Authoritarianism, Authority and Migration

Abstract

Anti-immigrant politics is central to the rise of the far-right and the trend towards democratic backsliding. Anti-immigration sentiment has been both a primary driver of the rise of populist far right politics and anti-immigrant policies are central to the policy platform such parties propose to implement when in power. Despite the centrality of the rise of the far-right to contemporary politics, political theorists have been slow to attend to it. Moreover, explicit theorizing about the far-right migration politics in particular remains marginal among political theorists. This panel seeks to fill this gap by exploring normative issues concerning the connection of authoritarianism and migration control. Papers will explore the following clusters of issues: (1) Migration and Democracy: What role does tough-on-migration rhetoric and policy play in driving democratic backsliding and the erosion of the rule of law? How should pro-democracy actors strategically and ethically respond to the rise of the anti-immigrant far-right? What implications does the rise of the far-right have for the state's legitimate authority over immigration? Does “saving democracy” require compromise on migration justice, or might such compromises rather undermine the states’ democratic credentials and embolden the right? (2) The Role of Political Theorists: What is the role of political theorists in assessing and responding to these developments? Must political theorists theorize in such a way that is attuned to the compromises of real world politics, and address itself to the state? Or does political theory have a different role to play in combatting the far-right? (3) Far-Right Integration Policies: A familiar complaint underlying far-right migration politics is that immigrants don’t integrate, and as such many states have moved to tighten their integration requirements. Some democrats also endorse this demand, claiming that it is essential to liberal democracy. But what should democratic theorists make of these requirements and demands? Are they necessary to sustain democracy, or an inegalitarian affront to democratic values? (4) Nationality-Based Migration Restrictions: How should we normatively analyse core far-right immigration policies, such nationality-based immigration bans? Are these practices justifiable from a liberal nationalist perspective? Or should political theorists rather question whether nationality is significant in the first place and whether nationalism can be liberal? (5) Responsibility for Migration Injustice: Who should we hold responsible for the increasingly worsened predicament facing immigrants? Should this be viewed as a matter of structural or more direct injustice? Might certain popular concepts in political theory, such as that of structural injustice, unwittingly feed into far-right narratives by obscuring the more direct ways in which states harm migrants?

Title	Details
Immigration and Herrenvolk Democracy	View Paper Details
Don’t Worry About the Backlash – It’s Not Your Job	View Paper Details
The Democratic Shortcomings of ‘Immigrant Integration’	View Paper Details
Excluding Immigrants by Nationality	View Paper Details
The Global Migration Regime: A Case of Structural Injustice?	View Paper Details