Concrete connections? Articulation, homology and the political geography of boundary walls
Concrete connections? Articulation, homology and the political geography of boundary walls
复制标题
具体连接？
作者：
G. Boyce;David J. Marshall;Jeffrey Wilson
学者和活动家的话语都援引了美国/墨西哥边境沿着和巴勒斯坦被占领土上的围墙做法之间的同源性。这种论述往往依赖于视觉/修辞手法来主张不同地点、技术和做法之间的等同。通常，这种等同会使差异崩溃为我们所说的“全球安全”范式，这种范式代表了政府实践、逻辑和结果的多样性，作为单一“全球”现象的表现形式。虽然我们庆祝表达反对暴力或剥夺的共同斗争的冲动，但我们质疑，在遗址之间断言单一性或等同性是否掩盖了可能更有效地告知团结政治的重要差异。我们进一步问，是否将“证券化”视为一种普遍存在的全球现象，有可能重申各国为自己的筑墙行为辩护的逻辑。在本文中，我们将探讨这些问题，并确定需要进一步的工作，认真对待的异质性墙项目，同时检查translocal的做法和衔接，通知他们的扩散和建设。
Scholarly and activist discourses alike have invoked a homology between walling practices along the US/Mexico border and in occupied Palestine. Such discourses often rely on visual/rhetorical manoeuvres to assert equivalence between distinct sites, technologies and practices. Often, this equivalence then enables the collapsing of difference into what we describe as the ‘global security’ paradigm, one that represents a multiplicity of governmental practices, logics and outcomes as manifestations of a singular ‘global’ phenomenon. Although we celebrate the impulse to articulate common struggles against violence or dispossession, we question whether the assertion of singularity or equivalence between sites obscures important differences that might more productively inform a politics of solidarity. We furthermore ask whether viewing ‘securitisation’ as a ubiquitous global phenomenon risks reiterating the very logic by which states rhetorically justify their walling practices. In this paper we explore these issues, and identify a need for further work that takes seriously the heterogeneity of walling projects while examining the translocal practices and articulations that inform their proliferation and construction.