Human society is founded on a long history of migration. Concurrently, migration is one of the most widely studied topics in the social sciences. It garners interest from its basis in human development, livelihood and existence. Migration is often studied from a sociological and theoretical point of view, or through geographical examinations of an empirical nature. Yet despite political leaders longstanding obsession with invading countries on one hand – and building walls to protect their own sovereignty on the other – politics and understanding the drivers to control migration been divorced until recently.
The unprecedented nature of global flows in goods, services, and people today which is most markedly embodied under the term ‘globalisation’ …show more content…
Migration presents a series of competing interests in the drive for control over human population. On the contrary, the introduction of human rights complicates the gap between rhetoric and action. This is embodied in the idea of a perfect migration economy – and the radical notion that migrants are human beings with desires, goals, aspirations built up by cultural ideas of providence for the family.
This nexus is presented to us in her chapter “Immigration Tests the New Order” by Saskia Sassen. Sassen so aptly looks at the ‘tension between new nationalising economic space, and renationalising political discourse in most developed countries’ (Sassen, 1996: xiv). Immigration, Sassen suggests, presents a crucial tension in this network. It becomes a site of renationalisation discourses in politics – but also reveals the contradictory role of the state.
The far left is presented as the liberal intelligentsia who support the notion of unalienable human rights, and the far right is epitomised by Katie Hopkins, a British columnist and television personality who during the UK elections in 2015 called migrants ‘cockroaches’ and ‘feral humans’ and was later condemned by the United Nations Human Rights Commission for her use of ‘genocidal …show more content…
She urges that the world is speeding up, and time-space compression is more prevalent in the face of internationalisation where cultures and communities converge and diverge in ‘layers upon layers’ which challenges the concept of ‘our’ history and ‘our identity’ resulting in the rupture in the idea of what constitutes the identity of ‘place’ (Massey: 2001).
The truth is that some of this which would be profoundly difficult to achieve in their home country. As Cornelius reveals out, Mexican workers are often paid 1/8th of what they could be paid across the boarder in the United States. (Which presents the issue of needing to strike a balance in equality)
Is it true that legitimacy, invested in power, can become the supreme power over the sovereign? While there are outliers…for example, kinship-based and nomadic societies, systems defy the power of the sovereign and of international governing bodies. Here, sovereignty remains
The unprecedented nature of global flows in goods, services, and people today which is most markedly embodied under the term ‘globalisation’ …show more content…
Migration presents a series of competing interests in the drive for control over human population. On the contrary, the introduction of human rights complicates the gap between rhetoric and action. This is embodied in the idea of a perfect migration economy – and the radical notion that migrants are human beings with desires, goals, aspirations built up by cultural ideas of providence for the family.
This nexus is presented to us in her chapter “Immigration Tests the New Order” by Saskia Sassen. Sassen so aptly looks at the ‘tension between new nationalising economic space, and renationalising political discourse in most developed countries’ (Sassen, 1996: xiv). Immigration, Sassen suggests, presents a crucial tension in this network. It becomes a site of renationalisation discourses in politics – but also reveals the contradictory role of the state.
The far left is presented as the liberal intelligentsia who support the notion of unalienable human rights, and the far right is epitomised by Katie Hopkins, a British columnist and television personality who during the UK elections in 2015 called migrants ‘cockroaches’ and ‘feral humans’ and was later condemned by the United Nations Human Rights Commission for her use of ‘genocidal …show more content…
She urges that the world is speeding up, and time-space compression is more prevalent in the face of internationalisation where cultures and communities converge and diverge in ‘layers upon layers’ which challenges the concept of ‘our’ history and ‘our identity’ resulting in the rupture in the idea of what constitutes the identity of ‘place’ (Massey: 2001).
The truth is that some of this which would be profoundly difficult to achieve in their home country. As Cornelius reveals out, Mexican workers are often paid 1/8th of what they could be paid across the boarder in the United States. (Which presents the issue of needing to strike a balance in equality)
Is it true that legitimacy, invested in power, can become the supreme power over the sovereign? While there are outliers…for example, kinship-based and nomadic societies, systems defy the power of the sovereign and of international governing bodies. Here, sovereignty remains