Search

Ausgehend von einer Analyse zweier Werken der Exilliteratur, Bertolt Brechts Dialogroman Flüchtlingsgespräche (1940/41) und Anna Seghers’ Erzählung Transit (1944), erforscht diese Arbeit das Thema ,Ordnung’ in diesen Texten. In beiden Darstellungen des Exils werden verschiedene Ordnungen dargestellt, deren Durchsetzung im Dasein der ExilantInnen besonders merkbar wird. Pässe und Papiere werden instrumental für die bürokratische Ordnung, die als zentrales Motiv vortritt. Als Hintergrund ist eine militärische Ordnung oder Logik identifizierbar, die mit der bürokratischen Kontrolle von Flüchtlingsströmen verbunden wird. Die ,Ordnungen’ werden in dieser Literatur herausgefordert; durch direkte satirische Kritik und durch die Darstellung militärischer und bürokratischer Logiken, die mit ,menschlichen’ Logiken unvereinbar werden. Die Werke thematisieren auch Nationalsozialismus und Patriotismus mit Bezug zur Exilsituation und zu den ,Ordnungen’, die diese Situation dominieren., This article explores the theme of order (‘Ordnung’) in german ‘Exilliteratur’, with the examples of Bertolt Brecht’s dialogue novel Flüchtlingsgespräche and Anna Seghers’ novel Transit. Orders which are imposed on the refugee / expat are central in both these accounts of the exile experience. Both texts deal with the bureaucratic order as a central or main motive, for which passports and identity documents are instrumental. In addition, a military order can be identified as a background to the bureaucratic control of migrants and refugees. The literature challenges the ‘orders’ through satirical criticism and through the description of military and bureaucratic ‘logic’ which become incompatible with ‘human logic’. The works also bring up national-socialist ideology and patriotism in relation to the exile situation and to the ‘orders’ which dominate this situation.

Wie kann es sein, dass Menschen Gewalt angetan wird, ohne dass die Verantwortlichen bestraft werden? In einem Land, in dem alle paar Jahre Volksinitiativen zur Strafverschärfung lanciert werden? Liegt es am Geld, der Nationalität, dem Geschlecht, der Parteizugehörigkeit? Vielleicht auch. Vor allen Dingen aber liegt es an der Bürokratie, so Michael Herzig, ZHAW-Dozent am Institut für Sozialmanagement.Er appelliert an Sozialarbeitende, Verantwortung wahrzunehmen, sich nicht hinter Regeln und Akten zu verstecken und sorgfältig mit ihrer Macht umzugehen.

Diese Arbeit untersucht die Auswirkungen einer Pandemie und das Gegensteuern durch mehrere Maßnahmen im Rahmen der Krisenbewältigung am Beispiel des Bundesministeriums für Inneres. Die Gesundheitspandemie beschäftigt die Organisation des BMI schon über 2 Jahre. Es wurde eine Zeitenwende in der Dienstverrichtung seit Beginn der Pandemie eingeläutet. Home-Office ist hier das omnipräsente Thema nicht nur im privaten Sektor, sondern auch im öffentlichen Sektor. Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es die Mobilitätssteigerung im Bereich der Verwaltung zu skizzieren. Die Stichproben der erhobenen Daten stammen aus 221 Rückmeldungen eines Online-Fragebogens und 5 durchgeführten Experteninterviews. Die draus gewonnenen Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Organisation zur Bekämpfung der Pandemie Adaptierungen in diversen Bereichen vorgenommen hat.*****This thesis examines the effects of a pandemic and the crisis management measures taken by the Federal Ministry of the Interior. Within the 2 years, where the BMI has had to deal with this health pandemic, a paradigm shift has taken place in duty performance since the beginning. The shift to Home-Office is one of the main themes of resilience enhancement in all sectors. The aim of this paper is to outline the mobility increase in the administrative sector. The samples of the collected data stem from 221 responses of an online questionnaire and 5 conducted expert interviews. The results obtained show that the organization has made adaptions in various areas to combat the pandemic.

The paper investigates the link between the sub-national variation of political regimes in a (at the federal level) non-democratic country and the appointments of federal officials in the sub-national provinces. In particular, we look at the appointment of the chief federal inspectors to the regions in Putin’s Russia in 2000-2012. Our main research question is whether appointment patterns can be explained by top-down concerns of the central government willing to keep control over the most unruly regions or by bottom-up self-selection of bureaucrats belonging to influential groups into more attractive positions more suitable for rent-seeking. The advantage of our case is that data we have at hand allow us to distinguish these two logics. Our results indicate that for the Russian chief federal inspectors in 2000-2012 bottom-up self-selection appears to be the more plausible explanation of the link between sub-national political regimes and appointment patterns.

Under EU law, EU citizens constitute a particular group of immigrants, as they can, mostly without restrictions, move to, and reside in, another EU country, enjoying equal treatment with nationals in terms of accessing employment and social rights. However, as this article demonstrates, the settlement of EU citizens in another member state does not happen without hurdles. Through a careful in‐depth study of access to transnational welfare rights in practice, we analyse knowledge and resulting power asymmetries impacting interactions between certain EU migrant claimants and street‐level bureaucrats in Austrian and German social administrations. Following an inductive approach, based on an extensive data set of 144 qualitative interviews, this article first unpacks the different types of knowledge asymmetries relating to administrative procedures, formal social entitlements and the German language. We then analyse how such knowledge asymmetries may open space for welfare mediation in order to compensate for a lack of German language skills and to clarify misunderstandings about legal entitlements and obligations embedded in the claims system. Finally, our contribution offers a typology of welfare mediators and their characteristics, as not all types can be regarded as equally effective in reshaping power asymmetries. Overall, this article allows for insights into how welfare mediators, as more or less institutionalised opportunity structures, can shift policy outcomes in unexpected ways, enabling access to social benefits and services for otherwise excluded EU migrant citizens working, or seeking to work, in another EU member state.

While existing research has analysed the intersecting migration and social security law, which stratifies migrants' formal social entitlements, less work has been done on the informal stratifications beyond the law that determine substantive social rights. This article illustrates the informal barriers to de facto benefit receipt that intra‐EU migrant citizens may experience when claiming social assistance in local German job centres, regardless of their manifest legal entitlements. Focussing on informal, yet commonly institutionalised practices of language discrimination, analysis of 103 qualitative, in‐depth interviews reveal recurring patterns of administrative exclusion beyond individual instances of discriminatory behaviour. The unwritten rules and everyday practices shaping administrators' claims‐processing routines often go against what the law or administrative procedures proscribe, and could be considered as forms of discrimination. The former may be explained by institutional constraints, such as a performance‐orientedmanagement culture, legalistic claims‐processing, or superficial diversity policies. By shedding light on how inequalities in access are constructed in daily administrative practice, this article adds to existing empirical knowledge on how informal inequalities in access emerge at different stages of the benefit claiming process, in contrast to formal social rights on paper, as well as social administrations' handling of diversity in a context of transnational social protection.

Concepts such as “belonging” (Yuval‐Davis, 2011) and "community of value" (Anderson, 2013) try to capture the multiple ways of classifying migrants. In this article, we argue that belonging needs to be analyzed against the backdrop of active social citizenship in European welfare states. Although the literature acknowledges the increasing links between migration and social policies, the latest "turn to activation" in social policy has hardly been accounted for. By focusing on two policy fields in Germany, the labor market and health policies, we briefly describe discourses and social right entitlements and their ambivalences. Empirically we show (a) how bureaucrats within the two policy fields regulate and justify refugees' social rights in practice and (b) how refugees act vis‐à‐vis relevant institutional opportunity structures. Our study contributes to previous research twofold: Firstly, we illustrate processes of positioning and selecting refugees that stem from recent social policy architecture. Secondly, we demonstrate everyday experiences from refugees' vis‐á‐vis relevant institutional opportunity structures in Germany. Our results show that inconsistencies within and between social policy fields of one welfare state have to be taken into consideration for further national and transnational research.

This working paper traces the trajectory of Syrian official documents across Syria and Germany in times of political upheaval, flight and integration. Documents issued by the Syrian state continue to be a fundamental element in the life of Syrians in Germany as they are still needed for certain mundane, yet crucial, purposes. Syrians are therefore forced to engage with Syrian state bureaucratic apparatuses at a distance. The journey of the papers across time and geographical borders unveils the highly political ambivalences and tensions embodied in Syrian paperwork in the context of German policies of asylum and integration. In Syria, the documents and their retrieval are embedded in the politics of security governing the Syrian citizenship regime. On arrival in Germany, the papers gain new meanings in their encounter with the German integration process and legal system rooted in the Rule of Law. At the same time, the papers' enmeshment with German bureaucracy reproduces (from a distance) the political dynamics between Syrians and the Syrian state in the past. Situated at a crossroads of the web of state(-s) power in and between Syrian and German bureaucracies, the papers re-integrate Syrians’ past into their present in Germany. By revealing this complex web of relationships, this working paper offers a reflection on the limits of studying the European context of integration and asylum 'fromwithin'.

Die vorliegende Arbeit widmet sich den macht- und identitätspolitischen Dimensionen kolonialer Verwaltungspraktiken im ehemaligen Schutzgebiet Deutsch-Südwestafrika und seiner Diamantabbaugebiete. Kernelement der Untersuchung stellen verschiedenste Primärquellen aus dem Bundesarchiv Lichterfelde dar. Anhand konkreter Schrifterzeugnisse kann so die Offenlegung komplexer Verflechtungen zwischen bürokratischer Regulationsmacht, institutioneller Gewalt, wirtschaftlichen Ausbeutungsstrukturen und persönlichen Schicksalen anschaulich erfolgen. Im Vordergrund der Analyse stehen die Nachzeichnung grober Entwicklungslinien und Funktionsweisen deutsch-südwestafrikanischer Verwaltungsbehörden sowie konkrete Repressionspraktiken. Anhand einzelner Dokumente der Diamantverordnung wird in diesem Zusammenhang deutlich, wie als sogenannte Eingeborene klassifizierte Menschen der Zugriff auf Erlaubnisscheine zum Schürfen von Diamanten kategorisch verwehrt und ihr bloßer Aufenthalt in den Abbaugebieten durch das Verwehren von Passierscheinen kriminalisiert wurde. Die Konstruktion von bürokratischen Identitätskategorien führte folglich zur räumlichen und sozialen Parzellierung in der Kolonie und produzierte sowie naturalisierte aktiv rassistische Ausschlussmechanismen., This paper deals with aspects of power and identity politics in colonial administrative practices in the former German South-West Africa protectorate and its diamond mining areas. The core element of the study is a variety of primary sources from the Lichterfelde national archives. As a result, the complex inter-relationships between bureaucratic regulatory power, institutional violence, structures of economic exploitation and personal stories can be laid out in clear terms based on concrete written documents. The analysis foregrounds a retracing of the approximate development and functioning of administrative authorities in German South-West Africa as well as concrete practices of repression. Against this backdrop, individual documents from the Diamantverordnung (Diamond Ordinance) show clearly how persons classified as so-called Eingeborene, or indigenous people, were categorically denied access to diamond mining permits, and how their mere presence in the mining areas was criminalized by a refusal to grant them travel permits. The construction of bureaucratic categories of identity consequently led to a spatial and social partitioning within the colony and produced both naturalized and actively racist mechanisms of exclusion.