Abstract:I lay out a case for recognizing “vulgar territory,” a fusing of superficial categories of spatial sovereignty with identarian rhetorics of belonging. I argue that vulgar territory is composed of two primary elements: first, a simplistic conception of sovereignty as being entirely contiguous with state borders. Second, affective elements of spatial belonging, particularly hope and fear. These two basic elements combine in various ways depending on the particular meanings, images, and emotions that are assemble… Show more
“…as disordered or unruly) are also normative because they help to delimit borders between self and others, define the boundaries and composition of communities, and help imagine social orders and belonging (Koch 2022;Ince 2011;Santamarina 2021). Such spatial practices are not only the prerogative of states in their exercise of sovereignty but also form part of the everyday and the political action of social movements and non-state actors (Lizotte 2020;Ince 2011). Focusing on spatial practices, as Natalie Koch (2022: 7) argues, also shifts the attention from regimes or pre-constituted spaces (such as the nation-state) to "practices of government as site of analysis."…”
Ecological crisis has given rise to a range of discussions over “climate fascism,” “green nationalism,” “fossil fascism,” and “eco-fascism.” Several authors have advanced the thesis that climate adaptation will be shaped by an increase in authoritarian politics or an uptick in organized violence (e.g. at the borders of nation-states) as states deploy counterinsurgency tactics against climate refugees and environmental activists. My article inverts this proposition by arguing that far right politics emerges as a contingent possibility in the mode of counterinsurgency governance. I propose the framework of “relations of counterinsurgency” as a means of understanding how counterinsurgency manages crises of urban governability by remaking the spaces of uneven urbanization. I then argue that to theorize contemporary far right climate politics, we should ask what the term eco-fascism does rather than what it is. My argument is that, as climate change makes increasing claims upon political institutions, relations of counterinsurgency allow far right actors to constitute their agency and subjectivity.
“…as disordered or unruly) are also normative because they help to delimit borders between self and others, define the boundaries and composition of communities, and help imagine social orders and belonging (Koch 2022;Ince 2011;Santamarina 2021). Such spatial practices are not only the prerogative of states in their exercise of sovereignty but also form part of the everyday and the political action of social movements and non-state actors (Lizotte 2020;Ince 2011). Focusing on spatial practices, as Natalie Koch (2022: 7) argues, also shifts the attention from regimes or pre-constituted spaces (such as the nation-state) to "practices of government as site of analysis."…”
Ecological crisis has given rise to a range of discussions over “climate fascism,” “green nationalism,” “fossil fascism,” and “eco-fascism.” Several authors have advanced the thesis that climate adaptation will be shaped by an increase in authoritarian politics or an uptick in organized violence (e.g. at the borders of nation-states) as states deploy counterinsurgency tactics against climate refugees and environmental activists. My article inverts this proposition by arguing that far right politics emerges as a contingent possibility in the mode of counterinsurgency governance. I propose the framework of “relations of counterinsurgency” as a means of understanding how counterinsurgency manages crises of urban governability by remaking the spaces of uneven urbanization. I then argue that to theorize contemporary far right climate politics, we should ask what the term eco-fascism does rather than what it is. My argument is that, as climate change makes increasing claims upon political institutions, relations of counterinsurgency allow far right actors to constitute their agency and subjectivity.
“…Research on borderwork has long underscored how bordering occurs across multiple temporal frames (Megoran, 2012) and geographical scales (Laine, 2016), prompting geographers to develop a multiplicity of new concepts beyond the line metaphor, including “boundary variations” (Mol & Law, 2005), “borders in motion” (Konrad, 2015), “borderities” (Amilhat‐Szary & Giraut, 2015), “polymorphic borders” (Burridge et al., 2017) and “hyper‐bordered territory” (Lizotte, 2020). Arguably, the notion that has gained greatest traction is the “borderscapes” concept, referring toa way of approaching bordering processes in specific geographical and social contexts, both in borderlands but also wherever a specific border has impacts, is represented, negotiated or displaced.…”
In recent years, critical border studies have developed sophisticated concepts and methodologies for exploring the multifaceted spatialities, sociologies and temporalities of contemporary borders. In this article, we consider how the “aesthetic turn” that has gained prominence in the scholarship can further inform thinking in border studies. Specifically, we focus on the role of the visual in the construction as well as subversion of borders, suggesting possible avenues for future critical aesthetics‐engaged research on COVID‐19 era border reconfigurations. To do so, we first briefly outline the theoretical evolution of border studies, paying attention to recent conceptualisations of borders as dynamic processes of social and spatial differentiation. We then build on the borderscapes concept to unpack research on border aesthetics, with particular attention to the heterogeneous roles played by visual objects such as maps, photographs and videos in shaping both hegemonic and counter‐hegemonic processes of bordering. Finally, we bring these contributions into discussion with recent insights on the COVID‐19 pandemic, sketching several ways to advance aesthetic concepts and methodologies in academic research on borderscapes that are emerging with, and will likely outlast, the pandemic. We suggest that border studies and affiliated sub‐fields can gain useful insights from attending more explicitly and robustly to dynamic visual geographies of power, contestation and subversion.
“…Following the parliamentary rise of far-right leaders and parties and the consequential geopolitical changes (e.g., Brexit, Trump), political geographers have increasingly paid analytical attention to the spatially varied manifestations of far-right politics and practices (Ingram 2017;Reid Ross 2017;Ince 2019;Lamour 2020;Nagel & Grove 2021). Different scales of analysis have evolved, from analysis of far-right's defence of European civilization (Casaglia et al 2020), to statist analysis of territorial sovereignism and hardening of borders (Agnew 2020;Casaglia et al 2020;Kallis 2018;Paasi et al 2020), (anti-)fascist mobilization (Ince 2019;Santamarina 2021), feminist analyses of embodied fascist practices (Gökarıksel & Smith 2016), and everyday geographies of the far-right (Lizotte 2020;Luger 2022). Despite the far-right's surge and increasing political importance, as Luger (2022: 3) argues, "there remains a comparative lack of geographic understanding of where, how, and through what socio-spatial processes the far-right operates".…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
