‘They don’t look like children’: child asylum-seekers,the Dubs amendment and the politics of childhood

In October 2016, following a campaign led by Labour Peer Lord Alfred Dubs, the first child asylum-seekers allowed entry to the UK under new legislation (the ‘Dubs amendment’) arrived in England. Their arrival was captured by a heavy media presence, and very quickly doubts were raised by right-wing tabloids and politicians about their age. In this article, I explore the arguments underpinning the Dubs campaign and the media coverage of the children’s arrival as a starting point for interrogating representational practices around children who seek asylum. I illustrate how the campaign was premised on a universal politics of childhood that inadvertently laid down the terms on which these children would be given protection, namely their innocence. The universality of childhood fuels public sympathy for child asylum-seekers, underlies the ‘child first, migrant second’ approach advocated by humanitarian organisations, and it was a key argument in the ‘Dubs amendment’. Yet the campaign highlights how representations of child asylum-seekers rely on codes that operate to identify ‘unchildlike’ children. As I show, in the context of the criminalisation of undocumented migrants‘, childhood is no longer a stable category which guarantees protection, but is subject to scrutiny and suspicion and can, ultimately, be disproved.     

Vernetzt beraten,trainieren und evaluieren

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Critical Nexus or Pluralist Discipline? Institutional Ambivalence and the Future of Canadian Sociology

While some scholars believe in a transdisciplinary future for the social sciences and humanities, we argue that sociology would do well to maintain its disciplinary borders, while celebrating the plurality of its intellectual, social, and political content. Although a pluralist position can threaten disciplinary coherence and increase fragmentation, we argue the counterbalance ought to be convergence around shared institutional norms of knowledge production. Establishing these norms is not easy, since there is a great deal of institutional ambivalence at play in the field of sociology. As such, sociology is pushed and pulled between two poles of at least four major continuums of knowledge production, which include the following: (1) interdisciplinary versus discipline‐based research; (2) political versus analytical scholarship; (3) professional versus public/policy sociology; and (4) local/national versus global audiences. Since both sides of these ideal‐typical continuums contain their own pathologies, we propose adopting a balanced position to correct for the shortcomings of each. Rather than imposing one philosophical or theoretical paradigm for the field, we suggest that embracing the "chaos" of our diverse forms of knowledge and centralizing and integrating findings will serve to strengthen our collective efforts in the long term. Alors que certains chercheurs croient en un avenir transdisciplinaire pour les sciences sociales et humaines, nous soutenons qu'il serait préférable pour la sociologie de maintenir ses frontières disciplinaires, tout en célébrant la pluralité de son contenu intellectuel, social, et politique. Bien qu'une telle position pluraliste puisse menacer la cohérence disciplinaire et accroître la fragmentation, nous défendons l'idée que la contre‐balance doit converger vers des normes institutionnelles communes de production de connaissances. La mise en place de ces normes n'est pas chose aisée. Une large quantité d'ambivalence institutionnelle est en jeu dans le domaine de la sociologie. Ainsi nous tendons vers quatre grands continuums de production de connaissances : (1) la recherche interdisciplinaire en opposition à la recherche par discipline ; (2) une érudition politique en opposition à celle analytique ; (3) une sociologie professionnelle contre une sociologie publique / politique ; et (4) un public local / national contre un public mondial. Dans la mesure où deux côtés de ces continuums idéaux‐typiques contiennent leurs pathologies propres, nous proposons d'adopter une position équilibrée pour corriger les lacunes de chacun. Ceci devrait être mieux reflété dans nos systèmes de récompense. Plutôt que d'imposer un paradigme philosophique ou théorique pour un domaine en question, nous suggérons de prendre en considération le «chaos» de nos diverses formes de connaissances, tout en centralisant et en intégrant plus efficacement nos conclusions. Ceci permettra de renforcer nos efforts collectifs sur le long terme.     

2. Dowling, Colette: Frauen im Aufwind. Mit 50 beginnt ein neues Leben. 330 S., DM 16,90 (Die Frau in der Gesellschaft)

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Critical theory meets America: Riesman, Fromm, and the lonely crowd

A reading of David Riesman’s classic The Lonely Crowd is presented that emphasizes its links with the critical theory of German psychoanalyst and social critic Erich Fromm. The intellectual and personal relationship between Riesman and Fromm brings into focus Riesman’s adaptation of the insights of European critical theory as well as the strengths of American social science and social criticism. Riesman’s relatively neglected theoretical approach has much to offer a sociology concerned with retaining its links to public debate and empirical evidence. Thanks to Robert Alford, Linda Boos, Steven Brint, Scott Davies, Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Louis Greenspan, Rhoda Howard-Hassmann, Lisa Kowalchuk, Bonnie Oglensky, Rolf Meyersohn, Stephen Steinberg, Alan Wolfe and Dennis Wrong for comments on earlier versions of this paper. A McMaster University ARB grant provided funds for a trip to German where I read the extensive correspondence between Riesman and Fromm housed in the Erich Fromm archives maintained by Rainer Funk. The paper was first presented at the American Sociological Association annual meetings in Chicago in 1999.