Suchergebnisse

Free population movement promises greater human liberties and improved economic performance. Inevitably, however, there are critics. Most vocally, the conservative Right points towards the erosion of Western welfare systems, the large migratory movements that a No Borders policy may precipitate, and the lowering of living standards in rich countries to approximate those in poor countries. This paper argues that, although the claims of the Right are often exaggerated, these objections have served to paste over important differences between advocates of No Borders, producing some unlikely bedfellows in opposition to conservative arguments. In particular, an uncomfortable conflation between liberal and Left-wing ideology has emerged as a result of the specific discursive strategy of Right-wing commentators to obfuscate distinctions between these ideological stances. After outlining the arguments of the Right for context, this paper responds to this conflation by distancing a Left-wing No Borders position from a free-market liberal No Borders position. It does this by using Left-wing arguments to criticize liberal No Borders ideology, and concludes by suggesting some key features of a Left-wing No Borders position. ; La liberté de mouvement des populations promet un accroissement des libertés publiques et une amélioration des performances économiques. Inévitablement, des critiques se font entendre. L'un des plus bruyants, la droite conservatrice, craint l'érosion des mécanismes de protection sociale mis en place dans les sociétés occidentales, les grands mouvements migratoires qu'une politique No Border pourrait précipiter et le rabaissement du niveau de vie dans les pays nantis vers celui des pays pauvres. Bien que les affirmations de la droite soient souvent exagérées, le présent article soutient qu'en servant à masquer d'importantes différences entre les partisans No Border, ces objections ont suscité d' étranges oppositions aux arguments conservateurs. Un assemblage particulièrement inconfortable entre ...

We explore judges' approaches to asylum court appeals based on the issue of conversion from Islam to Christianity. Our court ethnography in Germany and Austria in 2018 and 2019 provides an insight into how such claims are discussed during appeals. At the time, they were increasingly common, especially concerning Iranians and Afghans involved in 'free churches' (e.g. Evangelical, Pentecostal or charismatic). We show how rumours, congregations' reputations and assumptions about baptism and what genuine conversions entail are discussed. These factors can not only influence appellants' cases, but reveal church–state tensions and some of the intractable challenges of refugee status determination.

Introducing the volume, the editors characterise the European asylum 'crisis' as a specific form of 'moral panic'. National policies display tensions between securitisation models emphasising control of refugees because of perceived risks they pose; and rights models focusing on asylum seekers as unique individuals. Approaches to asylum decision-making also reflect each country's legal culture and political circumstances, generating anomalies both in the procedures adopted and in national rates of refugee recognition, while actual practice emerges from the multifaceted interaction of numerous legal and quasi-legal social fields. An ethnographic approach is best suited to disentangle processes of such complexity. Finally, the introduction explains the organisation of the book into sections focusing on 'actors', 'communication', and 'decision-making', and summarises how each chapter contributes to those themes.

Behavioural economists argue that humans are predictably irrational in various ways, as a result of which there appears to be a role for public policy in improving their decision making. We of er a sympathetic critique of this so-called 'libertarian paternalist' approach. As well as reviewing existing critiques, we present two new arguments. First, we question whether policies which are not beneficial to the individuals they target can be justified within a libertarian paternalist framework, even if they contribute to the social good. Second, we highlight the potentially adverse consequences of poorly targeted libertarian paternalist interventions. In the penultimate section we bring together the existing critiques and the new arguments to of er seven best-practice imperatives for the careful application of these powerful, but easily misused, tools of government. We conclude with a brief reflection on what freedom might mean in the context of libertarian paternalist governance.

Cover Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- List of Figures and Tables -- Notes on Contributors -- 1 Introduction -- PART I: MOBILITY -- 2 On Mobilities and Migrations -- 3 Mobility versus Liberty? The Punitive Uses of Movement Within and Outside Carceral Environments -- 4 Mobility and Power in Detention: The Management of Internal Movement and Governmental Mobility in Romania -- 5 'You don't even know where you are': Chaotic Geographies of US Migrant Detention and Deportation -- 6 Up the River (from Home): Where Does the Prisoner 'Count' on Census Day? -- 7 Landscapes of Toxic Exclusion: Inmate Labour and Electronics Recycling in the United States -- 8 Liminal TransCarceral Space: Prison Transportation for Women in the Russian Federation -- PART II: SPACE AND AGENCY -- 9 On Carceral Space and Agency -- 10 Hungering for Freedom: Asylum Seekers' Hunger Strikes - Rethinking Resistance as Counter-Conduct -- 11 Getting Out and Getting In: Legal Geographies of US Immigration Detention -- 12 Penal Space and Privacy in French and Russian Prisons -- 13 Resisting 'Bare Life': Prisoners' Agency in the New Prison Culture Era in Colombia -- 14 Poetic Testimonies of Incarceration: Towards a Vision of Prison as Manifold Space -- 15 The Politics of Carceral Spectacle: Televising Prison Life -- 16 Dialogues across Carceral Space: Migration, Mobility, Space and Agency -- Index.