No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Democratic (In)Equalities: Immigration in Twentieth-Century Western Europe
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 December 2012
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Review Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012
References
1 Brubaker, Rogers, ‘The Return of Assimilation? Changing Perspectives on Immigration and Its Sequels in France, Germany, and the United States’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24, 4 (2001), 531–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kazal, Russell A., ‘Revising Assimilation: The Rise, Fall, and Reappraisal of a Concept in American Ethnic History’, American Historical Review, 100, 2 (1995), 437–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 I am very simplistically rendering here Pierre Rosanvallon's dazzling genealogy of the democratic drive for social unity in French political thought. See Rosanvallon, Pierre, Democracy Past and Future, ed. Moyn, Samuel (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006), 79–116Google Scholar and 135–8. While Moyn translated most of the chapters, he did not do all of them, so no translator is listed on the copyright page.
3 Scott, Joan W., Only Paradoxes to Offer: French Feminists and the Rights of Man (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996)Google Scholar.
4 Conklin, Alice, A Mission to Civilise: The Republican Idea of Empire in France and West Africa, 1895–1930 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar.
5 Shepard, Todd, The Invention of Decolonization: The Algerian War and the Remaking of Modern France (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2006)Google Scholar.
6 Pitts, Jennifer, A Turn to Empire: The Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005), 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 Tocqueville, Alexis de, ‘Essay on Algeria’, in Pitts, Jennifer, ed. and trans., Writings on Empire and Slavery (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001), 83Google Scholar.
8 Foucault, Michel, ‘Governmentality’, in Burchell, Graham, Gordon, Colin and Miller, Peter, eds, The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 87–104Google Scholar; Foucault, Michel, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978, ed. Senellart, Michel, trans. Burchell, Graham (New York: Picador, 2007)Google Scholar.
9 Regarding refugees, Lewis at once reinforces and revises Hannah Arendt's argument that the dilemma of refugees was ‘not that they are not equal before the law but that no law exists for them’. Lewis shows that the status of refugees varied much more greatly than Arendt acknowledged. Their claims to rights depended not just on their legal status but also on their employment, where they lived, the dynamics of local and national politics, and the state of international relations.
10 On the post-1945 genealogy of supranational rights (human rights), see Moyn, Samuel, The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.
11 Peabody, Sue and Stovall, Tyler, eds, The Color of Liberty: Histories of Race in France (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hesse, Barnor, ‘Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: The Postracial Horizon’, South Atlantic Quarterly, 110, 1 (2011), 155–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12 While attention to race in modern French history has increased in recent years, the same can only partially be said for historical research on race/racialisation in West, East, and reunited Germany. Rita Chin, Heide Fehrenbach and Uta G. Poiger are the leading historians of this still small area of inquiry.
13 Brubaker, Rogers, Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992)Google Scholar.
14 Statistics from the Statistisches Bundesamt's ‘Bevölkerung auf einen Blick’, available at www.destatis.de.
15 While ascertaining the ideological and hierarchical constructs of words such as Gastarbeiter (guest worker) and Ausländer (foreigner), Chin decided to avoid generally using the word race in this book (15–17). In her more recent work, however, she has directly employed the concepts of race/racialisation. See Rita Chin, ‘From Rasse to Race: On the Problem of Difference in the Federal Republic of Germany’, The Occasional Papers of the School of Social Science, Institute for Advanced Study, Paper no. 42, 2010; Chin, Ritaet al., After the Racial State: Difference and Democracy in Germany and Europe (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
16 Here I am referring to Chin's most recent work in particular. Chin, ‘From Rasse to Race’; Chin, After the Racial State, 1–29, 102–36, and 80–101. Chin co-wrote the first and last sets of these pages with Heide Fehrenbach.
17 ‘Mit einem NPD-Verbot ist es nicht getan: Zafer Şenocak im Gespräch mit Friedbert Meurer’, Deutschlandfunk, available at http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/interview_dlf/1606427/ (last visited 11 December 2011). Translation mine.
18 Fehrenbach, Heide, Race after Hitler: Black Occupation Children in Postwar Germany and America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005)Google Scholar.
19 Brown, Wendy, Regulating Aversion: Tolerance in the Age of Identity and Empire (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006)Google Scholar.
20 On the myth, see Honig, Bonnie, Democracy and the Foreigner (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001), 73–98Google Scholar.
21 David Art has uncovered how memory helps marginalise German radical right parties in his The Politics of the Nazi Past in Germany and Austria (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006).
22 Die Mitte in der Krise: Rechtsextreme Einstellungen in Deutschland 2010 (Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2010).
23 Broadly speaking, the Encyclopedia emphasises two changes. The first change concerns the migration regime – the rules and regulations – that have shaped human mobility in Europe since the seventeenth century. The regulations governing migration diverged widely across seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Europe. They converged over the course of the nineteenth century in laissez-faire regimes that generally allowed people to move freely across borders. A much more restrictive migration system emerged in the wake of World War I, as new nation states played active roles in controlling immigration. This restrictive nation state regime continues to this day, despite the growth of supranational organisations and agreements. The second change relates to how migrants are marked as different. In early modern Europe, a migrant's religion and social status largely determined his or her position in a new community. Nationality did not begin to matter significantly until the late nineteenth century, but it became determinative after the First World War when nation states started to distinguish sharply between national citizens and foreigners.
24 Such a practice and tension in liberalism has existed at least since the 1830s with the growth of ‘liberal imperialism’. See Pitts, A Turn to Empire.
25 ‘PM's Speech at Munich Security Conference’, 5 Feb. 2011, www.number10.gov.uk. (last visited 23 July 2012).
26 Derrida, Jacques, Of Hospitality, trans. Bowlby, Rachel (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2000).Google Scholar