| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
193143
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
There is an increasing call for addressing the Eurocentrism of research on the external dimension of European Union (EU) migration and border policies and practices. A growing body of work attempts to remedy the discipline’s Eurocentrism through postcolonial theory. This article argues that more needs to be done to unsettle the Eurocentrism of migration studies with regard to the question of non-EU political subjectivity. The article adopts an alternative conception of subjectivity, which looks at the “affective” dimension of international relations. Through a close engagement with postcolonial studies on the question of political subjectivity, the article underscores the significance of history and historical relationships in constituting an affective politics of borders and migration in the non-EU world. The argument is illustrated through an empirical focus on Turkey. Drawing on interviews with Turkish border officials, the article aims to contribute to the literature in two ways. First, it argues that affective attachments shape how Turkish actors perceive and attribute meaning to national borders and human mobility across the national territory. Second, and relatedly, Turkish actors’ identification with and positioning towards the EU’s migration control regime are products of affective attachments rooted in historical experiences and encounters with Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
152731
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the wake of the disclosures by Edward Snowden about NSA surveillance practices, a series of public hearings was held before the Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committee of the European Parliament in 2013–2014. These hearings offer a wealth of information concerning the details of Snowden’s claims, their implications for privacy rights, and the way in which the transatlantic political dialogue on these issues is unfolding. However, they have yet to receive academic attention. This article suggests that the LIBE Hearings were an important platform that rendered the contested Snowden files into public evidence of contemporary surveillance practices. Drawing on the concept of “material publics” proposed by Noortje Marres and others, we examine how the material setting of LIBE was crucial to the ways in which the Snowden files were made public in Europe. Valid evidence was produced, legal issues were identified, technological solutions were fostered, and responsibilities were enacted and denied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|