Abject Spaces: Frontiers, Zones, Camps



Abject spaces are those in and through which increasingly distressed, displaced, and dispossessed peoples are condemned to the status of strangers, outsiders, and aliens (e.g., refugees, unlawful combatants, insurgents, and the conquered) and stripped of their (existent and potential) citizenship (rights of becoming political) in various emerging frontiers, zones, and camps around the world. There has been a veritable outcry against the fact that these people have been reduced to a status without human rights. Yet their being human has not seemed to matter much to the states and their laws that have condemned them to these states of inexistence (figure 9.1). What is the logic of these abject spaces and how do we investigate the practices that sustain them?


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Julia Kristeva, Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection, European Perspectives (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998), p. 166.Google Scholar
  3. 8.
    Ibid., p. 175; William Walters, “Deportation, Expulsion and the International Police of Aliens,” Citizenship Studies, 7 (2002): 285.Google Scholar
  4. 9.
    Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1951).Google Scholar
  5. 10.
    Jacques Derrida, “On Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness,” in Thinking in Action, trans. M. Dooley and M. Hughes (London: Routledge, 2001).Google Scholar
  6. 11.
    Peter Nyers, “Abject Cosmopolitanism: The Politics of Protection in the Anti-Deportation Movement,” Third World Quarterly, 24 (2003): 1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 12.
    Giorgio Agamben, Means Without End: Notes on Politics, Theory Out of Bounds, vol. 20 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000), pp. 24–25.Google Scholar
  8. 15.
    Jacques Rancière, “Who Is the Subject of the Rights of Man?” The South Atlantic Quarterly, 103 (2004): 297–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 44.
    Nandita Sharma, “Travel Agency: A Critique of Anti-Trafficking Campaigns,” Refuge: Canada’s Periodical on Refugees, 21 (2003): 21.Google Scholar
  10. 52.
    Human Rights Watch, “By Invitation Only”: Australian Asylum Policy (New York: Human Rights Watch, 2002), p. 1.Google Scholar
  11. 54.
    Human Rights Watch, “Refugees, Migration and Trafficking” in Human Rights Watch World Report 2003 (New York: Human Rights Watch, 2003).Google Scholar
  12. 65.
    U.S. Committee for Refugees, World Refugee Survey 2003 Country Report: United Kingdom (Washington, DC: U.S. Committee for Refugees, 2003).Google Scholar
  13. 67.
    Sarah Gibson, “Accommodating Strangers: British Hospitality and the Asylum Hotel Debate,” Journal for Cultural Research, 7 (2003): 372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Elizabeth Dauphinee and Cristina Masters 2007

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations