During the so-called "refugee crisis", the notion of an unparalleled German hospitality toward asylum seekers circulated within the (inter)national public sphere, often encapsulated by the blurry buzzword "Welcome Culture". In this article, we scrutinize these developments and suggest that the image of the so-called "crisis" has activated an unprecedented number of German citizens to engage in practices of "apolitical" helping. We argue that this trend has contributed to the emergence of what we term a new dispositif of helping, which embeds refugee solidarity in humanitarian parameters and often avoids an explicit political, spatial, and historical contextualization. This shift has activated individuals from the socio-political centre of society, well beyond the previously committed radical-left, antiracist, and faith-based groups. However, we aim to unmask forms of "apolitical" volunteering for refugees as a powerful myth: the new dispositif of helping comes with ambivalent and contradictory effects that range from forms of antipolitics to transformative political possibilities within the European border regime.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper inquires the moral and political ambivalences of migrant support located between contentious politics and humanitarian aid. Comparing Save Me and Seebrücke, two cases of pro-migrant activism in Germany claiming the safe passage of migrants to Europe, we develop the notion of ‘strategic humanitarianism’, a hybrid form of migrant support, in which actors combine the strategic employment of predominantly depoliticizing, narrow and humanitarian framing with a contentious repertoire of action. It entails deliberately sacrificing a ‘deep’ politicization of fundamental critique against contemporary migration regimes in order to achieve a ‘wide’ politicization and broad consensus for progressive social change. Furthermore, we carve out how distinct political contexts, in this case the issue salience and polarization of migration, influence the dynamics of mobilization and the configuration of humanitarianism and contentious politics. Despite a similar focus, thus, the ‘strategic humanitarianism’ of Save Me has developed a less contentious and disobedient character than Seebrücke.

Public policies implemented to flatten the curve of COVID-19 infections created unprecedented challenges for social movements. Most striking was the de facto temporary suspension of the right to assembly. Using the case of pro-migrant mobilizations in Germany as an example, we analyse how social movements are affected by and respond to this exceptional context. Instead of a breakdown, we find evidence for a proliferation of mobilization. This is surprising since COVID-19 related restraints were particularly accentuated for pro-migrant mobilizations. We argue that this puzzle can be explained by looking at the particular framing strategies and the hybrid online and offline protest practices used by activists. Integrating empirical insights of social movements in times of crisis, theoretical approaches to boundary spanning, intersectional frame bridging, and hybrid combinations of online and offline protest, our article provides an analysis of pro-migrant mobilizations in times of pandemic. It also sketches-out avenues for future research on plural alliance formation in diverse societies.