The ever-expanding demand for higher education poses a special challenge for small states. Historically many of their citizens have studied at traditional universities overseas but the increasing foreign exchange costs to individuals and governments precludes sending people abroad as a core strategy for achieving mass higher education. Small states now want to offer more postsecondary education on their territories, not just to save money but also to reduce brain drain and to enhance the cultural, economic, and social benefits associated with local higher education.// However, countries with populations of less than a quarter of a million people do not have the critical mass to create national institutions in the image of those traditional universities at which their elites studied overseas. The Commonwealth of Learning is helping small states to invent new types of postsecondary institutions that achieve the goal of providing local education at reasonable cost. This means combining several approaches: expanding local conventional provision; structuring partnerships with overseas institutions; expanding the use of distance learning, both synchronous and asynchronous; and adapting global intellectual resources to local needs.// The paper explores an important new phenomenon that recasts the old debates about balancing nationalism and regionalism in a new light. This is the rapid deepening of a global pool of Open Educational Resources (OERs) of high quality. These allow institutions to offer authentically local curricula developed to world standards of quality. The Virtual University for Small States of the Commonwealth is a first step in exploiting this new trend.
Our personal data is everywhere and anywhere, moving across national borders in ways that defy normal expectations of how things and people travel from Point A to Point B. Yet, whereas data transits the globe without any intrinsic ties to territory, the governments that seek to access or regulate this data operate with territorial-based limits. This Article tackles the inherent tension between how governments and data operate, the jurisdictional conflicts that have emerged, and the power that has been delegated to the multinational corporations that manage our data across borders as a result. It does so through the lens of the highly contested and often conflicting approaches to the jurisdictional reach of law enforcement over data, the so-called right to be forgotten, and a range of other privacy regulations-engaging in an in-depth analysis as to how these issues are playing out across both Europe and the United States. In so doing, the Article highlights the flaws with the straightforward application of old jurisdictional rules onto the new medium of data-taking on recent scholarship on this issue. And it shines a spotlight on the unilateral rulemaking by powerful states and the powerful multinational companies that manage our data, which in turn puts private, multinational companies increasingly in control of whose rules govern and thus the substance of both privacy and speech rights on a global, or near-global, basis
In this article I discuss the themes of movement and restriction inherent in digital technologies in two very different artistic projects, both of which offer aesthetic material for debating the politics of data. I approach this discussion through the term gravity as used by philosopher Levi R. Bryant (The Gravity of Things; Onto-Cartography). Through an analogy to Albert Einstein's theory of relativity, Bryant suggests the term gravity to denote how both semiotic and material entities influence the becoming and movement of subjects and collectives in time and space (Bryant, The Gravity of Things 10). I use this as a point of departure to investigate the shared space between physical and virtual borders, and the streams of data that are formed by, and also form, the space they traverse. The term gravity is used to elucidate the contours of the digital space that determines the paths between sender and receiver, as well as draws and erases borders, restricts and enables movement.
The latest expansion of the EU towards the East has again modified its borders, showing once again the intangibility and flexibility of the latter. The very definition of border acquires different meanings depending on which theme is being discussed: an impenetrable barrier against migratory flows and the introduction of goods, transforming itself into a strainer for the exporting of national products. The new Internal Affairs Commissioner for the EU, Rocco Buttiglione, affirms on the one hand that migratory flows cannot be blocked manu militari, although he also believes that Europe decides who can enter and who cannot. Even within Europe, and despite the Schengen Agreements, borders are taking shape in concrete situations, reminding us that their disappearance is not definitive. We should differentiate between natural borders and those erected by man; in reference to the latter we will focus on walls, such as the one no longer standing in Berlin or that illegally erected by Israel in the Occupied Territories, scoffing at the international bodies dedicated to the defense of human rights and freedoms. In reference to natural borders, in direct opposition to those made by man, and due to the dramatic events that are taking place, we will concentrate on the oceans, true black holes in which the dreams of immigrants come to a tragic end. The absence of man-made elements can be more powerful than the presence of the very same barriers. The interesting thing about the Berlin Wall, having certain similarities to the Great Wall of China, is its slow (but deliberate)transformation from Cold War symbol to souvenir and finally its disappearance altogether in favour of urbanistic exploitation. The best analysis of this condition, as R. Koolhaas states (encloses free space, leaving outside the enclosed city), resides in its mutable situation, sometimes improvised evolution, and others detailed planning. It seems unfathomable that after the disappearance of one wall someone could construct another, especially under ...
Whoever said that the more thresholds we draw, the more marginal spaces we create, was certainly right. The indefinite character of liminality seems to infallibly invite radical solutions: the margin is the locus of the aporia: a non-encounter with a non-language in a non-space. It is there that the Spanish conquistadors located the native peoples of the Americas, construing them as "out of place" in the place in which they had dwelled since the times immemorial; it is there that the thinkers of the Age of Reason would relegate phenomena defying rationalist argumentation or empirical proof, yet undeniably felt as present; it is finally there that individuals driven by empathy end up today amidst the ruthless political tug-of-war between 21st century nationalisms and progressive advocacy of freedom and equality. The mirage of greatness, poisoning the minds of many, calls into existence discourses of degradation and deprivation; the self-proclaimed "righteous" need a scapegoat to purge their own sins; the necessary condition of "being great" is the legitimization of the fallacy of someone else's insignificance. with alt-facts ousting hard facts from the public space, with Orwellian media shamelessly creating realities based on the binarity of familiarity and enmity, with all visible attempts to silence the academic humanities, arts and letters by means of massive cuts in funding, the marginalization of those who find the "he who is not with us is against us" philosophy abhorrent gains significant momentum. But it is not in the margins that the monsters awaken: it is in the very heart of the well-defined center that fear rules unchecked while coercion, wearing white gloves, and walking hand in hand with blatant lies that boost fearful egos, facilitates turning a blind eye to cynical oppression, rendering the alleged winners actual victims of their own would-be "greatness." More thresholds, more limits, all designed to keep the Others out, but all trapping those drawing the demarcation lines within, are being called into existence with increasing speed and intensity; yet the tighter the grip of the stultifying discourse is, the larger the space of the margin, the more obvious the aporias.
For centuries the political geography of Europe has been based around borders of its nation states. The ability of the nation state to control its territory has been essential to the practices of war and diplomacy, the legitimacy of governments, immigration policies and trade. But processes of globalization and EU integration have transformed the borders of the European nation state. While globalization theorists tend to posit an opening up of borders to global flows of capital, information and people, the changed nature of the border is itself often left unexamined and is assumed to have simply disappeared. But scholars and activists are now arguing that, rather than fading away, borders are proliferating in the globalized world and their functions spreading into many different areas of society. This article examines the transformation of the 'classical' border of the nation-state into its recent forms, using the work of theorists such as Balibar, Mezzadra, Rigo and Walters. It then examines how these theories have been applied in recent literature, and in particular Chris Rumford's analysis of the European Neighbourhood policy and his argument that this represents a 'cosmopolitanisation' of European borders.
non-peer-reviewed ; Against the backdrop of the humanitarian tragedy unfolding in the waters of the Mediterranean and refugee camps around the world, psychologists and other social scientists must ask themselves whether their discipline can offer any answers. For example, why do politicians and citizens in at least some Western countries find it difficult to welcome those fleeing warfare or persecution? What kinds of problems are encountered by refugees once they have been given permission to settle temporarily or permanently in a new culture? How are these issues represented in the media and everyday discourse? We as psychologists have not always been effective in explaining how our research is relevant to this issue, yet these are all phenomena that clearly have a psychological component. Here, we attempt to showcase some of the ways that psychology can help us to understand the refugee crisis ; PUBLISHED ; non-peer-reviewed
Migrating Borders and Moving Times analyses migrant border crossings in relation to their everyday experiences of time, and connects these to wider social and political structures. Sometimes border crossing takes no more than a moment; sometimes hours; some crossers find themselves in the limbo of detention; for others, the crossing lasts a lifetime to be interrupted only by death. Borders not only define separate spaces, but different temporalities. This book provides both a single interpretative frame and a novel approach to border crossing: an analysis of the reconfiguration of memory, personal and group time that follows the migrants' renegotiation of cross-border space and recalibrations of temporality.Using original field data from Israel and northern and south-eastern Europe, the contributors argue that new insights are generated by approaching border crossing as a process with diverse temporalities whose relationship to space has always to be empirically determined.
This article explores how art can help audiences to think and feel about migration differently, by focusing on two political art projects: Tanja Ostojić's Misplaced women? (2009-present) and Bern O'Donoghue's Dead Reckoning (2015- present). These projects are based on experiences of crossing hostile borders. Both artists' work explores personal, social and political aspects of displacement.
International audience ; Critics have dismissed the notion of open borders as utopian. In this article I argue that open borders are not a utopia. My concern, however, is not whether open borders are practical or politically feasible. Rather, my point is that the notion of open borders is merely a critique and a negation of the contemporary condition of closed borders. It does not articulate concrete alternatives, which would be a characteristic of utopia. Furthermore, drawing on the 'Frankfurt School' of critical theory, I suggest that concrete utopias that incorporate the notion of open borders must be rejected. Instead, the path towards an open-border world is a dialectical one in which the imagination of the future cannot be fixed.
International audience ; In this chapter, we will be looking at the conditions for the emergence of critical maps and mapping performances which go beyond the state-centric perspective of conventional border maps, and which allow us to analyze critically the cartographic practices of geo-surveillance, particularly in the context of migration. Our purpose is to envision a critical border cartography based on the study and visualization of borders from the perspective of those who try to cross them and who are excluded from the right of migration. By choosing to focus in particular on individual experiences of migrants, the aim is to contribute to the decentralization of state meta-narratives on border politics.
International audience ; In this chapter, we will be looking at the conditions for the emergence of critical maps and mapping performances which go beyond the state-centric perspective of conventional border maps, and which allow us to analyze critically the cartographic practices of geo-surveillance, particularly in the context of migration. Our purpose is to envision a critical border cartography based on the study and visualization of borders from the perspective of those who try to cross them and who are excluded from the right of migration. By choosing to focus in particular on individual experiences of migrants, the aim is to contribute to the decentralization of state meta-narratives on border politics.
The construction of a political community is often explained by a process founded on the emergence of feelings of solidarity between individuals. Such solidarity is the result of a common history, of a culture, of a language or even of a political project or of values shared by all components of the social body. It is often the result of deepening relationships between people and of the discovery of the Other and of its status as an alter ego. Collective identity, where it exists, is above all a question of affection, even friendship, between fellow citizens. At the European level, the transition of multiple demoi to a single European demos could also be seen as a double process. Firstly, it would be a vertical process of attachment to the European project, to its values and symbols. Secondly, it would be a horizontal process in which sentiments of friendship between European citizens are strengthened. The narrative that Europe has chosen to promote in recounting its own history is a narrative of friendship between peoples and of bridges successfully crossed. It is a narrative of reconciliation, solidarity and recognition of the other and of differences. However, political history as well as the history of political ideas teaches us that the formation of a unified social body is not always founded on positive sentiments and love between compatriots, and even that that is quite rare. The body politic is also the product of historical turmoil, wars and armed combats of all kinds. It is built on hostilities, even hatreds, as much as upon friendship. It is a defence mechanism leading men to join together and unite, not necessarily because they have any mutual regard but because they are attempting to jointly protect what is dear to them. Indeed, since Thomas Hobbes and theories of the Social Contract, a number of writers have underlined the crucial role played by insecurity and fear in the emergence of feelings of belonging . This reasoning, often used to explain the formation of national identities and the structuring of modern States, appears to us to be equally useful when applied to the European Union. The progressive application of Community projects for internal security and integrated management of external borders provides a new context for such questions. On the basis of this suggestion, we analyse in the following pages the impact of Community policies directed against illegal immigration on the emergence of a "community of Europeans ». In fact, it seems to us that in posing the question of controlling the Union's external borders, illegal immigration also poses the question of symbolic and mental borders defining the conditions for belonging to a particular political order. It provides an identification principle for defining the contours of the body politic. In the pages that follow, we explore the hypothesis that the European integrated management project for the Union's external borders cannot be entirely reduced to a policy for managing migratory flows, but that it must also be seen as a politically constructed discourse on the dangers weighing on Europe. This policy encourages a distinction between «them» and «us» which contributes to the process of forging a European political community on the basis of an emotion, namely anxiety concerning, or even fear of, the Other. In a situation in which a culturally or politically homogeneous whole has not been created, Europeans thus find themselves united and sharing a sense of solidarity as a consequence of a shared feeling of collective insecurity.
The construction of a political community is often explained by a process founded on the emergence of feelings of solidarity between individuals. Such solidarity is the result of a common history, of a culture, of a language or even of a political project or of values shared by all components of the social body. It is often the result of deepening relationships between people and of the discovery of the Other and of its status as an alter ego. Collective identity, where it exists, is above all a question of affection, even friendship, between fellow citizens. At the European level, the transition of multiple demoi to a single European demos could also be seen as a double process. Firstly, it would be a vertical process of attachment to the European project, to its values and symbols. Secondly, it would be a horizontal process in which sentiments of friendship between European citizens are strengthened. The narrative that Europe has chosen to promote in recounting its own history is a narrative of friendship between peoples and of bridges successfully crossed. It is a narrative of reconciliation, solidarity and recognition of the other and of differences. However, political history as well as the history of political ideas teaches us that the formation of a unified social body is not always founded on positive sentiments and love between compatriots, and even that that is quite rare. The body politic is also the product of historical turmoil, wars and armed combats of all kinds. It is built on hostilities, even hatreds, as much as upon friendship. It is a defence mechanism leading men to join together and unite, not necessarily because they have any mutual regard but because they are attempting to jointly protect what is dear to them. Indeed, since Thomas Hobbes and theories of the Social Contract, a number of writers have underlined the crucial role played by insecurity and fear in the emergence of feelings of belonging . This reasoning, often used to explain the formation of national identities and the structuring of modern States, appears to us to be equally useful when applied to the European Union. The progressive application of Community projects for internal security and integrated management of external borders provides a new context for such questions. On the basis of this suggestion, we analyse in the following pages the impact of Community policies directed against illegal immigration on the emergence of a "community of Europeans ». In fact, it seems to us that in posing the question of controlling the Union's external borders, illegal immigration also poses the question of symbolic and mental borders defining the conditions for belonging to a particular political order. It provides an identification principle for defining the contours of the body politic. In the pages that follow, we explore the hypothesis that the European integrated management project for the Union's external borders cannot be entirely reduced to a policy for managing migratory flows, but that it must also be seen as a politically constructed discourse on the dangers weighing on Europe. This policy encourages a distinction between «them» and «us» which contributes to the process of forging a European political community on the basis of an emotion, namely anxiety concerning, or even fear of, the Other. In a situation in which a culturally or politically homogeneous whole has not been created, Europeans thus find themselves united and sharing a sense of solidarity as a consequence of a shared feeling of collective insecurity.
This study, commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee, appraises the revised legislative proposals ('package') on EU smart borders adopted by the European Commission on 6 April 2016. It provides a general assessment of the package, focusing in particular on costs, technical feasibility and overall proportionality, and a fundamental rights check of the initiative.