Refugee Protection and Civil Society in Europe by Unknown

Author:Unknown
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9783319927411
Publisher: Springer International Publishing

‘Merely Emotional’? Affect and the Politics of Care

This chapter discusses the debates around the increased role of emotions and affect in refugee help and refugee politics. On the one hand, arguments that criticize the limitations of benevolent refugee help are presented. On the other hand, a simplistic equation of “emotional help = problematic help” is questioned in the light of feminist debates on affect and care.

The argument of a problematic shift from rights to emotions is supported by analyses that detect this shift not merely in individual help projects but in the political treatment of refugees in general. In a much-debated study, Miriam Ticktin argued that refugee politics has come to be guided by a problematic “regime of humanitarianism” (Ticktin 2006, p. 45). She showed that humanitarianism, when it is integrated into the regular functioning of refugee politics, turns highly problematic, as the production of empathy for those who can demonstrate legitimate forms of (bodily) suffering gradually replaces a logic of rights. In a similar vein, Didier Fassin (2005) argued that a particular biopolitical logic is at work in refugee politics that privileges suffering over rights. To illustrate this, Fassin draws on the works of philosopher Agamben (1998) arguing that “the full life (bios) of the freedom fighter or the victim of repression has less social value than the bare life (zoё) of the immigrant suffering from a severe disease” (Fassin 2005, p. 371).

It thus seems highly relevant to question the role of emotions such as empathy or pity in the context of refugee help. Who manages to arouse the “right” kind of feelings amongst helpers (or civil servants) in order to seem worthy of help? What are the conditions under which it feels good to be charitable toward some strangers while ignorant to the suffering of others? What do helpers expect to receive in return to their charitable actions and how do these expectations limit the agency of those receiving help? Considering these problematic dynamics, it is understandable that scholars such as Ticktin or Fassin criticize the important role of emotions as the central motivation and legitimization of helping refugees and argue for the need for more politically informed ways of engaging with refugees and their needs. While the call for a (re-)turn to rights-based politics and politicized forms refugee help is highly relevant, it seems important to question a simplistic opposition between “emotions” and “politics.”

Feminist scholars have long since identified the ideological and institutionalized division between a feminized private sphere (imagined to be a space of harmony and emotionality) vis-a-vis a masculinized public sphere (supposedly organized around rationality and reason) as a cornerstone to the reproduction of male dominance (Schneebaum 2014). Feminists have criticized not only the relegation of women to the private sphere, but also decried the devaluation of what takes place within this sphere. Care work, mainly carried out by women, has been identified as central to the reproduction of individuals, societies, and economies as a whole (Federici 2004). Furthermore, the devaluation of emotion and affect

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.