| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
139770
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The debate on migration-related border controls has greatly expanded during the past decade. Special attention has been given to processes of contestation and of rights-claims enacted by migrants, drawing greatly on Isin’s work on acts of citizenship and Rancière’s articulation of the ‘uncounted’ and the political. Within this broad debate little attention has been devoted to the acts of common people in contesting current border management and especially in refusing the policing and the bordering of their own territory. By focusing on the Lampedusa borderland, this paper will explore and interrogate the verbal protests made by the people of Lampedusa in response to the drowning of some 366 African migrants on 3 October 2013. The protests were mostly against current border patrolling and its politics of (non-)life, which prioritise border protection against (migrants’) life protection. The call to protecting all human life, equally worthy of being protected, transformed these protests into political acts. Using and extending the work of Rancière, I explore the extent to which the people of Lampedusa have highlighted a ‘wrong’ and enacted ‘dissensus’ by contesting the (natural) securitised order of EU border management.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
118024
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In spite of a set of central unifying claims, the Occupy movement has generated a powerful challenge to the hegemonic politico-economic order through the expressive and transgressive act of occupation. Through such an act, occupy (verb) has become transformed into Occupy (noun): a resistance politics concerned with (re)claiming physical spaces and creating representational spaces. Following on the heels of the popular uprisings characterized as the 'Arab Spring', Occupy seemed to represent - even embody - the moment of democratic reflexivity where, if only just for a moment, the cracks in the façade of liberalism opened up just a little further, exposing the bonds between the decades-old frustrations of postcolonial subjects and the shattered hopes of democratic citizens. Occupy irrupted into the sacred space of global capitalism, and spread from Lower Manhattan to town squares and city centres the world over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
189497
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the abiding “one China” contention between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC or Taiwan), focusing on their 2008–2016 cooperation and the ensuing political stalemate. It does so by investigating the PRC's and the ROC's respective legal frameworks and the positions of the major political actors, including the Chinese Communist Party and both Taiwan's Kuomintang and its Democratic Progressive Party. While the PRC maintains its “one-China principle,” and the ROC's legal system retains some “one China” elements, the idea of “one China” has been in flux in Taiwan. The traditional conceptualization of “one China” has been increasingly challenged in Taiwan's democratic era by the rise of a countervailing Taiwanese national identity and opposition to the PRC's insistent agenda to absorb the island. These dynamics are rapidly minimizing the appeal and political utility of any “one China” notions in China–Taiwan relations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|