Politics and Connolly’s Ethics: Immigrant Narratives, Racism, and Identity’s Contingency

Apostolidis, Paul

doi:10.1353/tae.0.0016

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the contemporary United States, these instances of rupture and discontinuity, manifested in the 2006 pro‐immigration protests and vociferous debates over immigration, constitute a moment of possibility. Specifically, this issue in the United States ‘poses a strategic opportunity for activating political‐cultural projects involving immigrants that would realize this unusual potential for cultivating experiences of identity's contingency’ (Apostolidis, 2008). This need not mean a complete overhaul of contemporary American political institutions or the existing model of democratic claims making, as I highlight above.…”

Section: Agonistic Democratic Theory and American Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Empowerment of individuals who reside within the polity but lack formal political membership remains first and foremost about ‘diversifying the forums where immigrants' stories can be told and heard, and where the infrasensible energies of these narratives can be released’ (Apostolidis, 2008). This requires the construction of multiple spaces for non-citizen testimonial and narrative, in addition to their formalization through social movements, global governance and international law.…”

Section: Critiquing the Disaggregation Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Radically Rethinking Citizenship: Disaggregation, Agonistic Pluralism and the Politics of Immigration in the United States

Glover

2010

Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The status of citizenship and the rights extended to non‐citizens are among the most contentious and hotly debated political issues in numerous Western polities. Some scholars, most notably Seyla Benhabib, have deemed the contemporary changes a ‘disaggregation of rights claims’, in which the interplay between ideals of particularism and universalism lead to an ‘unbundling’ of civil, political and social rights with formal national membership. Yet this theoretical framing harbors deficiencies that complicate our understanding of the contemporary politics of immigration. In this article, I critically examine this account to show both its theoretical shortcomings and the incomplete explanations to which these deficiencies lead. In particular, I focus on the case of the 2006 protests in response to restrictionist immigration reform in the United States. Furthermore, I suggest ways in which an agonistic pluralist approach to citizenship and immigration issues provides us with a richer account of the political negotiations under way, as well as a means to re‐conceptualize democratic voice and, at least in part, to begin democratically legitimating borders and access to political membership.

show abstract

Section: Agonistic Democratic Theory and American Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Critiquing the Disaggregation Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%