Advertisement

Deportation and Expulsion: Closing Borders, Defending Sovereignty

  • Steven Loyal
  • Stephen Quilley
Chapter

Abstract

At least in theory, in modern Western states, there is a deep and intrinsic relation between (more or less regulated) market capitalism and the principles of political liberalism. Such principles include universal suffrage, the protection of civil and political rights, political pluralism, the separation of powers, a division between the public and private, adherence to the rule of law, the protection of private property, a commitment to freedom of conscience and religion, an ontological commitment to individual freedom, and a practical commitment to freedoms of movement, occupational choice, speech and thought, cultural worldview, and political expression. With regard to the infrastructure and capacity of the state, a complex array of institutions and practices function to safeguard and balance these (often conflicting) freedoms. However, there is often a gulf between such underlying operating principles and their modus operandi in the face of particular problems. Liberal democratic states are complex and contradictory entities, simultaneously capitalist and national states, concerned with securing the conditions for capital accumulation and also the imperatives of nation-building, social cohesion, and political order. It is in the shifting balance between these interlinked aspects of the state within an international state system, that modern states express themselves: that is, liberal democratic with regard to the protection of individual rights, the rule of law, and adhering to international human rights obligations; capitalist with regard to fiscal base and flows of investment; and national with regard to the reproduction of a cohesive and ethno-culturally homogeneous population and the maintenance of social order through the exercise of symbolic coercion and physical violence. Though the capitalist aspect is usually dominant when examining society as a whole, the causal configuration of these three processes is differently mediated and weighted when examining the concrete conditions involving immigration. Here, nationalism, order, and security play a stronger role, whilst practices of state expulsion challenge the complacent liberal democratic self-image.

References

  1. Allen, K. (2007). Double Speak: Neoliberalism and Migration. In B. Fanning (Ed.), Immigration and Social Change in the Republic of Ireland (pp. 84–98). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (Revised and extended ed.). London: Verso.Google Scholar
  3. Bendix, R. (1977). Nation-Building and Citizenship. New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  4. Bloch, A., & Schuster, L. (2005). At the Extremes of Exclusion: Deportation, Detention and Dispersal. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(3), 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P. (1990). In Other Words. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  7. Bourdieu, P. (1994). Rethinking the State: Genesis and Structure of the Bureaucratic Field. Sociological Theory, 12(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1996). The State Nobility. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Acts of Resistance: Against the Tyranny of the Market. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P. (2014). On the State: Lectures at the College de France 1989–1991 (P. Champagne, R. Lenoir, F. Poupeau, & M.-C. Riviere, Eds.). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  11. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (2000). The Organic Ethnologist of Algerian Migration. Ethnography, 1(2), 173–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boyd Barrett, R. (2017a). Dail Parliamentary Questions 23 November. Oireachtas Debates.Google Scholar
  13. Boyd Barrett, R. (2017b). Dail Parliamentary Questions 28 November. Oireachtas Debates.Google Scholar
  14. Brubaker, R. (1992). Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Caestecker, F. (1998). The Changing Modalities of Regulation in International Migration Within Continental Europe 1870–1940. In A. Bocker, A. Groenendijk, T. Havinka, & P. Minderhoud (Eds.), Regulation of International Migration: International Experiences. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
  16. Chacon, J., & Davis, M. (2006). No One Is Illegal. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Book.Google Scholar
  17. Cohen, R. (2006). Migration and Its Enemies. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  18. Crosscare. (2009). Living in Ireland. Dublin: Crosscare.Google Scholar
  19. Dannreuther, C., & Petit, P. (2006). Post-Fordism, Beyond National Models: The Main Challenges for Regulation Theory. Competition & Change, 10(2), 100–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Genova, N. (2016). The Crisis of the European Border Regime: Towards a Marxist Theory of Borders. International Socialism, 150. Retrieved from http://isj.org.uk/the-crisis-of-the-european-border-regime-towards-a-marxist-theory-of-borders/.
  21. Dowty, A. (1987). Closed Borders: The Contemporary Assault on Freedom of Movement. Yale: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Elias, N. (2012 [1978]). What Is Sociology? Collected Works of Norbert Elias (Vol. 5). Dublin: UCD Press.Google Scholar
  23. Elias, N., & Scotson, J. (2008/1965). The Established and the Outsiders: Collected Works of Norbert Elias (Vol. 4). Dublin: UCD.Google Scholar
  24. Fekete, L. (2005). The Deportation Machines: Europe, Asylum and Human Rights. Race and Class, 47(1), 64–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fekete, L. (2007). They Are Children Too: A Study of Europe’s Deportation Policies. London: Institute of Race Relations.Google Scholar
  26. Foucault, M. (1980). Governmentality. In C. Gordon, G. Burchell, & P. Miller (Eds.), Foucault Effect (pp. 87–104). Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism (New Perspectives on the Past). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Gibney, M., & Hansen, R. (2003). Deportation and the Liberal State: The Forcible Return of Asylum Seekers and Unlawful Migrants in Canada, Germany and the United Kingdom. UNHCR New Issues in Refugee Research, 77.Google Scholar
  29. Giddens, A. (1985). The Nation-State and Violence. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  30. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  31. Goodwin-Gill, G. (1983). The Refugee in International Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hall, S. (2017). Selected Political Writings: The Great Moving Right Show. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
  33. Hayek, F. A. (1948 [1939]). The Economic Conditions of Inter-State Federalism. In Individualism and Economic Order. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  34. Irish Refugee Council. (2015). Policy Recommendations on the International Protection Bill. Dublin: Irish Refugee Council.Google Scholar
  35. Jones, R. (2015). Violent Borders. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  36. Kedar, B. (1996). Expulsion as an Issue of World History. Journal of World History, 7(2), 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lattimore, O. (1940). Inner Asian Frontiers of China. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Lefebvre, G. (1990). The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  39. Loyal, S., & Quilley, S. (2017). Categories of State Control: Asylum Seekers and the Direct Provision and Dispersal System in Ireland. Social Justice, 43(4), 69–98.Google Scholar
  40. Luibhead, E. (2002). Entry Denied: Controlling Sexuality at the Border. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  41. O’Halpin, E. (1999). Defending Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Peutz, N., & De Genova, N. (2010). Introduction. In N. De Genova & N. Peutz (Eds.), The Deportation Regime: Sovereignty, Space & Freedom (pp. 1–32). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Polanyi, K., Arensberg, C. M., & Pearson, H. W. (Eds.). (1957). Trade and Market in the Early Empires: Economies in History and Theory. Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  44. Ryan, B. (2001, November). The Common Travel Area Between Britain and Ireland. Modern Law Review, 64, 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sayad, A. (2004). The Suffering of the Immigrant. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Scott, J. (1998). Seeing Like the State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Soysal, Y. (1994). The Limits of Citizenship. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. Torpey, J. (1998). Coming and Going: On the State Monopolization of the Legitimate “Means of Movement”. Theory and Society, 16(3), 239–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Torpey, J. (1999). The Invention of the Passport: Surveillance, Citizenship & the State. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wacquant, L. (2010). Crafting the Neoliberal: Workfare, Prisonfare, and Social Insecurity. Sociological Forum, 2, 197–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Walters, W. (2002). Deportation, Expulsion and the International Police of Aliens. Citizenship Studies, 6(3), 265–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (G. Roth, Ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Blue and Brown Books. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Loyal
    • 1
  • Stephen Quilley
    • 2
  1. 1.University College DublinDublinIreland
  2. 2.University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations