search the archive
search the archive
"Immigration against Empire" Abstracts: Aug. 1 Papers: Oct. 1
full name / name of organization:
Recently the political theory regarding (global) capitalism, nation-states and international organizations has been re-conceptualized. Most notably, Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri's Empire (2000), Multitude (2004) and Commonwealth (2009) have reshaped traditional views concerning the relationships between the local, political and global institutions of power. Because the late 20th and early 21st century has ushered in supra-, trans- and inter-national organizations that in some instances supersede nation-states, Hardt/Negri conceptualize contemporary issues of power, democracy and war in their term "Empire." Whereas nation-states were defined by both an exterior (war with other nation-states) and an interior (citizenry, democracy), Empire has no exterior since it is international and global. Thus, Hardt/Negri see war as completely civil, within Empire, and democracy is suspended nevertheless (Hardt/Negri, 2004:iii-15). In Multitude, the authors describe how notions of democracy were suspended within a nation-state whenever that government went to war with other nation-states. They simultaneously, and some critics would say too optimistically, propose their concept of the “Multitude”—created by the global system of capital and its constant state of flux—a revolutionary, immanent and collective subject.
This issue situates immigration (and other forms of nomadism) as a possible disruptive event against Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri's concept of Empire. We are interested in different perspectives that view or do not view immigration as a tool for combating Empire in different social arenas (social, political, economical, etc.). If we view the world with the author's concept of Empire, how do we situate different forms of movement, both literally (immigration) and metaphorically (ontological, cultural change), within a global interior with no outside or other? Also of interest, how might other conceptualizations of global capitalism be used in regards to immigration? How do our conceptual frameworks enhance or inhibit action?
In light of Arizona's new immigration law in the United States, it would seem that as the "Third World" pops up in the "First World" neo-liberal policing comes into view of the Global North. In light of the various reactions to these events, responses from the radical Left, in and outside of academia, need to be formulated in order to map resistances and the role of the immigrant and the exile within the Empire. Thus we are seeking essays that describe both (1) different forms of nomadism and/or immigration that present possible disruptions within the global Empire and (2) the converse of the aforementioned, simply: immigration as a part of Empire's global assemblage of power.
Articles could be in relation to but not necessarily strictly involving any one or more of the following topics:
* Specific case scenarios of immigration in and between geopolitical regions around the globe.
Submissions are welcome in all languages, with a preference toward English, Spanish and Spanglish.
Articles must be between 2,000 and 3,000 words in length with endnotes and a bibliography.
Citations should follow the latest version of MLA.
Abstracts must be between 150 and 300 words.
A short biographical description of 3-5 lines should be included.
Abstracts due August 1. Papers due October 1.
More information at pro-visions.org