International audience ; This article introduces to an issue that offers a discussion on the authoritarian exercise of power, not on authoritarianism defined as a political regime that seeks to restrict political pluralism. It therefore considers the authoritarian exercise of power in all political regimes, whether they be described as authoritarian or democratic. This authoritarian phenomenon is characterised by a plasticity of practices that range from "cultural hegemony" to the use of force, from the "insidious blandishments of the State" to coercion. The approach the collection takes is highly pragmatic and material, tackling power in its spatial embeddedness and seeking to contribute to the analysis of authoritarian practice by focusing on its spatialisation. This provides a way to re-examine the link between justice and authoritarianism and is an invitation to discuss the obvious presumption of injustice often associated with these political situations
International audience ; This article introduces to an issue that offers a discussion on the authoritarian exercise of power, not on authoritarianism defined as a political regime that seeks to restrict political pluralism. It therefore considers the authoritarian exercise of power in all political regimes, whether they be described as authoritarian or democratic. This authoritarian phenomenon is characterised by a plasticity of practices that range from "cultural hegemony" to the use of force, from the "insidious blandishments of the State" to coercion. The approach the collection takes is highly pragmatic and material, tackling power in its spatial embeddedness and seeking to contribute to the analysis of authoritarian practice by focusing on its spatialisation. This provides a way to re-examine the link between justice and authoritarianism and is an invitation to discuss the obvious presumption of injustice often associated with these political situations
International audience ; This article introduces to an issue that offers a discussion on the authoritarian exercise of power, not on authoritarianism defined as a political regime that seeks to restrict political pluralism. It therefore considers the authoritarian exercise of power in all political regimes, whether they be described as authoritarian or democratic. This authoritarian phenomenon is characterised by a plasticity of practices that range from "cultural hegemony" to the use of force, from the "insidious blandishments of the State" to coercion. The approach the collection takes is highly pragmatic and material, tackling power in its spatial embeddedness and seeking to contribute to the analysis of authoritarian practice by focusing on its spatialisation. This provides a way to re-examine the link between justice and authoritarianism and is an invitation to discuss the obvious presumption of injustice often associated with these political situations
International audience ; This article introduces to an issue that offers a discussion on the authoritarian exercise of power, not on authoritarianism defined as a political regime that seeks to restrict political pluralism. It therefore considers the authoritarian exercise of power in all political regimes, whether they be described as authoritarian or democratic. This authoritarian phenomenon is characterised by a plasticity of practices that range from "cultural hegemony" to the use of force, from the "insidious blandishments of the State" to coercion. The approach the collection takes is highly pragmatic and material, tackling power in its spatial embeddedness and seeking to contribute to the analysis of authoritarian practice by focusing on its spatialisation. This provides a way to re-examine the link between justice and authoritarianism and is an invitation to discuss the obvious presumption of injustice often associated with these political situations
International audience ; This article introduces to an issue that offers a discussion on the authoritarian exercise of power, not on authoritarianism defined as a political regime that seeks to restrict political pluralism. It therefore considers the authoritarian exercise of power in all political regimes, whether they be described as authoritarian or democratic. This authoritarian phenomenon is characterised by a plasticity of practices that range from "cultural hegemony" to the use of force, from the "insidious blandishments of the State" to coercion. The approach the collection takes is highly pragmatic and material, tackling power in its spatial embeddedness and seeking to contribute to the analysis of authoritarian practice by focusing on its spatialisation. This provides a way to re-examine the link between justice and authoritarianism and is an invitation to discuss the obvious presumption of injustice often associated with these political situations
International audience ; This article introduces to an issue that offers a discussion on the authoritarian exercise of power, not on authoritarianism defined as a political regime that seeks to restrict political pluralism. It therefore considers the authoritarian exercise of power in all political regimes, whether they be described as authoritarian or democratic. This authoritarian phenomenon is characterised by a plasticity of practices that range from "cultural hegemony" to the use of force, from the "insidious blandishments of the State" to coercion. The approach the collection takes is highly pragmatic and material, tackling power in its spatial embeddedness and seeking to contribute to the analysis of authoritarian practice by focusing on its spatialisation. This provides a way to re-examine the link between justice and authoritarianism and is an invitation to discuss the obvious presumption of injustice often associated with these political situations
International audience ; This article introduces to an issue that offers a discussion on the authoritarian exercise of power, not on authoritarianism defined as a political regime that seeks to restrict political pluralism. It therefore considers the authoritarian exercise of power in all political regimes, whether they be described as authoritarian or democratic. This authoritarian phenomenon is characterised by a plasticity of practices that range from "cultural hegemony" to the use of force, from the "insidious blandishments of the State" to coercion. The approach the collection takes is highly pragmatic and material, tackling power in its spatial embeddedness and seeking to contribute to the analysis of authoritarian practice by focusing on its spatialisation. This provides a way to re-examine the link between justice and authoritarianism and is an invitation to discuss the obvious presumption of injustice often associated with these political situations
This paper was accepted for publication in the journal International Journal of Migration and Border Studies and the definitive published version is available at https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMBS.2017.083218 ; Is it possible to make illegal migrants intelligible as a force creating social space? What is transit space? Many migration experts seem to ignore the transit space beyond managing geopolitical borders. Much academic literature analyses this space in terms of the migrant's (in)capacity to act. Drawing on this literature, I argue that transit space policies are on the one hand the condition of possibility for a particular kind of illegality of the transit space and the condition of possibility for ephemeral spaces of solidarity/creativity quite different from the places of citizenship (accorded or denied). Geopolitical transit space is intrinsically important to understanding how contradictory mobility practices are constructed. My speculation is informed by a postanarchist perspective and draws on selected ethnographic studies for illustration. Approaching transit space as contradictory constellation makes it political in that abstract logics imposed by the European discursive order interact with ephemeral practices producing violence and solidarity in such a way that what is licit and illicit is thrown open to radical questioning.
In the ideal city of Cerdà, all the controls are rational and beautiful, but with time passing by, urbanization and industrialization have increased the population. The neighborhood courtyard that originally belonged to each Manzana disappeared, buildings of various uses gradually fill up the center of manzana. The government has made efforts to restore part of the inner garden, but it is far from enough. People's outdoor activities are forced to gradually move away from their residences, onto the streets or further squares. The neighborhood space in Manzana is different from the larger social space. Similarly, the buildings inserted in each manzana are also different from ordinary buildings. The free social space that should be facing the neighbors has become a monotonous roof. Now, sharing these roofs can contribute to the social networking of the entire neighborhood.Follow Cerda's will to carry Utopia to the end.
Recent political, military and technological developments demonstrate that the consensus enshrined in the Outer Space Treaty (1967) and other international agreements is under threat. According to the author, agreement on preventive arms control in space could soon be reached, as long as all countries choose to cooperate.
introduction du dossier Histories of Space, Spaces of History dirigé par Matthew GRAVES et Gilles TEULIÉ ; International audience ; This issue of E-rea examines the temporalities of space and the spatialities of time in the area of colonial and postcolonial Commonwealth Studies viewed through the prism of the Geohumanities, with an emphasis on historiographies that transcend the national or underpass it at the infra-state scale of relations, while overflowing conventional timelines and adopting perspectives that lengthen focus and broaden analytical scope, connecting social and cultural trajectories across disciplinary boundaries. The authors draw upon the methodologies of colonial and postcolonial history, geohistory and geopolitics, memory studies, commemorative politics, geopoetics and literary mapping, media studies and the digital humanities.
introduction du dossier Histories of Space, Spaces of History dirigé par Matthew GRAVES et Gilles TEULIÉ ; International audience ; This issue of E-rea examines the temporalities of space and the spatialities of time in the area of colonial and postcolonial Commonwealth Studies viewed through the prism of the Geohumanities, with an emphasis on historiographies that transcend the national or underpass it at the infra-state scale of relations, while overflowing conventional timelines and adopting perspectives that lengthen focus and broaden analytical scope, connecting social and cultural trajectories across disciplinary boundaries. The authors draw upon the methodologies of colonial and postcolonial history, geohistory and geopolitics, memory studies, commemorative politics, geopoetics and literary mapping, media studies and the digital humanities.
Der Aufsatz behandelt die Weltraumforschung und deren rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen in Japan. Gegenwärtig gehört Japan zu den diesbezüglich aktivsten Nationen. Seit Beginn der Forschungstätigkeit im Jahre 1955 arbeitet eine Reihe von japanischen Institutionen an verschiedenen Projekten, und auch internationale Kooperationen sind vielfältig. Mit der Weltraumforschung verbinde Japan auch insbesondere wirtschaftliche und industrielle Interessen. Dabei sei es eines der Länder, das den Weltraumtourismus besonders fördern möchte. Derzeit werde versucht, staatliche und wirtschaftliche Projekte stärker in eine Kooperation einzubinden. Japan habe die wesentlichen multilateralen völkerrechtlichen Verträge über die Nutzung des Weltraums ratifiziert. Darüber hinaus gebe es ein Gesetz für die Errichtung und Aufgaben der National Space Development Agency (NASDA). Ein spezielles Gesetz, das private Weltraumforschung von japanischen Institutionen reguliert, habe Japan derzeit noch nicht. Es solle aber wie auch Deutschland darüber nachdenken, ein solches zu schaffen, da die Überwachung privater Aktivitäten nach dem Völkerrecht den Staaten überlassen sei, von denen sie ausgehen. Ferner existiere noch das Grundgesetz über Wissenschaft und Technologie, das die staatliche Beteiligung im Rahmen allgemeiner wissenschaftlicher und technischer Forschungsprojekte regele sowie verschiedene zwischenstaatliche Abkommen zur Kooperation bei der Weltraumforschung, einschließlich des Betriebes der International Space Station (ISS). (die Red.) ; Der Aufsatz behandelt die Weltraumforschung und deren rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen in Japan. Gegenwärtig gehört Japan zu den diesbezüglich aktivsten Nationen. Seit Beginn der Forschungstätigkeit im Jahre 1955 arbeitet eine Reihe von japanischen Institutionen an verschiedenen Projekten, und auch internationale Kooperationen sind vielfältig. Mit der Weltraumforschung verbinde Japan auch insbesondere wirtschaftliche und industrielle Interessen. Dabei sei es eines der Länder, das den Weltraumtourismus besonders fördern möchte. Derzeit werde versucht, staatliche und wirtschaftliche Projekte stärker in eine Kooperation einzubinden. Japan habe die wesentlichen multilateralen völkerrechtlichen Verträge über die Nutzung des Weltraums ratifiziert. Darüber hinaus gebe es ein Gesetz für die Errichtung und Aufgaben der National Space Development Agency (NASDA). Ein spezielles Gesetz, das private Weltraumforschung von japanischen Institutionen reguliert, habe Japan derzeit noch nicht. Es solle aber wie auch Deutschland darüber nachdenken, ein solches zu schaffen, da die Überwachung privater Aktivitäten nach dem Völkerrecht den Staaten überlassen sei, von denen sie ausgehen. Ferner existiere noch das Grundgesetz über Wissenschaft und Technologie, das die staatliche Beteiligung im Rahmen allgemeiner wissenschaftlicher und technischer Forschungsprojekte regele sowie verschiedene zwischenstaatliche Abkommen zur Kooperation bei der Weltraumforschung, einschließlich des Betriebes der International Space Station (ISS). (die Red.)
