Samenvatting

Summary Critical Essay

0 keer verkocht

Vak
Geographies Of Crisis (GEOG1241)

Instelling
Durham University (DUT)

This essay focuses upon the research of A.Mountz and N.Hiemstra (2014), N.De Genova (2013) and M.Coleman (2007), in assessing the scope and quality of their findings, in revealing contemporary issues and patterns of undocumented migration in its new geographical expressions.

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 2 van de 5 pagina's

Bekijk voorbeeld

Geupload op 14 september 2022
Aantal pagina's 5
Geschreven in 2019/2020
Type Samenvatting

migration
critical
mountz
hiemstra
de genova
coleman
contemporary
critical geography
discourse
chaos
crisis
agamben
neoliberal
pacific solution
mv tampa

Instelling
Durham University (DUT)
Studie Onbekend
Vak
Geographies Of Crisis (GEOG1241)

€10,36

In winkelwagen

Op verlanglijstje

100% tevredenheidsgarantie
Direct beschikbaar na je betaling
Lees online óf als PDF
Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten

The subject of migration has become increasingly researched and scrutinised in
contemporary times due to its multi- faceted and highly complex nature. The politics of
migration, in that it varies spatiotemporally renders no two cases the same, with the
destination, journey, and subject having the ultimate importance in dictating this. Arguably
the most research in this field has been into the form of undocumented migration,
particularly post 9-11, perhaps due to the mass media presentations and sense of ‘crisis’
which followed in the wake of this. This essay shall focus upon the research of A.Mountz
and N.Hiemstra (2014), N.De Genova (2013) and M.Coleman (2007), in assessing the
scope and quality of their findings, in revealing contemporary issues and patterns of
undocumented migration in its new geographical expressions.
Migration, due to the intrinsic introduction of different cultures which it poses to the already
established state of the destination country, is highly contested phenomenon.
Subsequently, many altering discourses are introduced as a reaction, most palpably by the
nation-state of arrival. Such reactions, particularly in times of conceived ‘crisis’, are key in
understanding the reception of migrants and their treatment, as is discussed in each of the
three academic sources. Mountz and Hiemstra’s work takes a highly analytical stance in
discussion of how “the language of chaos and crisis… (is) a discourse of states.” They
argue that each depiction of migration “conjures notions of humanitarian disaster and
images of disorder”; “state responses to migration and border enforcement practices are
steeped in rationales of crisis and chaos.” To formulate their argument this source calls
upon many other former researcher’s work, notably that of Agamben (1998). Agamben
identifies “zones of transition”, where state borders are crossed, as “thresholds”. However,
Mountz and Hiemstra identify that without a spatial and temporal understanding of where/
when these “thresholds” invoke “expressions of disorder and alarm”, the value that these
add to migration understanding is null. In this way therefore, their research can be seen as
key in furthering geographical understanding of migration. This argument is echoed in
Coleman’s source, in which he sites Agamben (2005)’s phrase of the “force of law”, in
which the emergency situation that migration often incurs is utilised by the state in order to
create a ‘juridicial void’, in which generally regarded essential legal practices are
disregarded in terms of the treatment of migrant bodies. As such, the “force of law”, he
argues, creates at these thresholds “an unmediated, extra-juridical space of punishment in
which there is limited recourse to the courts to contest the sovereign’s exercise of power.”
In such, both Coleman and Mountz and Hiemstra’s sources can be seen as highly
important in their analysis of discourses at the state border, and how this essentially, can

, be seen as an expansion of sovereign power, as they act to further build and expand the
work of Agamben.
However, it could be viewed that in assessing the proponents of neoliberal capitalist
economics in generating narratives of fear surrounding migration, Mountz & Hiemstra’s
work falls short. They solely identify the work of Klein (2007), in this field, in her hypothesis
of “disaster capitalism”, a concept which highlights “proponents of free-market
economics”… taking “advantage of disasters to make reforms that ultimately advance
neoliberal policies”. Such a view is perhaps far too narrow, as it only focuses upon non-
state actors, such as “companies that run detention facilities or sell surveillance
technologies” and in such will “profit from punitive immigration laws” (Heyman 2012). This
however, relies upon a most specific form of industry, which would necessitate a shift of
governance from the state to more local actors to be relevant (at least on a significant
scale) to this argument. Conversely, De Genova’s research could be identified as
revealing a wider scale neoliberal reaction to migration due to the production of illegality of
undocumented migrants rendering them cheap labour sources. “The unequal and invidious
politics of citizenship, which is institutionalised in immigration law, produces migrant
‘illegality’. The Border Spectacle, however, systematically renders that same ‘illegality’
effect to appear as a quasi-intrinsic deficiency of migrants themselves” (De Genova 2011).
In this sense, colonial nationalisms and the endemic racism embedded in these ideas,
suggests that due to rendering immigrants as highly vulnerable due to the nation-state
asserting the status of “illegality”, the scope for exploitation from labour markets, in
dismembering immigrants of any rights to demand better working wages, is significantly
increased. In this way, the profits of the labour markets are increased, as due to the threat
of ‘deportability’, in hiring undocumented workers, capitalist agendas are being
propagated. The source acts to highlight how the true work of the INS is in maintaining the
operation of the border as a “revolving door”, in that it sustains the border’s position as a
filter for an unequal value transfer (Kearney 1998). This is an analysis of a very different
phenomenon of capitalist desires, however, to Mountz and Hiemstra’s research and
arguably, one which holds a lot more ground due to its roots being embedded in nearly
every labour demanding business, as opposed to merely those concerned with profiting off
governance related capitals, as shown through references of a variety of geographical
locations, such as Belgium with the Flemish interest Swiss People’s Party and the National
Democratic Party and People’s Union in Germany.
Moreover, to return to the ‘revolving door’ concept, in a comparison of De Genova’s
analysis, with Mountz and Hiemstra, further weaknesses in their work can be derived.

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Direct to-the-point

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper hcane22. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €10,36. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 68175 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Begin nu gratis