|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
160441
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Dilemmas around how to deal with asylum seekers who arrive in Australia by boat have been a key driver of political and public discourse for over a decade. In 2012, an ‘Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers’ was established to provide advice to the Australian government about how to deal with the increasingly embarrassing issue of asylum seekers drowning at sea and a parliamentary stalemate on the matter. Using frame analysis to understand how national and post-national identities are being recruited in this debate, this paper analyses submissions to the Panel. We demonstrate how arguments for and against asylum seekers are constructed around nationalism, regionalism and globalism (cosmopolitan). Australia was variously framed as having an alternative national character from that promoted by politicians, as having a key regional role, and hence identity, and as a global citizen (both in reality and in appearance). Contrary to expectations, we found that each frame served as a vehicle through which progressive arguments were articulated, indicating the utility of each in arguing for more humane treatment of ‘Others’.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
095090
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The relationship of the individual to the nation-state is often conceived by theorists in terms of either an emotional ethno-cultural bond (to the traditional 'nation'), or a civic legal-rational connection (to the 'state'). Such a distinction is fundamentally problematic for settler nations with diverse migrant populations. Australia is such a society built on the integration of migrants into an increasingly multicultural polity. The role of citizenship in this process of integration and nation-building is contested. As in other Western democracies, recent moves to increase the value and uptake of citizenship by eligible residents have occurred using discourses of ethno-cultural patriotism. Yet little is known about how migrants to Australia view citizenship. Australian political scientists Betts and Birrell (2007) have argued that most Australians envisage citizenship in terms of monocultural patriotic commitment, while government and the intellectual elite take a more civic 'proceduralist' approach. To explore the validity of this dichotomy, and its relevance to migrants, we analyse migrants' constructions of Australian citizenship from two sources, a government website and interviews, finding evidence of both patriotism and proceduralism, but significant overlap in the way the perspectives are articulated. Differences between the data sets, in representations of economic productivity, identity and exclusion, are also discussed. We conclude that everyday conceptualisations of Australian citizenship by migrants combine patriotism and proceduralism, and indicate a degree of complexity and ambivalence missing in Betts and Birrell's formulation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|