Identity formation as a result of transnational political contestation: a performance as a result of a rehearsal

Some time back, I read in an ethnography (In & Out of Morocco, McMurray, 2001, page 128) that „subjects involved in border running can both succeed at what they are doing while simultaneously confirming the legitimacy of the state’s monopoly, .. the dominated often become complicitous in legitimising state power.“   Our focus in this blog is, of course, elsewhere than upon smugglers, which are the subjects being inferred primarily by the preceding position, however I begin there to ready your mind with what mine has been readied with.  Now, return to the Asylum seekers, and consider how the notion of I and you is performed via the behaviour that is bordering.  Permit me, one more anecdote, my Uncle lives in a little neighbourhood between the city of Ratzeburg and the Hamlet of Einhaus, half of which is a suburb of Einhaus and half of which is of Ratzeburg and in this harmless arena a comical game of charades is evident, not only in the way my Uncle describes his lived environment, but also in the signage which signifies which streets of the suburb are Ratzeburg streets and which are Einhaus streets.  This is a ridiculous example and there are no real consequences of this suburban microcosm, but the borders which do in fact have great consequences are the same behaviour which the people in my uncle’s neighbourhood so comically rehears.  Didier Fassin turns our attention to life-size performance, the arrest of human mobility across the lines some polity (state, not culture) has drawn on their map; the creation of illegal zones and the spectres that they reject.   Fassin frames their discussion of what I would call a masquerade, pure political trickery, in the explication of „Governmentality“, for the line drawers are not involved in the market or the culture, but the state.  The state, the locus of governmentality, is the emperor’s costume, something made up by and for those who can’t contend with humanity, so it doesn’t fit the scope of humanity, only an imagined section of it.  So the action of performing ownership and stateship in governmentality (just as intuitive as it sounds) serves mainly to hobble the helpless and lift up the loudest.  This governmental performance is frictive, it builds an artifice ostensibly to mimic boundaries, but in fact creating boundaries as a consequence of living a perpetual masquerade, borders which draw vitality out of the heart and toward the thickening of the crust, kicking out and permitting in, delaying and accelerating, seeking only to dominate, to control, and, ultimately, to be affirmed, to be legitimised, to be actuated.

main reference:  Fassin, Didier. Policing borders, producing boundaries. The Governmentality of Immigration in Dark Times.  Annual Review of Anthropology. 2011

We, Too, are "Beasts"

I recently was on a long car trip and with many hours to pass, I turned to Netflix for an escape.  I tend to watch documentaries so based upon my viewing habits, Netflix recommended the film, "Beasts of No Nation".  The description caught my attention and so I settled in for the movie.

For those unfamiliar with the movie, it was released in 2015 and was based on the 2005 novel of the same name written by author, Uzodinma Iweala.  The film is set in an unspecified African country that is facing a civil war.  The story follows a young boy of about twelve years old named, Agu, who ends up becoming a child soldier in the resistance army.  Agu's transformation from happy-go-lucky boy to hardened killer is a chilling one.

At the beginning of the film, Agu is with his family living safely in a village which is removed from the violence that is plaguing his worn torn country.  Viewers see Agu interact with his mother, father, older brother and younger sibling.  Shortly in the film, the fighting encroaches upon his village and the family must abandon their home for safety.  In a chaotic scene, Agu's father bargains with men who are using their vehicles to transport the internally displaced people.  He is able to secure a ride for the mother and baby but the men must stay behind.  Within days, military forces advance and capture Agu, his brother and father.  The men of the village are lined up for execution.  Agu sees his father and brother murdered but he is able to flee to the jungle.  Frightened, traumatized and alone, he wanders in the jungle for days without food, water or shelter.

Finally, he comes across a motley crew of soldiers in the jungle who take him to their leader, the commandant of the resistance.  The commandant begins the process of recruiting Agu through a series of psychological brainwashing tactics.  The commandant preys upon the fact that Agu's father was murdered and repeatedly encourages Agu to avenge his father's death by picking up arms to fight  with the resistance.  Throughout his training, Agu is subjected to and forced to engage in horrific activities that no child should ever been subjected to.  The commandant calls for Agu to come to his quarters where he proceeds to sexually assault Agu.  The other child soldiers give Agu "brown brown", a cocaine like drug mixed with gun powder.  The time soon comes where Agu must prove he is a true solider and is asked to make his first kill when the resistance enters a village and rounds up innocence people.  Agu is goaded into bludgeoning someone to death and in doing so, earns the approval of the commandant.  As the film goes on, we see death, destruction, and unspeakable violence (rape of village women, executions of children, etc) in which Agu and the other child soldiers are exposed to.  Eventually, after the commandant defects because he is not promoted, the child soldiers decide they no longer want to follow his lead.  They are rescued by United Nation forces and placed in the safe sanctuary of an orphanage of sorts fun by a religious organization.

In this safe place, the children are allowed to try to return to some semblance of a normal life.  They go to class, play tag and swim in the ocean and yet, they are definitely shell shocked and traumatized.  The story ends when Agu meets with a counselor at the orphanage and is asked to open up and talk about his experiences.  He simply states that he has done and seen some horrible things of which he does not want to talk about because she will think he is a "beast".  Instead he states that he was a good boy once who loved his family and that he was also loved by his family.

This film had an extremely profound affect on me.  I knew that child soldiers exist and had even read some autobiographical novels on the subject (mainly on the "lost boys" of the Sudan) but I think this fictional version of a very real phenomenon brought to life the true atrocities that are occurring all over the world for so many young people . I think of my own twelve year old stepson who I worry about because he plays video games I deem "too violent" and I compare this to the reality many African boys witness in their daily life.  They are robbed of their innocence.  They are orphaned.  They are forced to fend for themselves for their basic survival.  Why is the world not outraged?  Where is our sense of compassion?  Why do we look the other way when we know children are being forced into acts that no one should ever do?  How can we allow history to repeat itself over and over agin as we see ethnic cleansing practiced in various parts of the world?  Why doesn't the world community address the issues of war, violence and destruction?   Why do we continue to not address the root causes of displacement?  We could be doing more.  I do not have the answers but I do know that turning a blind eye to such horrendous situations, fortifying our own borders to prevent those in need of our assistance from seeking safety here, and being callous and immune to others' suffering is not the answer.  We are better than this.

References
Kaufman, A. et al (Producer), & Fukunaga, C. (Director). (2015). Beasts of No Nation [Motion Picture]. United States: Red Crown Productions, Primary Productions, Parliament of Owls.

• 
  

Connection + Reflection = Understanding (and Pessimism)

Normally I would write a post about some up-to-date events happening that involve the class, but after the asylum role play I wanted to talk about something stemming from that experience. Last semester I took Dr. Pendry’s Migration and Transnationalism course, and I had to interview an immigrant. While the immigrant status is a very loosely defined word as far as general conversation goes, throughout this class and Dr. Pendry’s we now know the distinction. I interviewed a fellow student whom I have known since our freshman year, she and her brother are here from Kenya. When I interviewed her about her migration experiences and the citizenship application process, she had a lot to tell me, most of which I had never known about her or even thought about in the general context of migration and transnationalism. Sylvia Iradukunda and her brother were actually born in Rwanda, but because of the political and ethnic turmoil there, they moved to Kenya when they were still very young. It wasn’t until they were nearing high school age that they made the move all the way to the United States. At this point, they were granted entry to the United States under their parents’ statuses as economic migrants, which Sylvia later told me she disagreed with this label but her parents accepted it thinking it was the only way they would be able to stay.

Sylvia and Julius were enrolled into high school here in the US and upon graduation they were excited to begin their college careers. Unfortunately, they were temporarily barred from applying to colleges here because they did not have citizenship or individual visas once they turned eighteen years old. Sylvia then told me the incredibly difficult process of applying for a student visa, and it was explained to her that her graduating here actually made things more difficult to be granted a visa. While I do not understand why – neither does she for that matter – she and Julius were both finally given visas and shortly thereafter applied, got accepted into, and enrolled at the University of Tennessee. The overall process took nearly two years. At the time of the interview, Sylvia was in the process of applying for US citizenship. Based on what I had learned in Dr. Pendry’s class thus far, I honestly did not think it would be that difficult for her to get citizenship. She arrived in the United States in her early teens, her parents were upstanding members of their community, she and her brother graduated from a good school in Memphis, no “red flags” on her record – I thought she would be in the clear. As we later discussed, this was not the case. She is now on her second round of petitioning for a citizenship status, and thus far her application is still pending and has received no word aside from the usual “we have received your application and will keep in touch”.

I realize that immigration is not the focus of this class, but after going through the asylum exercise, it made me think back to that experience and really put into perspective a few things. The process for applying for citizenship only differs from the application for asylum in a few key areas, the most prominent being the reasons why and conditions under which someone has arrived in the United States or another country. Even so, from just Sylvia’s account of the never-ending circles she’s experienced for citizenship, I realized just how many road blocks can, and often are, in the way of becoming an “official” American. After playing as an officer for the asylum exercise, I can only imagine just how hard it is to get approved for asylum. The statistics we discussed in the beginning of the class finally make a little more sense to me, but unfortunately that just makes me more upset for refugees rather than more understanding of our government and its processes and decisions. For a nation that is supposed to be so understanding, open, and a safe haven for others, we have a long way to go if we want to actually live up to that name and reputation.

First Major Shipwreck of the Year

Back in January, on the 9^th to be exact, an Italian coast guard rescued refugees after dinghy took on water and started deflating in the Mediterranean Sea.  A dinghy is a small, inflatable rubber boat meant for a small amount of people, yet, this one was carrying 150 fleeing refugees.  It is believed that as many as ¾ of the dinghies capacity died after a traffickers’ overcrowded rubber dinghy sank.

This event took place off the coast of Garabulli, which is east of Tripoli, Libya.  There was a total of 86 people rescued by the coast guard, however, 64 of the refugees are believed to have drowned.  Eight bodies; six women and two men, were recovered from the dinghy, per a UN migration agency official, but there are still 56 migrants unaccounted for.  One of the refugees stated, “some eight hours into the Mediterranean crossing, ‘water started pouring in, panic ensued, the migrants all moved to one side, and the boat lost its balance and was deflating.’”  The Italian coast guard arrived about half an hour after the dinghy was spotted by a European naval aircraft.  Many of the Refugees came from Mali, Gambia, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Cameroon, Senegal, and Nigeria.

Tommaso Fabbri, who is the head of the MSF mission in Italy stated, “Only by opening legal, secure, stable, and sustainable routes for those seeking protection will it be possible to prevent desperate people putting their own and their children’s destinies in the hands of traffickers.”

We have discussed many times in class about the various ways refugees can get from place to place, and this reminded me of class when Jenna had her friend, Zabi, talk about his experiences.  He described how he didn’t know if the boat he was on was even going to make it to the island, there was a chance for it to go past it, then what would happen?  This situation is similar.  All of these refugees were not going to make it to their sought destination; families no longer whole, mothers without children and children no longer with parents.  It is saddening to read about this tragedy because the dinghy should not have been overcrowded, even though that is normally the case when traffickers are smuggling people over boarders.  I believe if I was in the shoes of someone in that situation, I would still be on that boat trying to make it to a better life.  After all, that is all refugees want, isn’t it?

 

References:

Osborn, Samuel

2018, 64 Refugees Believed to Have Drowned off Coast of Libya in First Major Shipwreck of Year. The Independent, January 9.

Activism Through Art for Refugee Rights

                           Art has the ability to connect with people to evoke emotions and influence new perceptions. Chinese artist and activist, Ai Weiwei, utilizes his passion and talents to create a dialogue for change. Combining the powers of art and activism, he hopes the public will gain a consciousness of the many abuses of human rights thus evoking a call for action against social injustices. In his recent work, Weiwei advocates for refugee rights in his piece titled “Law of the Journey”. As a refugee himself, Weiwei hopes to educate people of the severity of this global issue. This piece is almost 200 feet long containing over 300 human figures tightly packed and huddled inside a lifeboat. The dark details depict the gloom and danger that refugees face in their journey to escape persecution. Weiwei describes the lifeboat as the vessel of forced exodus as countless refugees will risk their lives to travel by boat. “Law of the Journey” is displayed on Cockatoo Island for the 21^st Biennale of Sydney, Australia.¹ Since the exhibit is being held in Sydney, Weiwei directs this piece to the ignorance of the Australian government for their role in perpetuating the “refugee crisis”. He hopes the Australian people will be advocates for refugees and come to the understanding of the many challenges refugees face as the government continues to deny their rights thus perpetuating persecution and oppression that refugees have already faced in their country of origin and throughout their travels. The masses of faceless figures depict how refugees are homogenized and reduced to subjects other than human beings in which regulations and laws prohibit basic human rights for refugees. Such laws detach individualism from refugees which allows for justification of their mistreatment. Weiwei has created other pieces pertaining to the advocacy of refugees and the placement of his art is very important as he’s done work in the Greek Island of Lesbos and in Berlin, Germany. We have learned that Greece is the arrival point for many refugees fleeing into Europe and Germany continues to open their borders to thousands of refugees. Weiwei’s work serves as a reminder to never forget refugees and to keep fighting for their rights. He states, “There is no refugee crisis, only a human crisis… In dealing with refugees we’ve lost our very basic values. In this time of uncertainty, we need more tolerance, compassion, and trust for each other, since we are all one, otherwise, humanity will face an even bigger crisis.”²

Ai Weiwei- "Law of the Journey"

¹ “Superposition- Equilibrium and Engagement.” Ai Weiwei- Biennale of Sydney,    www.biennaleofsydney.art/artists/ai-weiwei/.

² Weiwei, Ai. “The Refugee Crisis Isn't about Refugees. It's about Us.” 

The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 2 Feb. 2018.

Tennesse Refugee Lawsuit is Dismissed by a Federal Judge

Just one day ago, a federal judge dismissed a Tennessee lawsuit, appearing in March of last year, that was accusing the federal government of violating the 10th amendment by forcing them to take refugees. Tennessee argued that the government was not complying with the Refugee Act of 1980 and wanted to opt out of resettlement programs. However refugees have continued to enter Tennessee under the Catholic Charities of Tennessee. The federal government threatened to cut seven billion in medicaid funds to the state if it does not comply, and the state currently cannot take a blow like that. Tennessee lawmakers overwhelmingly approved the lawsuit last year, why? I think the southern states, including Tennessee, are more fearful and hateful than their northern counterparts, perhaps because they are closer to a border where immigrants are coming in. This finds its way into politics, and then negative biases/stereotypes end up having real life negative impacts on refugees quality of life through policy. Regardless, I think the federal government has the right to place refugees where they see fit. The 10th amendment gives powers not granted in the constitution to states, but when they constitution was drafted, refugees were not nearly as prevalent of a problem, at least in America. If masses had been fleeing to America at the time, maybe the founding fathers or whomever would've included it in the constitution. The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee and the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition have openly spoken out against the lawsuit, saying it will "negatively affect the state's refugee community and perpetuate a culture of fear" (Ebert). Today, (March 20th) more than 40 refugees are meeting with legislators in Nashville to discuss how resettlement has changed their lives. It's important for lawmakers to hear these stories, because I think it's easy for them to succumb to groupthink and forget that the individuals are just looking for better lives. Lawmakers have yet to comment on the dismissal, but it has generally been viewed as a victory by refugees and social activists. In the future, I do not doubt that Tennessee or other states will try to prevent refugee processions. But I am hopeful that in light of this government administration, public opinion has been more left leaning and many POC and women are running for elections to block actions like that in the future.

References
Ebert, Joel. “Federal Judge Dismisses Tennessee's Lawsuit Seeking to Halt Refugee Resettlement.”
The Tennessean, 19 Mar. 2018.
Stempel, Jonathan. “U.S. Judge Dismisses Tennessee Refugee Resettlement Lawsuit.” Reuters, 19 Mar. 2018.