Rethinking the Bangladesh state

Lewis, David; Schendel, Willem van

doi:10.1177/0069966720911733

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…And while the Awami League government faces less political competition since 2008, growing dominance has meant a corresponding loss of procedural or electoral legitimacy, particularly since the 2014 election (Hassan and Nazneen 2017;Riaz 2019). Social service delivery is always important to the legitimacy of the Bangladeshi state, democratic or not (Lewis and van Schendel 2020;Hassan 2013). But it is likely to be more important when the government is perceived to lack democratic legitimacy.…”

Section: Theory and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Distributing Social Transfers

2022

The Politics of Distributing Social Transfers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chapter 2 develops the analytical framework employed in the six country cases in this volume, highlighting the importance of state capacity—captured by the concept of state infrastructural power—and political competition. In doing so, the discussion confronts important debates in the politics of development and political science that have relevance well beyond social protection. The first of these debates concerns the relative importance of historical legacies and contemporary political dynamics for explaining state performance and service delivery. The second debate concerns the relevant unit of analysis in political research. In contrast to the considerable degree of ‘methodological nationalism’ in much research in comparative politics and the politics of development, this study contributes to a growing literature that examines sub-national political processes.

show abstract

Section: Theory and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Distributing Social Transfers

2022

The Politics of Distributing Social Transfers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Expansive ethnographies include de Maaker, (2022); Marak, (2015Marak, ( [1985); Karlsson, (2011) ;Bal, (2007) ;Burling, (1997) and Nakane, (1967). 8 We use the term "state" throughout in a way that belies its complexity, as discussed in recent work on Bangladesh (Lewis and van Schendel, 2020;Wood et al, 2018). We do so because, as we demonstrate, in the case under discussion the state has acted with remarkable consistency over an extended timeframe, a fact which strengthens our conclusions (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Permutations of a lie: fortress conservation and the (re)making of subjects in the global carceral archipelago

Scanlan,

Ritchil

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is substantively based on an analysis of land documentation concerning the Indigenous communities of Madhupur Forest of Bangladesh, combined with fifty five interviews. We demonstrate that the Garos have suffered formal dispossession of their land rights, while retaining control of a substantial number of holdings, over a a timescale of forty years. This suggests that economic factors were not the main reason for the removal of their de jure rights as no-one has gained financially from this process. In order to explain why this was done, we turn to theories of the carceral state insofar as they bear on the racialisation of property and the making and remaking of subjects in a manner that is relational to dominant narratives and processes in the nation-building process.

show abstract

“…I draw on Tariq Jazeel’s (2019) ideas on post‐colonialism. For the purpose of the discussion, “Post‐colonialism” with a hyphen refers to a time period after the end of colonial rule, hence, post‐1947 India and post‐1971 Bangladesh (Jazeel 2019; Lewis and van Schendel 2020). “Postcolonialism”, without a hyphen, refers to the intellectual movement and bodies of scholarship that emerged to challenge and “conceptually transcend” colonial thoughts (Jazeel 2019:4–5).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sovereign Atonement: (Non)citizenship, Territory, and State‐Making in Post‐Colonial South Asia

Ferdoush

2020

Antipode

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The former border enclaves of Bangladesh and India, which were small pieces of one state entirely surrounded by the other, existed as extraterritorial spaces from 1947 until 2015. Since these spaces were subject to state violence but remained completely excluded from the protections provided by courts, police, and government, they have historically been understood as spaces of exception that contained bare lives. After the exchange of enclaves in 2015, the situation changed dramatically as the state assumed an active role in incorporating new lands and citizens. Such an active role resulted in unique privileges exclusively for the enclave residents understood here as sovereign atonement. Drawing on field research in Bangladesh, however, the paper argues that it would be misleading to capture sovereign atonement as an effort to correct the past violence of extraterritorial exclusion; instead it must be understood through the primacy of territory in state‐making in post‐colonial South Asia.

show abstract

Rethinking the Bangladesh state

Cited by 10 publications

References 21 publications

The Politics of Distributing Social Transfers

The Politics of Distributing Social Transfers

Permutations of a lie: fortress conservation and the (re)making of subjects in the global carceral archipelago

Sovereign Atonement: (Non)citizenship, Territory, and State‐Making in Post‐Colonial South Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About