A+| A| A-
Unsettling of the Dominant Refugee Discourse(s)
In the dominant refugee discourse(s) the citizen is the normal, the insider, the one who belongs, while the refugee is the abnormal, the deviant, the outsider, the one who does not belong. Thus, the latter is not only a threat to the very existence and legitimacy of the state, but also, for this reason, dispensable for it and can be dispensed off by it.
Much has been said, written, and shown, even critically, about refugees, their deaths, and the hardships they face crossing borders. This includes the focus on (Muslim) refugees from Syria at Europe’s borders and within, on (Latino) refugees from Central and South America at the United States (US) border and within, and on (Muslim) Rohingya refugees from Myanmar at India’s border and within.
However, there is minimal examination of the underlying statist logic that encompasses modern human existence. This logic, finally, enables the very possibility for the production, characterisation, and categorisation of humans as refugees, severely limiting their available possibilities of movement, assistance, resettlement, and classification reassignment in order to lead a fuller and freer life. Implicated in these processes, besides states, are also organisations and people in their everyday activities and at times of crises, of stated refugee influx in the West and
in India.
Dear Reader,
Or
To gain instant access to this article (download).
(Readers in India)
(Readers outside India)
