, interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs), and a survey of 981 workers, I consider how zones of compounded informality in Delhi‐NCR interact with India's Aadhar biometric identification system to variegate access to the franchise and Targeted Public Distribution System (PDS) for migrant and other low‐wage workers.
{"title":"Zones of compounded informality: Migrants in the megacity","authors":"Shikha Silliman Bhattacharjee","doi":"10.1111/plar.12534","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12534","url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces the term zones of compounded informality to demarcate locations wherein regulatory exclusions in distinct domains interact to escalate the impact of exclusions for people who live and work in these areas. Based upon a study of India's Delhi, National Capital Region (Delhi‐NCR), I explain how the interaction of flexible planning and employment in particular locales produce zones of compounded informality as a technique of governance. Circular migrant workers in Delhi‐NCR overwhelmingly live and work in these zones, wherein unstable employment and housing contribute to nomadic migration. Legal exclusion from housing protections interacts with other procedural pathways, creating barriers to accessing social protection and citizenship rights. Based on ethnographic fieldwork, including participant observation, interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs), and a survey of 981 workers, I consider how zones of compounded informality in Delhi‐NCR interact with India's Aadhar biometric identification system to variegate access to the franchise and Targeted Public Distribution System (PDS) for migrant and other low‐wage workers.","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136336778","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization declares its ruling to be an optimum result of separating law from politics. “After Dobbs” examines that claim's provocations for anthropologists interested in the ethnography of politics and law. I begin with the court's paradoxical rendering of United States democracy—an algorithm of electoral power that is eliciting unanticipated forms of agency extending well beyond partisan party politics. As such, those new forms are especially instructive, and in their pursuit, I consider them in a broader context. The next part of the discussion turns to recent work by ethnographers in situations in which people identify their own experience as political in new ways or for the first time. Finally, reflecting on that body of ethnographic work in relation to Dobbs and its after-effects, I identify through-lines connecting law(s) and politics in practice (as well as in ethnographic practice): indeterminacies of scale, the dynamic instability of juridification and the creative openness of political agency. These points also serve as prompts to rethink the conditions of law's availability to ethnography. Anthropology is a patient discipline, slowed by the value anthropologists place on immersion, context, and interpretation. So it may seem contradictory to insist—as I do—that ethnography is especially useful in impatient times. Its urgent utility rests on the fact that anthropologists draw their analytics from a fundamental idea of humanity as social—a premise that sustains the stakes of the discipline as well as the dynamic creativity of its methods and capacity for renewal. These qualities are broadly relevant to anthropological practice and especially well-suited to circumstances of political crisis and polarization. Ethnography can crack the illusion that political agency is limited to choosing from a menu. Without the support of other tactics for stabilizing opposition within a closed discursive field, no binary opposition can survive ethnographic scrutiny for very long. That said, it is difficult to avoid using the terms that flow through binarisms when they reside in ordinary language and appeal to public intuition as complementary opposites. A case in point: Liberal legal tradition draws a bright line between law and politics, while anthropology finds norms and power everywhere, as inherent qualities of the social. The space between these two positions teems with life and unsettled ethnographic questions. In that spirit, this article concerns the discursive complementarity of law and politics as drawn by the U.S. Supreme Court in the ruling that ended the constitutional right to abortion in the United States (Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (No. 19–1392, 597 U.S. ___ (2022)). The majority's explicit deployment of a distinct separation between law and politics is not surprising, given liberalism's traditional discourse of judicial neutrality. That makes all the more noteworthy the
在多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案中，多数人宣称其裁决是法律与政治分离的最佳结果。《在多布斯之后》考察了这种说法对对政治和法律人种学感兴趣的人类学家的挑衅。首先，我将从最高法院对美国民主的自相矛盾的诠释谈起——一种选举权力的算法，引发了远远超出党派政治的意想不到的代理形式。因此，这些新形式特别具有启发性，在追求它们的过程中，我在更广泛的背景下考虑它们。讨论的下一部分转向人种学家最近的工作，在这种情况下，人们以新的方式或第一次将自己的经历视为政治。最后，在反思与多布斯有关的民族志工作及其后续影响时，我确定了在实践中(以及在民族志实践中)将法律与政治联系起来的贯穿线:规模的不确定性，合法性的动态不稳定性以及政治机构的创造性开放性。这些观点也促使我们重新思考法律适用于人种学的条件。人类学是一门耐心的学科，由于人类学家对沉浸、语境和解释的重视而放慢了速度。因此，坚持民族志在不耐烦的时代特别有用——就像我坚持的那样——似乎是矛盾的。它的迫切效用取决于这样一个事实，即人类学家从人类是社会性的这一基本观念中得出他们的分析——这一前提支撑着这一学科的利害关系，以及其方法的动态创造力和更新能力。这些品质与人类学实践广泛相关，尤其适合于政治危机和两极分化的情况。人种学可以打破一种错觉，即政治机构仅限于从菜单中选择。在一个封闭的话语领域中，如果没有其他策略的支持来稳定对立，任何二元对立都无法在民族志的审视中存活很长时间。也就是说，当它们存在于日常语言中，并作为互补的对立面吸引公众直觉时，很难避免使用通过二元关系流动的术语。一个恰当的例子是:自由主义法律传统在法律和政治之间划清了界限，而人类学则发现规范和权力无处不在，是社会的内在品质。这两个位置之间的空间充满了生活和悬而未决的民族志问题。本着这种精神，本文关注美国最高法院在结束美国宪法规定的堕胎权利的裁决(多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案(No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. ___(2022))中所提出的法律和政治的话语互补性。考虑到自由主义对司法中立的传统论述，多数人明确部署法律与政治之间的明显分离并不令人惊讶。更值得注意的是，在这种情况下，他们在自己的意见文本中反复这样做，把法律与理性、政治与情感结合起来，从中找到好处。在他们所陈述的观点中，感情在法律中没有地位，必须在政治进程中加以驯服- -下文将进一步讨论这个问题。至于他们自己的角色，他们写道:“我们只能做我们的工作，那就是解释法律，应用长期以来的先例原则，并据此裁决此案”(69)。在接下来的内容中，我将发展Dobbs中提出的法律/政治区分，但我的重点不是法律论证本身——关于先例的主张和反诉，以及美国宪法允许或不允许什么。相反，它是一个相关但不同的“法律在行动的关键场所”(Li, 2023,1):大多数人提供给公众消费的社会和文化主张，作为他们法律推理的代表。多布斯法院提出的法律/政治区分就是这样一种主张，人类学家已经准备好从民族志上对其作出回应。在这种情况下，民族志的生产力并不是通过对任何一个术语的更好定义来检验的，而是取决于这些术语的含义的倍增，这些含义是由人们的经验和相互关系的关键上的即兴创作所决定的。从这个角度来看，正如下面进一步讨论的那样，政治不能被简化为对政党或党派活动的认同——这一观察对政党的总体主张提出了挑战，仿佛党派对立现实地反映了一个被相互对立的社会领域之间的界线所分裂的国家。正如Foblets等人所观察到的那样，“法律与人类学之间的关系往往是在政治生活的坩埚中锻造出来的”(Foblets等人，2022)。4) -肯定人类学对理解法律和政治危机的贡献的动态性、特殊性和相关性的陈述。 医学人类学学会、生殖人类学委员会和其他人类学团体的声明紧随多布斯的裁决，提供了强有力的人种学和其他经验证据，以质疑多数人的许多社会文化表征(Andaya et al.， 2022a;Buchbinder et al.， 2022;Williamson et al.， 2022)。我依靠这些贡献作为我自己狭隘目的的背景，来研究法院对其自身社会推理的描述，以询问他们对法律和政治的话语对立在这种情况下是如何起作用的，以及它对法律和政治人类学可能有什么影响。最近关于多布斯前后堕胎权利活动的人类学研究表明，生殖政治并不以党派关系开始或结束，而是形成了“文化斗争的场所”——围绕“代理”问题，重塑斗争的形式，即使其实质发生了变化(Andaya et al.， 2022b);另见Cromer & Bjork-James, 2023)。这种不确定性与主流媒体对堕胎权利的公众辩论的表述背道而驰，似乎堕胎只是一个双方辩论的对象。最高法院在多布斯案中的裁决，也利用了二元对立的形象——这是大法官们引导政治两极分化的方式的证据，他们歪曲政治两极分化的条款，使自己与之保持距离，以强调他们对自己裁决的法律合理性的主张。相比之下，在公众对该裁决的持续反应中，多布斯展示了法律是如何分散和折射的，因为它使个人代理以各种方式被人们自己视为政治。接下来，我将从多布斯案的多数派意见开始——九名法官中有六人签名。由于篇幅有限，我不讨论持不同意见的人，尽管他们显然有助于扩大我对多数人的社会和文化主张的讨论。相反，在下一节中，我将借鉴大多数人的主张，梳理出他们与目前困扰着法律和政治人类学家的问题之间的话语联系。在讨论人类学家目前如何处理与政治相关的规模、代理和目的问题时，我对这些问题进行了扩展。最近的学术研究为理论、方法和社区提供了更广泛的视角，在结论中讨论了与多布斯和其他相关的问题。在Dobbs一案中，最高法院援引了一种强烈的原旨主义立场，在很大程度上强调了宪法制定者在文本中没有提及“堕胎权”(5,9)这一事实。就我在本次讨论中的目的而言，与原旨主义者声称对制宪者的意图和用法有特殊了解的说法争论是无关的。这将是一个不同的讨论，尽管是一个受欢迎的讨论。我更感兴趣的是，多布斯法院援引原意主义来主张“沉默”的含义——宪法文本中缺失的词语——是可用的法律财产。这样的房地产具有很高的价值，法院提出的社会和文化主张是对这些沉默区域的解释性增强。在整个意见书中，多数派代表了他们的权力是排他性的、有纪律的、受法律理性原则约束的——不受政治热风的干扰(也不受影响)。在这些主张中，最主要的是法院对堕胎辩论本身的论述。他们一开始就哀叹罗伊诉韦德案(410 U.S. . 113(1973))引发了“全国性的争议”，而凯西诉计划生育案(505 U.S. . 833(1992))“没有解决”(3,6;另见卡瓦诺意见，第8-9条)。在我听来，这不是审判的语言，但奇怪的是(考虑到这是这个国家的最高法院)第三方调解的语言。我的意思是，与他们不把公众意见作为法院判决的一个因素相比，法院在凯西案中给予败诉一方特权，在事实发生30年后，基于自该案判决以来一直持续的“热烈的”公众辩论进行重审。6).法官们认为，持续的争议对一项裁决的合法终局性具有负面影响，这一观点构成了Roe案件结束了堕胎法规受制于政治程序的论点的基础(2,44,68)。在他们所陈述的观点中，凯西案也“缩短了”这一过程(52):“那些(在凯西案中)败诉的一方——那些试图促进国家对胎儿生命利益的人——不再试图说服他们选出
{"title":"After <i>Dobbs</i>: Reflections on political and legal anthropology","authors":"Carol J. Greenhouse","doi":"10.1111/plar.12535","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12535","url":null,"abstract":"The majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization declares its ruling to be an optimum result of separating law from politics. “After Dobbs” examines that claim's provocations for anthropologists interested in the ethnography of politics and law. I begin with the court's paradoxical rendering of United States democracy—an algorithm of electoral power that is eliciting unanticipated forms of agency extending well beyond partisan party politics. As such, those new forms are especially instructive, and in their pursuit, I consider them in a broader context. The next part of the discussion turns to recent work by ethnographers in situations in which people identify their own experience as political in new ways or for the first time. Finally, reflecting on that body of ethnographic work in relation to Dobbs and its after-effects, I identify through-lines connecting law(s) and politics in practice (as well as in ethnographic practice): indeterminacies of scale, the dynamic instability of juridification and the creative openness of political agency. These points also serve as prompts to rethink the conditions of law's availability to ethnography. Anthropology is a patient discipline, slowed by the value anthropologists place on immersion, context, and interpretation. So it may seem contradictory to insist—as I do—that ethnography is especially useful in impatient times. Its urgent utility rests on the fact that anthropologists draw their analytics from a fundamental idea of humanity as social—a premise that sustains the stakes of the discipline as well as the dynamic creativity of its methods and capacity for renewal. These qualities are broadly relevant to anthropological practice and especially well-suited to circumstances of political crisis and polarization. Ethnography can crack the illusion that political agency is limited to choosing from a menu. Without the support of other tactics for stabilizing opposition within a closed discursive field, no binary opposition can survive ethnographic scrutiny for very long. That said, it is difficult to avoid using the terms that flow through binarisms when they reside in ordinary language and appeal to public intuition as complementary opposites. A case in point: Liberal legal tradition draws a bright line between law and politics, while anthropology finds norms and power everywhere, as inherent qualities of the social. The space between these two positions teems with life and unsettled ethnographic questions. In that spirit, this article concerns the discursive complementarity of law and politics as drawn by the U.S. Supreme Court in the ruling that ended the constitutional right to abortion in the United States (Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (No. 19–1392, 597 U.S. ___ (2022)). The majority's explicit deployment of a distinct separation between law and politics is not surprising, given liberalism's traditional discourse of judicial neutrality. That makes all the more noteworthy the","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136341939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Christin Achermann, Lisa Marie Borrelli, Luca Pfirter
Abstract Focusing on the intersections between bureaucracies of welfare and migration control, this article interrogates how decisions about the future stay of non‐citizens receiving social assistance are made in a relational interplay of different offices and actors in Switzerland. We investigate how relational decision‐making is fundamental in crafting legitimate decisions about the exclusion of “poor others.” Based on ethnographic fieldwork with diverse actors involved in migration control enforcement and welfare policy implementation, this article contributes to understanding how legal regulations turn into social reality. We show that a multitude of actors, including social services, inform and affect migration control‐related decisions. This relationality co‐produces the outcome and legitimacy of the final decision taken by the respective migration office. In turn, the actors’ fields of action, values, and procedures are themselves affected by this relational involvement. The relational character of decision‐making therefore involves an expansion of migration control into other bureaucratic and social fields that co‐construct legitimate decisions concerning the deportation of “poor others” and create the illusion of a “coherent state,” invisibilizing structural inequalities.
{"title":"“For just decisions we need you!”: Relational decision‐making and the bureaucratic exclusion of “poor others”","authors":"Christin Achermann, Lisa Marie Borrelli, Luca Pfirter","doi":"10.1111/plar.12542","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12542","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Focusing on the intersections between bureaucracies of welfare and migration control, this article interrogates how decisions about the future stay of non‐citizens receiving social assistance are made in a relational interplay of different offices and actors in Switzerland. We investigate how relational decision‐making is fundamental in crafting legitimate decisions about the exclusion of “poor others.” Based on ethnographic fieldwork with diverse actors involved in migration control enforcement and welfare policy implementation, this article contributes to understanding how legal regulations turn into social reality. We show that a multitude of actors, including social services, inform and affect migration control‐related decisions. This relationality co‐produces the outcome and legitimacy of the final decision taken by the respective migration office. In turn, the actors’ fields of action, values, and procedures are themselves affected by this relational involvement. The relational character of decision‐making therefore involves an expansion of migration control into other bureaucratic and social fields that co‐construct legitimate decisions concerning the deportation of “poor others” and create the illusion of a “coherent state,” invisibilizing structural inequalities.","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136341930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It was late September last year. I was a few weeks into a graduate seminar that had quickly turned into one of my favorites. Anthropology of the Otherwise taught by Dr Naisargi Dave at the University of Toronto over the Fall of 2022. Drawing on the concept of “otherwise worlds” by Elizabeth Povinelli (2012), the seminar explored what is not there yet, and what might be1, the world as it is and it is becoming, and what political and ethical alternatives exist in worlds that are determined to deplete and exhaust. Some thinkers, some teachers, some books, and some classmates make it possible to truly inhabit and practice the creative pulse of thought; they take us to places we did not know exist—they create places. The otherwise seminar was one of those experiences, taking me to a different place each week. But in some ways, also the same—from another route, another angle, another field of view and possibility, all in wonderful company. Dionne Brand's A Map to the Door of No Return one week. Political manifestos, another. Freud and psychoanalysis in the middle. Around the same time, another kind of world-making was underway in my life. A loved one who had been a cherished presence for many years and lived in another continent (let's call him Sunflower—or just S, oh the fear of not being taken seriously!) was starting to act in ways that I could not comprehend. I had known and loved S for many years. More importantly, I liked him very much. But I had begun to find it straining to like him. I would find out 3 months later that these were the beginnings of what would be diagnosed as S's “first manic episode”. I would make an emergency visit to India and make possible his “forced sedation” and hospitalization at a psychiatric facility. In what follows, I write about the coming in contact of these two moments—the otherwise classroom and S's diagnosis, and how this serendipitous contact aided what can sometimes appear to be the most difficult thing to do—just getting by, possibly as an otherwise practice and an ethic of alongside-ness. Here, I think about that (ongoing) moment and some questions it raises about ethical and political ways of “becoming” in the world alongside one another. In doing so, I think about what it means to take care of each another and what is there to do, if anything at all, when we are exhausted—by diagnosis, by caregiving, by the limits that an oppressive world forces upon us, and, perhaps by the limits of politics and ethics themselves? Can an otherwise world emerge amid such exhaustion and what might it look like? For better or for worse, I have often seen the world through my classroom notes (what a privilege to have inhabited classrooms that make that possible!). In the face of a diagnosis that felt totalizing and all-engulfing, the body (re)turned, almost intuitively, to the otherwise classroom experience where, as if, presciently enough, the question at stake was: How to register context and history without letting them in
{"title":"An otherwise classroom and a diagnosis, or, the preciousness of a pause","authors":"Ridhima Sharma","doi":"10.1111/plar.12538","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12538","url":null,"abstract":"It was late September last year. I was a few weeks into a graduate seminar that had quickly turned into one of my favorites. Anthropology of the Otherwise taught by Dr Naisargi Dave at the University of Toronto over the Fall of 2022. Drawing on the concept of “otherwise worlds” by Elizabeth Povinelli (2012), the seminar explored what is not there yet, and what might be1, the world as it is and it is becoming, and what political and ethical alternatives exist in worlds that are determined to deplete and exhaust. Some thinkers, some teachers, some books, and some classmates make it possible to truly inhabit and practice the creative pulse of thought; they take us to places we did not know exist—they create places. The otherwise seminar was one of those experiences, taking me to a different place each week. But in some ways, also the same—from another route, another angle, another field of view and possibility, all in wonderful company. Dionne Brand's A Map to the Door of No Return one week. Political manifestos, another. Freud and psychoanalysis in the middle. Around the same time, another kind of world-making was underway in my life. A loved one who had been a cherished presence for many years and lived in another continent (let's call him Sunflower—or just S, oh the fear of not being taken seriously!) was starting to act in ways that I could not comprehend. I had known and loved S for many years. More importantly, I liked him very much. But I had begun to find it straining to like him. I would find out 3 months later that these were the beginnings of what would be diagnosed as S's “first manic episode”. I would make an emergency visit to India and make possible his “forced sedation” and hospitalization at a psychiatric facility. In what follows, I write about the coming in contact of these two moments—the otherwise classroom and S's diagnosis, and how this serendipitous contact aided what can sometimes appear to be the most difficult thing to do—just getting by, possibly as an otherwise practice and an ethic of alongside-ness. Here, I think about that (ongoing) moment and some questions it raises about ethical and political ways of “becoming” in the world alongside one another. In doing so, I think about what it means to take care of each another and what is there to do, if anything at all, when we are exhausted—by diagnosis, by caregiving, by the limits that an oppressive world forces upon us, and, perhaps by the limits of politics and ethics themselves? Can an otherwise world emerge amid such exhaustion and what might it look like? For better or for worse, I have often seen the world through my classroom notes (what a privilege to have inhabited classrooms that make that possible!). In the face of a diagnosis that felt totalizing and all-engulfing, the body (re)turned, almost intuitively, to the otherwise classroom experience where, as if, presciently enough, the question at stake was: How to register context and history without letting them in","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135199014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology ReviewEarly View COMMENTARY Indeterminative critique: Epistemic certitude and the temporality of crisis Malay Firoz, Corresponding Author Malay Firoz [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-1323-1946 School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA Correspondence Malay Firoz, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author Malay Firoz, Corresponding Author Malay Firoz [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-1323-1946 School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA Correspondence Malay Firoz, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 28 September 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12541Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES Abrams, Philip. 1988. “Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State.” Journal of Historical Sociology 1(1): 58–89. Arendt, Hannah. 1976. The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company. Azoulay, Ariella. 2013. “Potential History: Thinking through Violence.” Critical Inquiry 39(3): 548–574. Azoulay, Ariella. 2019. Potential History: Unlearning Imperialism. New York: Verso. Benjamin, Walter. 1996. “ Critique of Violence.” In Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings, Volume 1(1913–1926), 236–252. Cambridge: Belknap Press. Boland, Tom. 2013. “Towards an Anthropology of Critique: The Modern Experience of Liminality and Crisis.” Anthropological Theory 13(3): 222–239. Cabot, Heath. 2016. “‘Refugee Voices’: Tragedy, Ghosts, and the Anthropology of Not Knowing.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 45(6): 645-672. Chandler, David. 2012. “Resilience and Human Security: The Post-Interventionist Paradigm.” Security Dialogue 43(3): 213–229. Chandler, David, and Julian Reid. 2016. The Neoliberal Subject: Resilience, Adaptation and Vulnerability. New York: Rowman & Littlefield International. Corry, Olaf. 2014. “From Defense to Resilience: Environmental Security beyond Neo-Liberalism.” International Political Sociology 8(3): 256–274. Crisp, Jeff. 2001. Mind the Gap!: UNHCR, Humanitarian Assistance and the Development Process. New Issues in Refugee Research. Working Paper No. 43. Geneva: UNHCR. Duffield, Mark. 2013
{"title":"Indeterminative critique: Epistemic certitude and the temporality of crisis","authors":"Malay Firoz","doi":"10.1111/plar.12541","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12541","url":null,"abstract":"PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology ReviewEarly View COMMENTARY Indeterminative critique: Epistemic certitude and the temporality of crisis Malay Firoz, Corresponding Author Malay Firoz [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-1323-1946 School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA Correspondence Malay Firoz, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author Malay Firoz, Corresponding Author Malay Firoz [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0002-1323-1946 School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA Correspondence Malay Firoz, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University, Glendale, Arizona, USA. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 28 September 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12541Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES Abrams, Philip. 1988. “Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State.” Journal of Historical Sociology 1(1): 58–89. Arendt, Hannah. 1976. The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company. Azoulay, Ariella. 2013. “Potential History: Thinking through Violence.” Critical Inquiry 39(3): 548–574. Azoulay, Ariella. 2019. Potential History: Unlearning Imperialism. New York: Verso. Benjamin, Walter. 1996. “ Critique of Violence.” In Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings, Volume 1(1913–1926), 236–252. Cambridge: Belknap Press. Boland, Tom. 2013. “Towards an Anthropology of Critique: The Modern Experience of Liminality and Crisis.” Anthropological Theory 13(3): 222–239. Cabot, Heath. 2016. “‘Refugee Voices’: Tragedy, Ghosts, and the Anthropology of Not Knowing.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 45(6): 645-672. Chandler, David. 2012. “Resilience and Human Security: The Post-Interventionist Paradigm.” Security Dialogue 43(3): 213–229. Chandler, David, and Julian Reid. 2016. The Neoliberal Subject: Resilience, Adaptation and Vulnerability. New York: Rowman & Littlefield International. Corry, Olaf. 2014. “From Defense to Resilience: Environmental Security beyond Neo-Liberalism.” International Political Sociology 8(3): 256–274. Crisp, Jeff. 2001. Mind the Gap!: UNHCR, Humanitarian Assistance and the Development Process. New Issues in Refugee Research. Working Paper No. 43. Geneva: UNHCR. Duffield, Mark. 2013","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135425760","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper examines legal efforts to criminalize same‐sex sexualities between consenting adults by conservative Muslim movements in Indonesia, epitomized by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia's 2016 Judicial Review on the Indonesian Penal Code, continuous resistance to the Sexual Violence Law, and the current Indonesian Penal Code. Based on my ethnography of the Judicial Review's court transcript and other legal archives, I argue that the conservative Muslim movements’ legal effort to criminalize sexuality in Indonesia is an exercise of Islamic political theology revolving around a certain ontology of personhood concerning the relationships between “the human” and God, the state, and the nation. This ontology is apparent in their assertion about the intrinsic difference between sexual violence (“kekerasan seksual”) vs. sexual crime (“kejahatan seksual”). This paper aims to: (1) demonstrate that anthropological inquiries of ontologies can further develop the conceptual framework of political theology, especially in elucidating how ontological imposition of “the human” and its personhood plays a pivotal part in conservative movements’ repertoires in criminalizing sexuality; and (2) make use of Southeast Asian studies’ scholarships and cases to speak back to the broader discussion on the fissures in/of secular imaginaries and secularization processes.
{"title":"An ontological struggle: Islamic political theology and the criminalization of same‐sex sexuality in Indonesia","authors":"Febi R. Ramadhan","doi":"10.1111/plar.12536","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12536","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper examines legal efforts to criminalize same‐sex sexualities between consenting adults by conservative Muslim movements in Indonesia, epitomized by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia's 2016 Judicial Review on the Indonesian Penal Code, continuous resistance to the Sexual Violence Law, and the current Indonesian Penal Code. Based on my ethnography of the Judicial Review's court transcript and other legal archives, I argue that the conservative Muslim movements’ legal effort to criminalize sexuality in Indonesia is an exercise of Islamic political theology revolving around a certain ontology of personhood concerning the relationships between “the human” and God, the state, and the nation. This ontology is apparent in their assertion about the intrinsic difference between sexual violence (“kekerasan seksual”) vs. sexual crime (“kejahatan seksual”). This paper aims to: (1) demonstrate that anthropological inquiries of ontologies can further develop the conceptual framework of political theology, especially in elucidating how ontological imposition of “the human” and its personhood plays a pivotal part in conservative movements’ repertoires in criminalizing sexuality; and (2) make use of Southeast Asian studies’ scholarships and cases to speak back to the broader discussion on the fissures in/of secular imaginaries and secularization processes.","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135425629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology ReviewEarly View COMMENTARY Reflecting on/for better worlds Amy J. Cohen, Amy J. Cohen Beasley School of Law, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USASearch for more papers by this authorIlana Gershon, Corresponding Author Ilana Gershon [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-0694 Department of Anthropology, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA Correspondence Ilana Gershon, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA. Email: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author Amy J. Cohen, Amy J. Cohen Beasley School of Law, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USASearch for more papers by this authorIlana Gershon, Corresponding Author Ilana Gershon [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-0694 Department of Anthropology, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA Correspondence Ilana Gershon, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA. Email: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author First published: 28 September 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12539Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES Afshary, Mohammad. 2018. “ Prefiguring the Revolution: The Politics of Law and Lawyering in Egypt.” PhD diss., Kent Law School, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK. Ashar, Sameer M. 2023a. “Pedagogy of Prefiguration.” Yale Law Journal Forum 132. Ashar, Sameer M.. 2023b. “ Toward Prefigurative Lawyering.” LPE Blog, July 3, 2023, https://lpeproject.org/blog/toward-prefigurative-lawyering/ Beltrán, Héctor. 2023. Coding Work: Hacking across the US/México Techno-Borderlands. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Cohen, Amy J. and Bronwen Morgan. 2023. “Prefigurative Legality.” Law and Social Inquiry 48(3): 1053–1082. Cooper, Davina. 2023a. “Crafting Prefigurative Law in Turbulent Times: Decertifcation, DIY Law Reform, and the Dilemmas of Feminist Prototyping.” Feminist Legal Studies 31: 17–42 Cooper, Davina. 2023b. “ Prefigurative Law Reform: Creating a New Research Methodology for Radical Change.” Criticalegalthinking.com. March 3, 2023. Coutin, Susan and Barbara Yngvesson. 2023. Documenting Impossible Realities: Ethnography, Memory, and the As If. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Marisol De La Cadena and Mario Blaser, eds. 2018. A World of Many Worlds. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Gershon, Ilana. 2005. “Seeing like a System: Luhmann for Anthropologists.” Anthropological Theory 5(2), 99–116. Gershon, Ilana. 2006. “Reflexivity in Others’ Contexts” Ethnos 71(4). Gershon, Ilana. 2019. “Porou
PoLAR:政治与法律人类学评论早期观点评论反思/为了更美好的世界艾米·j·科恩，艾米·j·科恩·比斯利法学院，美国宾夕法尼亚州费城坦普尔大学搜索本文作者的更多论文，通讯作者伊拉娜·格尔森[email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-0694美国德克萨斯州休斯顿莱斯大学人类学系通讯伊拉娜·格尔森，美国德克萨斯州休斯顿莱斯大学邮箱:[Email protected]。搜索本作者的更多论文，艾米J.科恩，艾米J.科恩比斯利法学院，费城，宾夕法尼亚州，美国搜索本作者的更多论文，通讯作者Ilana Gershon [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-0694美国德克萨斯州休斯敦莱斯大学人类学系通信Ilana Gershon，休斯敦，德克萨斯州，美国。邮箱:[Email protected]。搜索该作者的更多论文首次发表:2023年9月28日https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12539Read全文taboutpdf ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare给予accessShare全文accessShare全文accessShare全文accessShare请查看我们的使用条款和条件，并勾选下面的复选框共享文章的全文版本。我已经阅读并接受了Wiley在线图书馆使用共享链接的条款和条件，请使用下面的链接与您的朋友和同事分享本文的全文版本。学习更多的知识。复制链接共享链接共享一个emailfacebooktwitterlinkedinreddit微信参考资料Afshary, Mohammad. 2018。《预示革命:埃及的法律政治与律师事务》博士羞辱。肯特大学肯特法学院，坎特伯雷，肯特，英国萨米尔·m·阿沙尔，2023a。“预言教学法”。耶鲁法律杂志论坛132。Ashar, Sameer M…2023 b。"走向先知律师"LPE博客，2023年7月3日，https://lpeproject.org/blog/toward-prefigurative-lawyering/ Beltrán, hcv。2023. 编码工作:在美国/墨西哥/ Techno-Borderlands进行黑客攻击。普林斯顿:普林斯顿大学出版社。科恩，艾米J.和布朗文摩根。2023。“预示的合法性。”法律与社会研究48(3):1053-1082。达维娜·库珀，2023a。“在动荡时期制作预示性法律:取消认证，DIY法律改革，以及女权主义原型的困境。”刘建军。女性法律研究(3):17-42。“预示性法律改革:为激进变革创造一种新的研究方法”。Criticalegalthinking.com。2023年3月3日。库廷，苏珊和芭芭拉·英格森，2023。记录不可能的现实:民族志、记忆和仿佛。纽约州伊萨卡:康奈尔大学出版社。Marisol De La Cadena和Mario Blaser编。2018. 多世界的世界。达勒姆，北卡罗来纳州:杜克大学出版社。格尔森，Ilana, 2005。"像系统一样看:人类学家的鲁曼"人类学理论5(2)，99-116。伊格森，伊拉娜。2006。“他人语境中的反身性”，《民族》71(4)。2019年，伊利诺伊州格尔森。“漏洞百出的社会秩序。”美国民族学家46(4):404-416。吉布森格雷厄姆，J. K. 2002。“超越全球与地方:二元框架之外的经济政治”《权力的地理:位置尺度》，安德鲁·希律和梅丽莎·w·赖特主编，第25-60页。牛津:布莱克威尔出版社。大卫·格雷伯，2009。《直接行动:民族志》奥克兰，加州:AK出版社。莉莉·伊兰尼，2015。“黑客马拉松与企业公民的塑造”，《科学技术与人文价值》40(5):799-824。兰迪·欧文，2019。衍生国家:非自治领土上的产权和索赔。新社会研究学院博士。兰迪·欧文，2020。“西撒哈拉采掘经济形成与瓦解中的争议语言”。《伦敦国际法评论》8(2):317-348。兰迪·欧文，2022。“合法性和主权的地形:裁定西撒哈拉磷酸盐在南非的所有权。”地理学报，27(6):1137-1159。刘易斯，杰森。2016。“为闹鬼做准备:对土著未来想象的笔记”《数字时代的参与条件》，达林·巴尼、加布里埃拉·科尔曼、克里斯汀·罗斯、乔纳森·斯特恩和塔玛尔·坦贝克主编。明尼阿波利斯，明尼苏达州:明尼苏达大学出版社229-249。Vanessa Machado de Oliveira, 2021。临终关怀的现代性:面对人性的错误及其对社会行动主义的启示。伯克利，加州:北大西洋出版社。戴娜·n·斯科特:《指环中的火:关键矿产边界上的定居者法律和土著管辖权》(手稿正在进行中;杜克大学出版社征求)。Bonnie Urciouli, 2022。文理学院生活中的新自由主义多样性。牛津大学:《在问题包含之前的早期视图在线版本的记录参考信息
{"title":"Reflecting on/for better worlds","authors":"Amy J. Cohen, Ilana Gershon","doi":"10.1111/plar.12539","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12539","url":null,"abstract":"PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology ReviewEarly View COMMENTARY Reflecting on/for better worlds Amy J. Cohen, Amy J. Cohen Beasley School of Law, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USASearch for more papers by this authorIlana Gershon, Corresponding Author Ilana Gershon [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-0694 Department of Anthropology, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA Correspondence Ilana Gershon, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA. Email: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author Amy J. Cohen, Amy J. Cohen Beasley School of Law, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USASearch for more papers by this authorIlana Gershon, Corresponding Author Ilana Gershon [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-0694 Department of Anthropology, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA Correspondence Ilana Gershon, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA. Email: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author First published: 28 September 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12539Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat REFERENCES Afshary, Mohammad. 2018. “ Prefiguring the Revolution: The Politics of Law and Lawyering in Egypt.” PhD diss., Kent Law School, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK. Ashar, Sameer M. 2023a. “Pedagogy of Prefiguration.” Yale Law Journal Forum 132. Ashar, Sameer M.. 2023b. “ Toward Prefigurative Lawyering.” LPE Blog, July 3, 2023, https://lpeproject.org/blog/toward-prefigurative-lawyering/ Beltrán, Héctor. 2023. Coding Work: Hacking across the US/México Techno-Borderlands. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Cohen, Amy J. and Bronwen Morgan. 2023. “Prefigurative Legality.” Law and Social Inquiry 48(3): 1053–1082. Cooper, Davina. 2023a. “Crafting Prefigurative Law in Turbulent Times: Decertifcation, DIY Law Reform, and the Dilemmas of Feminist Prototyping.” Feminist Legal Studies 31: 17–42 Cooper, Davina. 2023b. “ Prefigurative Law Reform: Creating a New Research Methodology for Radical Change.” Criticalegalthinking.com. March 3, 2023. Coutin, Susan and Barbara Yngvesson. 2023. Documenting Impossible Realities: Ethnography, Memory, and the As If. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Marisol De La Cadena and Mario Blaser, eds. 2018. A World of Many Worlds. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Gershon, Ilana. 2005. “Seeing like a System: Luhmann for Anthropologists.” Anthropological Theory 5(2), 99–116. Gershon, Ilana. 2006. “Reflexivity in Others’ Contexts” Ethnos 71(4). Gershon, Ilana. 2019. “Porou","PeriodicalId":56256,"journal":{"name":"Polar-Political and Legal Anthropology Review","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135425630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"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：