Search

The first keyword, Welfare State, sets out to problematise the term itself. The welfare state is a national construct, a 'national social state' as Etienne Balibar calls it. Thus, transnational or global migration is often construed as a disruptive force, potentially destabilising the welfare state and the nation. This keyword entry critically examines common conceptions of what the welfare state should provide. It delineates some of the ways that migrants (and, more broadly foreign nationals who are not themselves necessarily migrants) are excluded or partially included, with a focus on contemporary EU social policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tensions between migration enforcement and migrants' health and rights have gained renewed urgency during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article critically analyses how the pandemic has affected detained and deportable people in Sweden. Building on an activist methodological approach and collaboration, based on a survey conducted inside Swedish detention centres during the pandemic and the authors' research and activist engagement with migrants who are detained or legally stranded in Sweden, we argue that migration authorities' inadequate measures to protect detained and deportable people during the pandemic is a case of governance through ignorance enabled by structural racism. The article traces how this ignorance operates on a structural, institutional and micro-level, enabling public disregard and political irresponsibility for the harmful effects of migration enforcement. A broader aim of the article is to challenge the structural, societal and epistemic ignorance of the conditions for detained and deportable persons and to contribute to political change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses sanctuary initiatives intended to change the situation of 'irregularised residents'. Through fieldwork, three main activities are identified: assistance for welfare services, alternatives to inaccessible services, and inventing new ways of organising togetherness in the city. The role of activists in the initiatives links to discussions within Critical Human Rights literature, which emphasise the anti-institutionalist origins of rights. Yet, a complex interplay also plays out through co-current resistance against the state's migration policing and collaboration with citylevel state agencies. Understanding this complex process is important to improving knowledge of both the politics of sanctuary and human rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The politics of migration has become increasingly prominent as a site of struggle. However, the active subjecthood of people on the move in precarious situations is often overlooked. Irregular migration struggles raise questions about how to understand the agency of people who are marginalised. What does it mean to engage people produced as 'irregular' as active subjects of trans-border politics? And what new research strategies can we employ to this end? The articles presented in this Special Issue of Politics each differently explore how actions by or on behalf of irregular/ised migrants involve processes of subjectivity formation that imply a form of agency. Collectively we explore how irregular migration struggles feature as a site marked by active subjects of trans-border politics. We propose a research agenda based on tracing those processes - both regulatory, activist, and everyday - that negotiate and contest how an individual is positioned as an 'irregular migrant'. The ethos behind such research is to explore how the most marginalised individuals reclaim or reconfigure subjecthood in ambiguous terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Through an analysis of 100 asylum decisions and 10 interviews with 20 asylum officers at the Swedish Migration Agency this article reveals two intricate processes through which children's rights are displaced in the Swedish asylum process; by overlooking children's individual claims for asylum through a circle of neglect, and negating children's best interests. The article demonstrates how the balancing act between migration control on one hand and children's rights on the other hand plays out in the asylum process, which results in a double displacement; the children are not adult enough to be addressed as asylum seekers and not children enough to deserve qualification as bearer of children's rights. An in-depth analysis of everyday practices at institutions applying children's rights is essential both to understand the reproduction of discrepancies between rights on paper and rights in practice, and to explore the potential of rights to disrupt oppressive vehicles of power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]