A note from - The Princeton Progressivetheprincetonprogressive.com/wp-content/uploads/... ·...

spring 2019 The princeton progressive I

A note fromthe editors

Dear Reader, Wehopethisissuefindsyouwell,andthatyouarefindingtimetocareforyourself,andthosearoundyou,asthissemestercomestoanend. Theissueinyourhandsmarksafewrecentchang-eswithin theProg.First, in themasthead:over thepasttwoyearsand thepast four issues,NoraSchultzservedasthispublication’sEditor-in-Chief.SheencouragedtheProg tomove innew,fruitfuldirections,andweare in-crediblythankfulforherpassionanddedication.Also,werecentlywelcomedagroupofnewstaffmembers.Goingforwardwithnewfaces,ideas,andpurpose,wehopetogrowandaspiretomoreasaproudlyleftistpublicationonPrinceton’scampus. This issue’s theme is citizenship, a topic of in-credible salience in the current political moment. Thispast yearwitnessed the continuation and intensificationoftheonslaughtagainstimmigrants,bothundocumentedanddocumented,withintheUnitedStates.Oneneednotevenlooktonationalpolitics;ICEregularlyconductstar-getedraidsinPrinceton.Additionally,therenowappearsaheighteneddegreeofpoliticalawarenessandactioninresponse to current immigrationpolicy andother injus-tices,bothforandagainst—oftenwiththevaguesubtextthat “good” citizenship is defined by sustained activityandengagement. Forthisissue,weencouragedourwriterstograp-plewithvariousunderstandingsofwhatcitizenshipisandcould be, beyond a legal status—citizenshipwithin thecampuscommunity;inrelationtobordersandtocities;asactiveparticipation;asidentity;asafundamentallyhistor-icalproduct. Ourmost recent issue,exploring themyriadso-cio-politicalmeaningsoffoodproductionandconsump-tion,signaledaninstitutionalshiftintheProg’sfocusto-

wardcontentmorecenteredongroundedexperience.Tothe same end, pieces in this issue address personal andmaterial experiences of citizenship, in addition to theo-reticalquestionsofgovernance that adiscussionof cit-izenshipdemands.Ourwriters ask:Howcanwedefinecitizenshipbeyondalegalcategorization?Cancitizenshipexistasaself-definedidentity,ratherthanasacategori-zationimposedtop-down?Cantheconceptofcitizenshipoperatetoelicitradicalchangeandleadtoimaginingbet-terfutures?Whatroledoescitizenshiphaveoncampus,orinlocalcommunities? Itisalsoworthwhiletonotethequestionsthatthisissuedoesnotengagewith;innowaydoesthisissuecon-stituteacompleteappraisalofcitizenship.Giventhattheinceptionofcitizenshipisnecessarilyentangledwithvi-olenthistoriesofcolonialism,slavery,andmassdisplace-ment, is itevenpossible toenvision itspositiveuse? Isitworthattempting todo so?Finally, as theconceptofcitizenshipcannotbelocatedtoofarawayfromus,whatarethenegativeusesofcitizenshipwithinPrinceton(thetownandtheuniversity)itself? Withtheselimitsinmind,youwillfindavarietyofpieceswithinthisissue,rangingfrompersonalreflec-tionsoncitizenship,culture,andimmigrationtorumina-tiononFrance’sYellowVestsandcolonialisminFrenchGuianatohistoricalconsiderationofbirthrightcitizenshipandsuffrageintheUnitedStates.Inthisissue,westrivetodeeplyinterrogatetheideaofcitizenshipandofferupnew,more radical conceptions of it.We encourage ourreaderstodothesame.

Inloveandsolidarity,

TheEditors

spring 2019 The princeton progressive II

masthead

www.theprincetonprogressive.com

editor-in-chiefexecutive PRINT editormanaging PRINT editor

EXECUTIVE WEB EDITORDigital EditorDESIGN EditorSTAFF EDITORS

STaff writers

cover illustration: Raya ward '21, Nora Wildberg '21, beatrice ferguson '21illustrators: victoria pan '21, jt tao '22, raya ward '21, Nora wildberg '21logo design: mariana medrano '17

Beatrice Ferguson '21alec Israeli '21CHAYA HOLCH '22JASON SEAVEY '21K STIeFEL '20CHRIS POPHAM '21MARC SCHORIN '22NORA SCHULTZ '19NALAnda SHARADJAYA '21TAJIN ROGERS '20Diego Ayala-McCormick '22Cole Diehl '20Braden Flax '21Rebecca Ngu '20Tamica Perera '22Jojo Prentice '22Chris Russo '20Peter Taylor '22

spring 2019 The princeton progressive III

masthead contents135691215

Sri lankan or sri-lankan american?by: tamica Perera

'foreign in a domestic sense'The Legal Paradox of Puerto Rican Citizenshipby: Diego Ayala-McCormick

Of Polling & PolisSUFFRAGE & THE BOUNDARIES OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIPby: Peter Taylor

Sorry to Burst your Bubble:the institutional limits of active citizenship at Princetonby: K Stiefel

GILETS JAUNESHigh Visibility, Shallow Rootsby: Cole diehl

City & Citizenan interview with dr. nasser abourahme by: Chris Russo

Your Majesty, The Most Honorable Venerable Chancellor Cihuacoatl Generalissimocontributed by: Alejandro Roig

spring 2019 The princeton progressive 1

withoutmakingitobviousthatIwantedtobeaccepted.SoIcalledmydad. Mydadwas actually very embarrass-ing.Ihadmyheadphonesin,readytotalktohim,and I evenmade sure to speak tohim in Sinhala. I thought that would beenoughtoshowthatIamSriLankan,butmy dad had a different idea inmind. Hepractically started to begme to handmyphonetoaworker,sothathecouldtalktothem.Hewantedtomakesure theyknewthatIwasSinhalese,sothatthefoodwouldbe spicy (if a Sri Lankan doesn’t knowyou’reSriLankantheywillmakethefoodless spicy—weknow thatour spice toler-anceisbasicallyunmatched). Iknewmydad’splanwasgoingtoendbadly, but because I love him, I tookmyheadphones out, turned to a waiter, andsaid, “I’m really sorry butmy dad hasn’tbeentoNewYorkbeforeandwantstosayhello.”Theworkerlookedsoconfusedandjust muttered a “hi” back. Then my dadstarted talking quickly and completely inSinhala.Thewaiter realizedwhatmydadwas doing and came closer, looking bothannoyedandunamused.Mydad toldhimthatweliveinLasVegas,butarefromSriLanka,thatIloveSriLankanfood(somakeitspicy),thatIgotoschoolinNewJerseyandwasvisitingNewYorkfortheday,andthattheyshouldmakemefalooda—adrinkmadeofrosesyrup,sabjaseeds,vermicel-li,andmilk—becausehewantedmetotrywhathegrewupdrinkinginSriLanka. Iwassoembarrassed. My dad basically told my life storyto awaiterwhowasnotmucholder thanI am, and who was obviously confusedabout whymy dadwas talking somuch.Now,ifhewasoldenoughtobeanuncleitwouldmakesense.SriLankanadultsareprotective of children and usually make

egally, I am anAmerican citizen.My family and I gave up our SriLankan citizenship and haven’tcompletedourapplicationsfordual

citizenship yet. But my legal citizenshipdoes not capture my experience as a SriLankan-American, as someonewhomustconstantlynegotiatemycitizenshipandmysenseofself.“Citizenship”isaconceptthatisoftendiscussed in academicandpoliti-calcircles,butformeandsomanyothersaroundtheglobe,thereisamorepersonalmeaningtoit.Everyday,Ifeelthatthereisadissonancebetweenmylegalcitizenshipandmysenseof self-identityandbelong-ing.AlthoughIwasborninSriLankaandamanAmericancitizen,IfeelneitherfullyAmerican nor fully Sri Lankan. I believecitizenship,intheculturalsense,istiedtoafeelingofbelonging,somethingIdon’tfeelinSriLankaorAmerica. Thereisadisconnectwithinmyiden-tity. For me, being an American and animmigrant means bringing my culture tothestates.However,Idon’tfeelSriLank-anall the timebecauseofhowdifferent IamfromotherSriLankans.Mainly,Idon’tfeelSriLankanbecauseotherSriLankansperceivemeasan“other.”Theway I amlookedat,thefactthatIinvoluntarilyspeakwithanAmericanaccent,andthewayItrytounderstandmyculturemeansthatoften-timespeopledon’talwayslabelmeasafullorrealSriLankan. Iwasborn inSriLankaandraised inLasVegas.MyfirstlanguageisSinhala,butmyEnglishismuchbetter;IalwaysspeakSinhala with a heavy American accent.WhenIgotoSriLanka,everyoneasksmewhereI’mfrom.Funnilyenough,theyaskmethatinAmerica,too.InSriLanka,myrelativesquestionwhetherIeattraditionalfoodeveryday.InAmerica,myfriendsand

sri lankan or sri lankan-american?

by: TAMICA PERERA peersquestionwhether I eat anythingbut traditionalfood. Comparing myself to Sri Lankans athomemakesmequestionmyidentity.MysisterandIgotsareeswellbeforemycous-inswholiveinSriLankadid,eventhoughwe’re all in the same age group.The SriLankanVegas community goes to partiesforSriLankanNewYearsandSriLankanIndependenceDay,whilemyfamilyinSriLanka just sleeps in on their day off.Weeatriceandcurryeveryday,butmycousinspreferpastaandbread.IknowmoreaboutSriLankannewsthansomeofmyfamilymembers.My sister and I have a SpotifyplaylistofSinhala songs,whilemycous-inshaveplaylistsofAmericanpopmusic.And,ifyoulookatthegroupchatmycous-insandIshare,youcanseethatitwasoncenamed“SriLankansvsAmericans.”BeingawayfromthephysicallandofSriLankacreates an intensification of culture. I amhyperaware that many of my traits are aproductofSriLankanculture,butbeinginAmericamakesmefeellikeIneedtoprovethat I have a reason to also celebrate theculture. Recently, while visiting Sigiri, a SriLankanrestaurant inNewYork,myiden-titycrisisstruckme.Itwas4pmandIwasready to quickly grab something beforecomingback toPrinceton.Whilewalkingdown1stAvenue,IsawaSriLankanflagandanAmericanflagoutsideofabuilding.I walked into a small restaurant with artandmaps on thewalls, and I immediate-lyknewthattheartcamefromSriLanka.I heard the sound of the restaurant staffspeakingSinhala,althoughnotdirectedatme.Instead,IwasgreetedinEnglish.Iwasalittlehurt.IwantedtotellthemthatIamSriLankantoo,thatIamfromwheretheyarefrom.ButIdidn’tknowhowtodoso

L


suretoactlikesecondparentsiftheyknowyour realparentsaren’twithyou.But thewaiterwas basically just an older brotherwhodidn’tcareaboutmystoryandprob-ablydidn’tthinkanythingofmybeingSriLankan,consideringhestilltalkedtomeinEnglish afterwards. Iwanted to leave therestaurant,andinallhonesty,Idon’twanttogobacktotherestaurantagainbecauseofhowembarrassedIfelt. Therestaurantdid,however,makethefoodwithspicesfitforaSriLankanandIgotthefalooda.(Idefinitelydorecommendthe restaurant if you are in the city. ThefoodwasgreatandIdoubtanyoneelsewillhaveanidentitycrisiswhileeatingthere.) TheownerheardthatIwasSriLank-anandtalkedtomeaboutwhereIliveandaboutotherSriLankansthatIknowontheEast Coast. He talked to me in English,butheatleastacknowledgedthatIamSriLankan. I partly blame myself; I didn’twant him to hear my American accentbutcheringSinhala, so I continued speak-inginEnglish. IthinkmydadwantedtoprovetothosecompletestrangersthathisdaughterisSriLankan,notAmerican.HisdaughterhasanAmericanaccentandgrewupinthestates,

butsheisSriLankan.Myidentity,inhiseyes,isnotthesameasmycitizenship.But,the situationmademe feel like even lessof a SriLankan.Yes, the foodwasmadeforaSriLankan,buttheconversationonlyhighlightedhowAmericanIwas.Iwasn’tSriLankanenough tobeat the restaurantalone, and I wasn’t American enough tojustbeatourist. Ifeeloutofplace.IdoidentifyasSriLankan, but I don’t usually feel acceptedintheculture.Ialsodon’teveridentifyasjustAmerican.IameitherSriLankanorSriLankan-American.And it is only aroundotherswhoidentifylikemethatIfeelac-cepted. I feel accepted around thosewhoare told theyarenotenoughofan identi-ty—withthosewhodon’tfeelliketheybe-longbecauseothersactlikewedon’t. Forme,beinganAmericanisnotacul-turalidentitybutalegalone—incontrast,being Sri Lankan is part of my culturalidentity.And being Sri Lankan-Americanmeans navigating the tricky relationshipbetween being hyperaware of my cultureandunderstandingthatthecountryIgrewupinshapedhowintouchwithmyrootsIamtoday.

ILLUSTRATION BY VICTORIA PAN '21

A Note from the Author:

My heart hurts for what recently happened to my country. This arti-cle was written prior to the bomb-ings in Sri Lanka, and my only hope is that my country unites and over-comes this tragedy.

We need support. I know that Princ-eton’s environment makes us feel secluded from the world, but these events cracked my perception of the ‘orange bubble.’ If anyone would like to help, donations can be given to Sri Lanka Red Cross or the Asia Pacific office of the Red Cross and Red Crescent. If you are still figur-ing out summer plans, I recommend you look at the organization Volun-teer Sri Lanka. We are a small is-land but filled with character, life, and culture. Prayers, donations, and aid will be greatly appreciated.


yfatheroftenlikestotellastoryabouthisjoborientationafterac-ceptinganewpostinLosAnge-les,towhichmyfamilymovedin

2002fromNewYork.Whilebeinghustledfromonemeetingtoanother,adepartmentadministratorranafterhimwithaquestionabout mixed-up paperwork. “César, areyouaUScitizen?”sheasked.“Yeah—butit’s not my fault,” was my father’s briefresponse. What my father was referringtowas the fact that as someonewhowasbornandgrewup inPuertoRico,hisUScitizenshipwastheresultofUSimperialistexpansion,andwhathesawasacolonialstatusforhishomeland.Whenretellingthisstorymyfatheralwaysrecalls,withsomeregret, the administrator’s bemused faceupon hearing this response.After all, allsheneededwasinformationtofillinaboxinaform,notananti-imperialiststatementaboutthenatureofhisbelongingintheUSpoliticalcommunity. Yet what my father expressed in thatbrief and somewhat amusing interactionspeaks to somethingdeeperabout thepo-litical status of the island he comes fromandthepeoplewholivethere.Indeed,the

AmericancitizenshipthatallPuertoRicansenjoy (and I use theword “enjoy” in fullknowledgeofall thestrugglesmillionsofotherLatinAmericanshavegone throughtrying to attain that coveted status ofUScitizen)wasnotonly imposedupon themwithout their consent, but is also a pro-foundlyunequalcitizenship. To understand its inequity, it is use-ful tobeginby considering thehistoryofthe incorporation of Puerto Ricans intothe American political community. From1898—when the United States acquiredPuertoRicofromSpainalongwithCuba,the Philippines, and Guam—until 1917,PuertoRicanswerenotconsideredUSciti-zens.Theywereinsteadconfinedtoavaguestatus as “Puerto Rican nationals,” whilestillbeingsubject toUSjurisdiction.ThiscreatedproblemsininternationalrelationsandcommerceforPuertoRicans,notleastbecausetheycouldnotobtainUSpassportsand Puerto Rico was not an independentcountry.TheJonesActof1917attemptedtosolvetheseproblemsbygrantingUnitedStatescitizenshiptotheresidentsofPuertoRico. But the US Citizenship granted to

PuertoRicansintheJonesActcarriestwocaveats.Firstofall,itisnotconstitutionalcitizenship.That is, it isnotbasedon theFourteenth Amendment, which dictatesthat anypersonborn in theUnitedStatesis aUnitedStates citizen, but rather onlyfrom the specific federal law that extend-edUScitizenshiptoPuertoRicans.Thus,while revokingmyUS citizenship (Iwasborn in New York) would require goingthrough the arduous process of amendingtheConstitution, taking awaymy father’scitizenship would only require getting abillthroughCongress.ThesecondcaveatisthattheconstitutionalconceptionofPuertoRicancitizenship,inextricablylinkedtotheabsurdconceptof“unincorporatedterrito-ry,”deniesPuertoRicanstheirrighttosov-ereignty. These caveats, which may afterallseemratherminor,reflectalonghistoryofpoliticaldiscriminationthatgoesbacktoaninfamoussetoffederalcourtcasesfromtheearly1900s”theso-called“InsularCas-es.” BeforetheSpanish-AmericanWar,thestatusofnewlyacquiredUSterritoriesgen-erallyfollowedacommonpattern.TheUSwouldannextheterritory.Then,overtime,

'foreign in a domestic sense'

The legal paradox OF puerto rican CITIZENSHIPBY: Diego ayala-mcCormick

M

ILLUSTRATION BY Raya Ward '21


veattoAmericancitizenshipamongPuertoRicans—itismoreprecariousthanallotherAmerican“citizenships.” Thesecondcaveatcomestolightwhenwe takeTaft’s legal reasoning to its logi-calconclusion.AccordingtoTaft,ifeveryPuertoRicanwantedtoexercisetheirrightsasaUScitizen(by,forexample,votinginelections for the President and the Con-gressthatultimatelycontrolPuertoRico’sdestiny)theywouldallhavetomove.Theislandwouldquicklybeemptiedofpeople.In the case of PuertoRico, in contrast toanyUS state or independent country, po-litical rights are dissociated from place.The individual rightofeachPuertoRicantoexercisetheirrightsandpowersasaUScitizendoesnotcoexistwithasocialrightofallPuertoRicanstoexistasasovereignpoliticalcommunity.

Evenwith thegrantingofUScitizen-ship, then, Puerto Ricans were left in aprecariouslegallimbo.Theywerebroughtinto theUS political orbit, but only half-wayandwithoutfullconstitutionalprotec-tion.AstheSupremeCourtitselfstatedinDownes vs. Bidwell, Puerto Ricans were“foreigntotheUnitedStatesinadomesticsense.”Theircitizenshipcouldberevokedmoreeasily.IngrantingPuertoRicansUScitizenship, but refusing to root that cit-izenship in constitutional rights, the US

accordingtoAnglo-Saxonprinciples,mayfor a timebe impossible” (emphasis add-ed).Itthusmadenosecretofthefactthatrelegating Puerto Rico to an inferior andcolonial status—in which it was subjecttothepoliticalcontroloftheUnitedStateswithout having any power in the federalgovernment—was a result of Puerto Ri-cans’perceived racialunfitness topartici-pateintheUSpoliticalcommunity. The status of “non-incorporated terri-tory”madeabitmoresensebefore1917,when Puerto Ricans still did not enjoyUScitizenship.Before1917,PuertoRicowasundoubtedlyacolony,anditscitizenswereconsideredunambiguouslyforeigntotheUSpolityasnon-USnationals.WhenPuerto Ricans became US citizens, how-ever, non-incorporation presented a legalparadox:howcouldUScitizensbeexclud-ed from the rights and protections of theConstitution?ItwasthisexactquestionthatJesúsdeMaríaBalzacyBalzac,aPuertoRican newspaper editor, asked in 1922,whenhesuedthefederalgovernment.Heinsistedthathisconvictioninatrialwith-outajuryinPuertoRicoviolatedhiscon-stitutionalrights.Ineffect,BalzacusedhisnewstatusasaUScitizentochallengethedeprivationofconstitutionalrightsinPuer-toRico that had been allowed for by theInsularCases. RulingagainstBalzac,thecourt,head-ed by former President William HowardTaft, reiterated that Puerto Rico was a“non-incorporated”territoryof theUnitedStatesand thusnotprotectedby theCon-stitution.Thecourtadded—andthispointiskey—that thisdidnotconstituteanun-constitutional deprivation of rights, sinceitwasbasedonplaceofresidenceandnotonanystatusinherenttothecitizensthem-selves. In other words, according to thecourt,seeingthataPuertoRicanacquiredalltherightsofanyothercitizenwhentheymoved toaUSstate, itwasnotunconsti-tutional to deprive PuertoRicans of theirconstitutionalrightsaslongastheylivedinPuertoRico.ByreinforcingthelegitimacyoftheselectiveapplicationoftheConstitu-tioneveninthecontextofUScitizenshipforPuertoRicans,thisrulingalsoleftPuer-toRicanswithoutconstitutionallyguaran-teed citizenship.American citizenship forPuertoRicanswas thus enshrinedonly inalaw,amuchmoreeasilyrevocablelegalmechanism than the Constitution. This istheimpactofthefirstabovementionedca-

Anglo settlers would settle there and de-velopagovernmentandaconstitution(theterritory thus becoming “organized”), theUS Constitution would be extended (theterritory would become “incorporated”),andeventuallyCongresswouldaccepttheterritoryintotheunionasastate.WhattheInsularCasesdictated,inessence,wasthatPuertoRicowasnotbound to follow thisfamiliar path. Instead, theSupremeCourtruledthatPuertoRico,aswellastheoth-er territoriesacquiredfromSpain in1898weredifferent fromprevious territories inthat theybelonged to,butwerenotapartof, theUnitedStates.Theywere, inotherwords,colonies.Therefore,theUSConsti-tutiondidnotautomaticallyapplyintheseareas. Instead, Congress could choose toapplyonly theclausesof theConstitutionitsawfit.

Examiningthecasesinmoredetail, itcomesasnosurprisethattheInsularCaseswere decided by a court composed of al-mostexactlythesamejudgesthatdecidedtheinfamousPlessy v. Fergusoncaseinfa-voroflegalsegregation.Thelanguageusedto articulate the political status of PuertoRico and the other territories acquired intheSpanish-AmericanWarislinkedtotheexplicitlyracisttreatmentoftheterritories’inhabitants. InDownes v. Bidwell (1901),forexample,thecourtdeclaredofthenew-lyacquiredterritoriesthat“ifthoseposses-sionsareinhabitedbyalien races,differingfromus in religion, customs, laws,meth-odsoftaxationandmodesofthought,theadministrationof government and justice,

When Puerto Ricans became US citizens,

hoWever, non-incor-poration presented a legal paradox: how

could US citizens beex-cluded from the rights and pRotections of the

Constitution?

In granting Puerto Ricans US citizenship, but

refusing to root that citizenship in

constitutional rights, the US government

chained Puerto Ricans to US hegemony, but made

sure it could more easily get rid of that chain-

And any responsibility it implied-when it wished.


government chainedPuertoRicans toUShegemony, but made sure it could moreeasily get rid of that chain—and any re-sponsibility it implied—when it wished.Puerto Rico’s non-voting congressionalrepresentative, Félix CórdovaDávila, putbluntly his despair with the absurdity ofPuertoRico’sstatusina1928hearingbe-foreCongress:

“Arewe foreigners?No;becauseweareAmericancitizens,andnocitizen of the United States canbe a foreigner within the bound-ariesoftheNation.AreweapartoftheUnion?No;becauseweareanunincorporatedTerritoryundertherulingsoftheSupremeCourt.Can you find a proper definitionfor this organized and yet unin-corporatedTerritory,forthispieceof ground belonging to but notformingpartoftheUnitedStates?Undertherulingsofthecourtsofjustice we are neither flesh, fish,norfowl.Weareneitherapartnora whole.We are nothing; and itseemstomeifwearenotallowedtobepartoftheUnionweshouldbe allowed to be a whole entitywith fullandcompletecontrolofourinternalaffairs.”

Córdova Dávila’s poignant words hittheheartoftheissue:second-classcitizen-ship among Puerto Ricans is inseparablefromthebroaderquestionofPuertoRico’spoliticalstatusanditsrelationshipwiththeUnitedStates.The current political statusofPuertoRico—thatofanon-incorporatedterritory—isintrinsicallycolonialandthusunsustainable. It is based on a precariousconcept of citizenship, it deprives PuertoRicans of their constitutional and dem-ocratic rights, and it denies their right tosovereignty.PuertoRico isultimatelyun-der thecontrolofagovernment inwhoseworkingsithasnosay.TorecognizePuertoRican sovereignty would mean to eitherempowerPuertoRicanswithsuchasayortoget ridof thatcontrolaltogether.Thus,either incorporation into the US politicalcommunityasastateor(asIwouldfavor)someformof independencewouldrecog-nize the sovereignty of Puerto Rico andwouldaccord its citizenswith thedignitytheydeserve.

Notmypresidentjustmypresidertheprideofthispatchofhairybipedprimates.SureI’llbepresident,seemslikefunpushthetidesalreadybegunjustthebiggestpawnpullingallthestringslooseofanytensionSoldierstoattention!Attention:weinterruptthisbroadcasttogiveyouManinaseatresponsibleforkeepingdoughsweet,airwarm,earwormsoutyo’hearingswirls.

ThePresidentisheretositontopofafewhundredmillionthatHarlemshakeunderhissheetspluckingwheattoselltoGreekfarmerssothattheycanmeatharvestandJeepmollusksacrosstotheislandofCrete.Nicetomeetyousir,Ishookhishand!Theproudestdayofmylife,gollygeehesurewasswellsayinghewisheduswellaswejumpedfromairplaneshightowatchpeoplefrymotherscry,milkrunfromcowsdry.

Why,thankyouMR.President.Mydude’sdickisbiggerthanyours!Racingtohavesovereignssevenfeettallrefusingtoacknowledgethey’rejustassmall.

Your Majesty, The Most Honorable Venerable Chancellor Cihuacoatl Generalissimo

Contributed by: Alejandro Roig '21


same kind of exclusionary approachto citizenship and democracy in theproperty qualifications for suffrage inearlyAmericandemocracy,eveninitsostensiblepredicationonthenotionoflibertyforall.ThoughthereweremanyinearlyAmericawhoweregrantedthetitle of citizen, only white men withpropertyweregrantedsuffrage,aclearexampleofakindofrestrictivecitizen-shipwheresomeweremoreequalthanothers,touseOrwell’sphrase.AftertheRevolutionaryWar,theFederalistPar-

atelastyear,DonaldTrumpcalledfortheendofbirthrightcitizenship,thegrantingofcitizenshiprightsby

virtue of being born onUnitedStatessoil.Thoughhisthreatultimatelywentunrealized, it brought to the forefrontofournationalconsciousnessthecon-ceptofAmericanbirthrightcitizenship.Thisnotionofcitizenship, in termsoflegal relationship to the state, is gen-erally understood in a positive sense.Thatistosay,citizenshipisdiscussedas a function of the rights it gives anindividual within our democratic so-ciety. Less attention in the commonconsciousness is afforded to consid-ering citizenship in a negative sense:whom exactly citizenship excludes,and inwhatmanner.As it stands, cit-izenship excludes non-citizens by thevery virtue of the rights and privileg-es itaffordscitizens,orperhapsmorepointedly, the rights and privilegesthenotionofcitizenshiprestrictsfromnon-citizens.Ifwebegintoregardtheconcept of citizenship as in-and-of-it-selfexclusionary,Trump’schallengingofbirthrightcitizenshipbecomesmoreunderstandable. And, understandingthebasisforthiskindofexclusioncanhelpusinoureffortstodemandamoreinclusivecitizenship. The Greek city-state, or polis, as discussed byAristotle, can be a use-ful theoretical frame to understandthe historical and contemporary reali-tiesofexclusionarycitizenship. InhisPolitics, Aristotle envisions a system

accommodating two spheres of life:the public and the private. InAristot-le’sview,freemen,citizensintheviewof the polis, occupied both spheres,whereas women and slaves occupiedonly the latter. Furthermore, Aristo-tle’s conception of citizenship is notinherently democratic. For Aristotle,the polisdoesnotnecessarilyexistforthepropagationofwealthorfreedom,therespectiveends,asheexplains,ofoligarchyanddemocracy.Rather,Aris-totleassertsthattheendofacity-stateisinstead“thegoodlife”andanequaldistribution of justice. In this system,theonlypeopledeemedcapableofen-actingjusticefortheendof“thegoodlife”are thearistoi,oraristocrats: thecity-state’s “best” people. Aristotle’sconceptionofcitizenshipwas thus in-herently exclusive, and predicated onitsbestowalonlyuponselectpersons. In sum, Aristotle’s ideal polis is dependent on public engagement andindeed in a sense controlled by thepeople—but only by certain peopledeemedworthyofhavingcontrol.Therest were excluded. Though the polis prizedinvolvementofitscitizenswith-inciviclifeasanidealofthestate,Ar-istotle’sconceptionofcitizenshipwasultimatelystillabasistoperpetuateex-clusion,power,andservitude.Forthisreason,thepolisisaparticularlyusefultooltoanalyzethesimilarlyexclusion-arytrendsofcitizenshipinthehistoryoftheUnitedStates. Wecanseeamanifestationof this

L

OF POLLING & POLIS:SUFFRAGE & THE BOUNDARIES OF

AMERICAN CITIZENSHIPBY: PETER TAYLOR

Though the polis prized involvement

of its citizens within civic life as an ideal

of the state, Aristotle's

conception of citizenship was

ultimately still a basis to perpetuate exclusion, power,

and servitude.


history, such challenging was not alinear purification of citizenship backto some unrestricted, ideal essence.Instead, such an unrestricted essencewascreated throughevolving,materi-aldemandsbymarginalizedgroupsfortheexpansionoftheboundariesofcit-izenshipbeyondthelandedwhitemaleelite.

The early push for black citizen-shiprepresentsoneaspectofthedriveto expand the inherently exclusionaryconceptions of American democracy.Before the Civil War and emancipa-tion,theverypresenceofslaverywith-intheUnionstoodinstarkcontrasttotheprinciplesof freedomuponwhichthe country was ostensibly founded.FrederickDouglassinhis1852speech,“WhattotheSlaveisFourthofJuly?”directly and forcefully exposed theinherent paradox present in a country

ty viewed the new country’s fight forindependenceprimarilyasanefforttoreject British rule without necessarilyenvisioningtheirnewstateasradicallydifferentinstructurefromtheirformerone. Thomas Jefferson’s RepublicanParty, on the other hand, pushed forsuffrage as “fundamental right ratherthanaprivilegeofproperty,” toquotehistorian Rosemarie Zagarri, in herbook Revolutionary Backlash.ZagarriarguesthatbothpartiesbegantoseetheimplicationsoftheRepublicans’strug-glestoexpandsuffragebeyondproper-tyqualifications.Theeliminationofthepropertybarrierinvitedthequestionasto what other barriers along racial orgendered lines could be struck down.Insteadoffurtherexpansionofsuffrageandwithitthenatureofcitizenship,thestatus quo remained intact, with suchbarriersmaintained. AlthoughthePreambleoftheCon-stitutionprioritizedcontrolofthegov-ernment by “the people,” the initialconceptions of American democracymaintainedadecidedlyrestrictivedefi-nitionofsaidpeople.Thisrestrictioniswell-demonstratedintheConstitution’sinfamous“Three-FifthsCompromise.”The “Numbers” relevant for decidingthe representation for and taxation ofeachstateweredeterminedbycombin-ingthe“wholeNumberoffreePersons”with three-fifths thenumberof“thosebound to Service,” that is, enslavedblackpeople.Therighttovote,howev-er,wasforthemostpartextendedonlytowhitemales.Just like inAristotle’spolis,womenandenslavedpeople,de-spiteincombinationmakingupaliteralmajorityofamanystates’populations,were acknowledged as inhabitants ofthe country yet not given the right toactively participate in its democracy.From the beginning, the Constitutiondeliberately excluded many Ameri-cans,insteadfavoringasmallsegmentof the population. This conception ofcitizenshipcementeditselfthroughtherulebythosewhomsuchaconceptionbenefitted.Thoughthisconceptionhasbeen challenged throughoutAmerican

thatbothostensiblypromotedfreedomyet tolerated enslavement. In Doug-lass’view,thecelebrationofAmericanIndependence Day revealed to blackAmericans:

“...morethanallotherdaysinthe year, the gross injusticeandcrueltytowhichheistheconstantvictim.Tohim,yourcelebration is a sham; yourboasted liberty, an unholylicense; your national great-ness, swelling vanity; yoursoundsofrejoicingareemptyandheartless;yourdenuncia-tionsof tyrants,brass frontedimpudence; your shouts ofliberty and equality, hollowmockery...”

For Douglass, celebrating libertywasfutileandhypocriticalifsuchlib-ertywasnotextendedtoall. DouglassdidnotdecryallaspectsoftheAmericanconceptionofcitizen-ship inrelationtodemocracy.Indeed,he found theDeclaration of Indepen-dence to espouse “great principles ofpolitical freedom and of natural jus-tice”andsimilarlycalledtheConstitu-tiona“gloriouslibertydocument.”Thegreat abolitionist instead challengedthesedocuments’incompleteinterpre-tationsasbeingwhatallowedthepro-motionofslaveryandfurtherinjustice.InDouglass’ sentiments, he clamoredforanexpansionoftheconceptofcit-izenshiptocoincidewiththefreedomthat theUnitedStates claimed to cel-ebrate.Douglasscanthereforebeseenaschallengingthedisjunctionbetweenthe rhetoric and material realities ofAmerican freedom. Suchmaterial re-alities harken back to the exclusivedefinitionofcitizenshipinthepolis.InDouglass’view,theideaofcitizenshipwasonlyvaluableifitincludedallpeo-ple. AftertheCivilWarandintoRecon-struction, the Thirteenth, Fourteenth,andFifteenthAmendments, therefore,wereturningpoints.Respectively,they

From the beginning, the Constitution

deliberately excluded many

Americans, instead favoring a small segment of the population. This conception of

citizenship cemented itself through the

rule of those whom such a conception

benefitted.


Thoughitiseasytoviewhistoricaleffortstoexpandtheboundariesofcit-izenshipasapartofcitizenship’snatu-ral evolution, such effortsweremuchmore radical than theymay appear tothe contemporary view in their de-mandstobroadenanoriginallyintrin-sically narrow definition. Though thestruggleforblacksuffragecanbetakenas an important manifestation of thebroadeningofcitizenship’sboundaries,such boundaries were not completelyeliminated in this or other similar de-mandsfromhistoryfortheirexpansion.Though the boundaries have becomebroader and less distinguishable, theystill indeedexist, therebykeepingcit-izenship an inherently exclusive con-ceptlikeinAristotle’spolis.

The modern rhetoric centeredaroundtheideaofan“incipientminori-ty”ofwhiteAmericans,touseRobertL.Tsai’stermfromhisarticle“SpecterofaWhiteMinority”intheLA Review

abolishedslavery,institutedthenotionof “birthright citizenship,” and rede-fined the terms of citizenship by pro-hibiting thedenialof theright tovotebasedon“race,color,orpreviouscon-ditionof servitude.” Inone sense, theamendmentswereastepofsignificantprogressintheexpansionoftheAmer-ican democracy; on the other hand,themere necessity of such expansionplainly highlighted the existing flawsinthegovernmentalsystemofacoun-tryrunbyawhitemaleminority.Thepassage of the 14thAmendment wasaccompanied by an extension of suf-fragestilllimitedbygender.Thepartialqualityofthisexpansionperpetuatedakind of ingrained exclusivity, even iftheboundariesofsuchexclusionwerebroadened.InaspeechinAugust1880,Frederick Douglass spoke of the pre-ceding and incipient struggles of thenewcitizens:

“They were hated becausethey had been slaves, hatedbecause theywere now free,and hated because of thosewhohadfreedthem.Nothingwas to have been expectedotherthanwhathashappened,andheisapoorstudentofthehuman heart who does notseethattheoldermasterclasswould naturally employ ev-erypowerandmeansintheirreachtomakethegreatmea-sure of emancipation unsuc-cessfulandutterlyodious.”

Douglassastutelyobservedthatex-pansionofthelimitsofAmericanciti-zenshipwasnotanaturalone,impliedby some pre-existing definitions ofthe termthatwasrestrictedbycertainpowergroups.Instead,citizenshiphadtobeforcefullyandradicallyredefinedtomake itmore true toamore inclu-siveiterationoftheconcept.Eventhen,however,theredefinitionwasmerelyapartialone:itextendedcitizenshiptoalargegroup,butonlytoafewtherightsweassociatewithsuchcitizenship.

of Books,sharesclearparallelswiththepreceding basis of exclusion throughUnitedStateshistory.WhenpoliticianslikeDonaldTrump speak of the dan-gerimmigrantsposetotheorderofourmodernsociety,theyinherentlyappealtoaningrainedsenseofexclusionen-genderedbythehistoricalprecedentofwhite-malerule.Ineffect,theyappealtoanexpectationofasocietypredicat-edonexclusivity.Trump’sconceptionof citizenship is then consonant withAristotle’s:onlyacertaingroupshouldbeallowedtorule,andthoseoutsideofit must be directly excluded. Strikingdown the notion of birthright citizen-ship,therefore,wouldmerelybeatooltoenabletheruleofsuchaconception. When the notion of citizenship isthis fraught, the question emerges astowhethercitizenshipshouldberede-fined in a manner more inclusive, orwhether the concept should be elimi-natedentirely inhopesofamore justsociety. We can look to the originalconstitutionof theUSSRforanalter-native,andpotentiallypromising,formofcitizenship.TheUSSRConstitutiongranted“allpoliticalrightsofRussiancitizens to foreigners who live in theterritory of the Russian Republic andare engaged inwork andwho belongtotheworkingclass.”Furthermore,thestaterecognized“theequalrightsofallcitizens, irrespective of their racial ornational connections” and proclaimed“allprivilegeson thisground,aswellasoppressionofnationalminorities,tobecontrarytothefundamentallawsoftheRepublic.”For thestate, inclusionwas not demanded through generousinterpretationsofasetofrulestofindnuances to allow for greater expan-sion.Instead,itwasagiven.Inlieuofan easily manipulated conception ofcitizenship predicated on arbitrary orunequitablequalifierssuchasplaceofbirth,race,orgender,wemustdemandsomethingmore.Weneedadefinitionofcitizenshipnotbuiltuponoppressiveexclusion,asinthepolis,butonebuiltupon mutual respect and communalparticipation.

Though it is easy to view historical

efforts to expand thE boundaries of

citizenship as a part of citizenship's

natural evolution, such efforts were much more radical

than they may appear to the contemporary view in their demands

to broaden an intrinsically

narrow definition.


For two years, I have led a Commu-nityAction (CA)orientation trip inNew-ark,wherefirst years navigate their entrytoPrincetonthroughafive-daysocialjus-tice-oriented experience. Both years, mygroupvisitedNewark’sAfricanAmericanOffice of Gay Concerns, an organizationfounded in 2001 to address the spread ofHIV/AIDSinthelocalLGBTQ+commu-nity. Thepeopleworkingtherearededicat-edtodoingthemosttheycanfortheentirecommunity.First-yearsontheCAtriphelpout by designing posters for their annualPrEPrally(shortforpre-exposureprophy-laxis,medicinewhich reduces the chanceof HIV infection), an event held to raiseawarenessaboutsafersexpractices, inanefforttopreventthespreadofHIV. It’s a fun activity for students to dowhile the staffmembers teach thembasicgender,sexuality,andHIV-preventionter-minology,hopingtogetnewpeopleinvest-ed in the organization.The net impact ofmaking a couple of nice posters is smallbut, as the PaceCenter reminds us everyyear at our CA training, the trip is moreaboutbuildingrelationshipswith“commu-nitypartners”toenablefutureservice,thantheservicedoneinoneweek. If a chief goal of this week of ser-vice—besides helping new students tran-

sitionintothePrincetoncommunity—istoleadpre-frosh into expansive,meaningfulservice,whydoes this goal gounfulfilledwhenstudentsreturntocampus? The Pace Center for Civic Engage-ment, according to its website, existsto make “service and civic engagementpart of the Princeton student experience”through“engageddiscovery,”“communityfocus,”“impactfulprograms,”and“studentleadership.”ThePaceCenteroftenusesthemetaphorofthe“orangebubble”—aman-ifestation of the disconnect between lifeonPrinceton’scampusand lifeseeminglyanywhere else—in its marketing. We’veallseentheirvinylstickersonlaptopsandwater bottles dramatically stamped with“Burst the Bubble.” So much time andmoneyandenergyisspentadvertisingthisandremindingusthatgoodcitizenshipen-tails good engagement—communicatingwith and listening to communities to ad-dresstheirneeds,notjustcominginfromafar toofferour timeormoneyorenergyforafewhourseachweek. Thethingaboutbubblesisthatthey’remeant to be burst. They’re transparent;we all knowwhat’s happening outside ofthem.They’realsoeasilybroken,allowingexchangewithminimal effort.Hypotheti-cally,allofuscouldgopastNassauStreetand join community members organizing

against the theft of immigrant workers’wages,orgetinvolvedwithlocalLGBTQ+organizations.Thatkindofactivecitizen-ship does not, however, flourish on thiscampus.InspiteofthePaceCenter’sstatedgoals,andit’sco-optingandnebuloususeof terms like “advocacy” and “activism,”itisnotdesignedtoactuallyenableexpan-sivecivicengagement.Itdoesawonderfuljob teaching students about fundraising,entrepreneurship, and volunteering, buttheheartofactivecitizenship is the laborto create a better society, laborwhich re-quires challenging existing power struc-tures.Theytellusthatwecanbringaboutsocialandpoliticalchanges,buttheydon’tteachushowtodo theworkethically, letalonewhat to dowhenwe encounter theresistancethataccompaniesactivistwork.

If you interact with the Pace Centerenough,you’reboundtofilloutaworksheetdesignedtoexaminewhatservicemeanstoyou.Itconsistsofaninventoryofdifferentwaystoperformservice,andincludesmoretraditionaloutlets,liketutoringandpartic-ipatinginafter-schoolprograms,aswellasmilitary service and the nebulous phrase:“talkingtofriendsabout...issues.”Com-ingfromhighschool,wheremanystudents

Sorry to Burstyour Bubble

the institutional limits of active citizenship at Princeton

By: K stiefel


seecommunityserviceassomethingtobetickedoffforacollegeapplication,myCAfirst-yearsoftendon’trankinformaladvo-cacyhighly.ThePaceCenterclaimsthatitis committed to broadening the definitionofserviceandmovingstudentsawayfrommore traditional conceptions. After all, Ididleadatriptitled“SocialJusticeNorthJersey.” However, what the Pace Center pro-videsdoesnotdoenoughtohelpstudentsrealize this expansive vision of engage-ment. First, the Center’s training effortsalmost exclusively focus onvolunteering,rather than other forms of civic engage-ment.Paceoffersonlyahandfulof train-ings, almost all of which center around“service”or“volunteering,”andquiteafewofwhichcenteronpreparingforCA.IftheCenterwastrulycommittedtobroadeningunderstandings of civic engagement, theywould train students on how to carry outactivistworkorundertakeadirectaction.Few students come to Princeton (or anyuniversity) understanding what activismis,what it aims todo,orwhat it requiresof them.The PaceCenter is theoreticallyinapositiontorectifythis,buttheymerelypaylipservicetotheseideas.Inaddition,thePaceCenter’smantraaboutlisteningtowhat a community needs, a focus duringCA,rarelycomesupanyothertime.HowmanyofPace’sstudentgroupsareactivelyconsultingwiththecommunitiestheywanttopartnerwith,beforeofferinganideaofwhat theypersonallywant todo?Wheth-er it comes from a paternalistic sense ofknowing what’s best or from a genu-inedesiretouseone’sskillssimplymissingitsmark,wecanbedoingbetter.LeadersandmembersofnewPacestudentgroupscouldhavemandatory trainingsonethical community engage-ment,attheveryleast. The Pace Center, inaddition to providingtrainings and operatingprograms like CA, alsohouses various civicengagement groups oncampus.Lookingattheirwebsite, thePaceCenterhosts around 20 campusgroups,mostofwhichfo-

cusoneducationandhealth.Additionally,manyofthegroupslistedunderthebannerof“Advocacy”aremorefocusedonraisingmoneyorengagingin“socialentrepreneur-ship,” than actively challenging existingpowerdynamics(whichistosay,activism).ThePaceCenterandtheuniversityteachusthatthemosteffectivechangecomesfromworking within, and thus upholding, thesystemsthatweoughttoberesisting.Theyteach us that the bestway to channel thepowerandprivilegewe’vebeengivenbyattendingthewealthiestschoolinthecoun-try, is towielditforourselves,aslongaswerememberthelessfortunate. Ultimately, the Center is not shap-ing the next generation of grassroots or-ganizers; they’re shaping students forthe “non-profit industrial complex.” Theidea behind this term is that most largenon-profit organizations become ineffec-tiveintheirworkandinsteadmerelyturnaprofitforthehigher-upemployeesoftheorganization.SproutDistro’s“What’stheNon-Profit Industrial Complex and whyshould I care?” zine posits that a charac-teristicofthenonprofit-industrialcomplexis pushing activists towards career-basedorganizing, instead of grassroots tacticswhicharemorelikelytofosterchange.ThePaceCenter’sroleinproppingupthisphe-nomenonisembodiedbythefactthatthereare multiple groupswhosesolep u r -

poseistofundraisefornationalU.S.char-ities that are doing “work” in far-flungplaces around the globe. This furthercompounds the non-profit industrial com-plexbyencouragingproblematicidealsofcharity as something performed for thoseoutsideofourowncommunities.Notonlydoesitdestabilizetheeconomiesof“thirdworld” countries and prevent them fromimplementingtheirownsolutions,butthismodelofcharityalsoerases theexistenceofthoseinneedinourownspaces.Iten-couragesus to“other” thereceiverofouraid,toviewourselvesastheirbettersaswestoopdowntosavethem.Afterall,Prince-toniswhereIvyLeagueprofessorsliveinmansions,elderlycouplespatronizeMcCa-rtertheater,andthreeover-pricedicecreamshopsoperatelessthanfiveminutesawayfromeachother—it couldn’t needour at-tention,right? Thus, few Pace Center-associatedgroupswhohavebeenapprovedandhaveaccess to theCenter’s staff and resourcesembody the center’s stated vision of ex-pansive engagement. The form to createa new group is easy to fill out—you justneedtomeetsomevaguecorevaluesandexplainwhereyouplantogetmoney.Butthat’s something you might not have ex-pected that shapes the type of groups thePaceCenterhouses.Regardlessofwhether

Pacemight eventually pro-vide capital to a

fledgling

ILLUSTRATION Jt Tao '22


group, their form suggests that the groupshouldhavethegoalofeconomicviability,whenmanygrassrootsorganizationsneverstriveforthatthemselves. Of course, thePaceCenter can nevertrulycarryoutanexpansivevisionofac-tivecitizenship.BecausethePaceCenterisa university institution, it cannotbemoreradicalthanPrincetonitself;ifitwere,oth-eradministratorswouldreadilybringittoheel. The institution that the PaceCenterrepresents is not interested in teachingushowto reducepolice impactonaprotest,becausethatpoliceforcemightbePSAFE.It’sinnoone’sinterestatthisuniversitytotell you how to pressure administratorswhen advocacy falls short, because youcould challenge someone like Eisgruber.Putsimply,whyintheworldwouldPrinc-etonteachushowtogoaboutchallenginginstitutions exactly like itself? Yet, eventhoughonecannotexpectPacetoteachstu-dentshowtostagethenextsit-in,itisen-tirelyreasonabletoexpectthateachstudentwhopassesthroughtheirdoorleaveswithnotonlyanunderstandingofethicalcom-munityengagement,but,moreimportantly,the tools toenact it. It isneithereasynorstandard,butthebenefitsfaroutweighthecosts.

With this, we’ve come full circle toexplainwhytherearesomanygroupsdis-proportionatelyfundraising,ratherthanen-gaging:itlooksamazingforanIvyLeagueschool,butdoesnothingtopushtheinsti-tution into the “service of all humanity.”ThePaceCenter speaks about “activism”asaformofcivicengagementbutdoesnotactually foster it, ultimately channelingstudentsintoapathyandfeel-goodservice.Butthispieceisnotmeantasablanketre-viewofallstudentgroupswithinthePaceCenter,oreven todenounce thecenter it-self.Isupporttheguidingprinciplebehindtheir work: that one cannot be an activecitizenwithoutactivecitizenship,thatonecannotexpecttheadvantagesofacommu-nitywithoutthedutiesofsupportingit.Theway that the Center provides and institu-tionalizes their services, however, imbuesapathy into even the act of feeling like agood,engagedcitizen.Theveryorganiza-tionthatissupposedtoconnectstudentstoservice, tomake it easier toaccess, toal-lowit toflourish,doesverylittletomakeservice meaningful. They’ve taken theradical concept of activism and co-optedit,inordertosaythey’relivinguptotheirownexpansivevisionofservicelookslike.They’vetakenactivisttermsjusttoappeartobewiththetimes. It is important to teach students thatactivism is part of good citizenship, butifyoucan’ttrulysupportit,don’tsayyoucan.Don’ttrickstudentsintobelievingthatitwillnotbeasdifficultas the institutionof PrincetonUniversity is going tomakeit for them toenact radical change. If thePaceCentercan’tsupportactivismdirect-ly,itshouldleaveittostudentstoseekoutother options, and try to give themwhatguidesitcan.Ifitcan’thelpstudentsformCenter-approvedgroups,itshouldkeepaninformal list of activists on campus andtheirgoalssoitcandirectstudentsiftheyapproachwithinterestinanissue. It took me two years before I hada sense ofwhowas doingwhat so that Icould get involved in causes that mattertome,andthatIhavetheenergyfor.Twoyearsisalongtime:imagineallthepoten-tialwastedinthoseyearsthroughoutwhichI could have beenmeaningfully engaged.Intwoyears,youcangetadriver’slicense.You can find someone and marry them.You can probably change careers.But on

Princeton’scampus,Icouldn’tfindgroupsof students doing activist work centeredaroundcausesthatIcaredeeplyabout. I know that we can do more to bothimprove Princeton University for futurestudentsandengagewiththecommunitiesaround us. It’s simply amatter of realiz-ing that this institution does not supportall forms of participative citizenship and,in themeantime, puttingour noses to thegrindstone, while keeping an eye out forstudentsdoingsimilarwork.

Put simply, why in the world

would Princeton teach

us how to go about

challenging institutions exactly like

itself?

It is importantto teach

students that activism is part

of good citizenship, but

if you can't truly support it, don't say

you can.


GILETS JAUNESHIGH VISIBILITY, SHALLOW ROOTS

rench settlement in what is nowFrenchGuiana dates back to 1503;itscapital,Cayenne,wasestablishedby French colonists in 1643. The

landwas home to a number of groups ofindigenouspeoplesuchastheKalina,Ar-awak,Emerillon,Galibi,Palikur,Wayam-pi,andWayana,whofaceddisplacementorenslavement throughout waves of Frenchcolonization. The colonists also broughtenslavedAfricanswiththem,forcingthemtolaboronplantationsproducingsugarandothercrops.ThecolonywasfirstdeclaredaFrenchoverseasdepartment(anadminis-trativedivisionunderFrenchgovernment)in1797.Butoverthefollowing150years,FrenchGuianawas developed as a penalcolony, perhaps most infamously knownfor the Devil’s Island system, where theSecond French Empire exiled incarcerat-ed convicts and political prisoners (suchasAlfredDreyfus,theJewisharmyofficertargeted during the infamous antisemiticDreyfus Affair) for intense and inhumanpunishment. This system continued un-til themid-20th century. In 1946, FrenchGuiana’s department status was restoredbytheFrenchgovernment,alongwiththatof Algeria, Guadeloupe, and Martinique.The colonized regions, now considered“departments,”were granted political sta-tusequivalenttoMetropolitandepartmentsin mainland France, while still not quiteequal;forexample,theywerestillexclud-ed from certain statistical measurementssuchasunemployment.Algeriafoughtforandgaineditsindependencein1962,whileFrench Guiana, Guadeloupe, and Marti-niqueremainFrenchoverseasdepartments

BY: COLE DIEHLtoday.GeneralCharlesdeGaulleand“FreeFrance”(agovernment-in-exileagendaledby Frenchmilitary forces duringWWII),established the Guiana Space Center in1965,inanefforttosecureandcontrolco-lonial projects guised as overseas depart-ments.TheCenter is stilloperatedby theFrenchNationalCentre forSpaceStudiesandtheEuropeanSpaceAgency.Theplan-tations of French Guiana—the roots ofFrench coloniality—merely changed face,transforming to a SpaceCenterwhen co-lonialism was formally denounced in thelatterhalfofthe20thcentury.Colonialismlives on as an extractive virus in FrenchGuiana,asFranceonlyextendsitsborderstoSouthAmericainsofarasitusesthelandforprojectssuchasspaceresearchorgoldmining:projectswhichhavelittletonore-gard for the people living there.Colonialrootsareattheheartofthisissueofbordersandcitizenship.

Excursus 1GillesDeleuzeandFelixGuattari,thepairof French philosophers famous for theirCapitalism and Schizophrenia project inthe1970s and80s, begin the essay “Seg-mentarity andMicropolitics” (featured intheir A Thousand Plateaus)with the sim-ple yet ominous proclamation: “We aresegmented all around and in every direc-tion.”DeleuzeandGuattariarenotableforbreachingtheoreticalhorizonsinpolitical,social, and psychoanalytic theory withbizarre and jargoned nomenclature as awayofprovokingan insurrection inepis-temology.The essay in question goes on,

atgreatlengthandequal—ifobscure—de-tail, topropose the theoretical frameworkof“StateGeometry”:

“State geometry, or rather thebondbetweenStateandgeometry,manifestsitselfintheprimacyofthe theoremelement,which sub-stitutesfixedoridealessencesforsupplemorphologicalformations,properties for affects, predeter-mined segmentations-in-progress… Private property implies aspacethathasbeenovercodedandgridded by surveying. Not onlydoeseachlinehaveitssegments,butthesegmentsofonelinecorre-spondtothoseofanother.”

StateGeometry isanythingbutan imagi-narypoliticalfabric—itisradicalbecauseitisrootedinempiricism,inthesegmentedrealityofpolitical life.How,then,arewetounderstandtheborderedspaceofFrenchGuiana? In a sense, it is a segmentary, ageographicallybrokenyet primallydeter-mined extension of the French border–ageometrical imposition of the State–andthissegmentarityissimultaneouslythecre-ationofprivateproperty:FrenchGuianaisa“department”ofFrance,extractedof itsresources and surveyed for its materials,mediatedbytheborderandmanifestedincitizenship.

Segment 1According to theColumbusGoldCorpo-ration, the mining company overseeing

F


mining operations at Montagne d’Or inFrenchGuiana,asofQ4of2018theEnvi-ronmentalandSocialImpactAssessmentshadbeen completed and theMinePermitApplicationsweresubmittedtotheFrenchgovernment for approval. In 2017 and2018,afterthreephasesofdrilltestingandduring theColumbus’BankableFeasibili-tyStudy,therewaspublicoutcryoverthedecision of Emmanuel Macron’s govern-ment to develop the 800-hectare open-pitgold mine at Montagne d’Or, which sitsonly100metersfromtheboundaryofoneof the twonatural reserveswhichenclosethe site. InApril of 2018,when coveringthe protests, The Guardianreportedindig-enous rights activistAlexisTiouka of theKalina people of French Guiana stating,“Paris is completely disconnected fromus”. Iwould reiterateThe Guardian’s re-port:Tioukawasn’texaggeratingwhenhemade that claim. FrenchGuiana, official-ly an “overseas department and regionofFrance,”isborderedbyBrazilandSurina-meontheAtlanticcoastofSouthAmerica.Cayenne,FrenchGuiana’scapital, isover4,000miles fromParis,andyetMacron’sadministration still governs the countrythroughtheFrenchGuianaTerritorialCol-lectivity and French Guiana Assembly,which iswhy, evenwithFrenchGuiana’sownprefect,itremainsMacron’sdecisiontoapproveofthemineatMontagned’Or.FrenchGuianaexiststerritoriallyandseg-mentarily,butas such it isahighlypolit-icized entity. France’s regimentary StateinterpellatesFrenchGuianageometrically;butthisgeometricrelationshipparadigmat-icallyoccupiesmultipleformsofcolonial-ity,citizenship,territoriality,andproperty:the political nexus ofwhich appears as asegmentaryconstellationofroots.

excursus 2Segmentarity, according to Deleuze andGuattari, appears in political forms: one“rigid”andone“supple,”binaryandcircu-lar, primitive and State. Segmentarity oc-cupiesamultiplicityoraggregateofpoliti-calrelations.And,asDeleuzeandGuattaridetail:

“It is not enough, therefore, toopposethecentralizedtotheseg-mentary.Nor is it enough toop-posetwokindsofsegmentarity…There is indeed a distinction be-tweenthetwo,buttheyareinsep-arable,theyoverlap,theyareen-tangled.Primitivesocietieshaveanucleiofrigidityorarborificationthat asmuchanticipate theStateaswarditoff.Conversely,[State]societies are still suffused by asupple fabric which their rigidsegmentswouldnothold.”

Emergent from such an entangled mul-tiplicity of relations are the overlappingspheresof themicropoliticalandmacrop-olitical.“Whatmakesfascismdangerousisitsmolecularormicropoliticalpower,foritis amassmovement,”DeleuzeandGuat-tariwrite.Themacropoliticalisnoantidoteto the poison of microfascism, for “May1968 inFrance [when large-scaleprotestsandstrikeseruptedacrossthecountry]wasmolecular,makingwhatleduptoitallthemoreimperceptiblefromtheviewpointofmacropolitics…The politicians, the par-ties,theunions,manyleftists,wereutterlyvexed; they kept repeating over and overagain that ‘conditions’ were not ripe.” Itmayseem,inFrenchGuiana,thatthemac-ropolitical sphere is not in revolt againsttheFrenchgovernment.TheFrenchStategeometryterritorializesandbordersFrenchGuiana and, as such, the “conditions arenotripe,”regardlessoftheactualinjusticeswhich constitute the territory. But, giventheentanglementofFrenchGuianawithintherhizomaticconstellationofFrenchter-ritoriality,whatmaywesayofthemicro-political?

Segment 2The Gilets Jaunes (Yellow Vests) move-mentisthrivinginParis.TheYellowVestsmovement initially responded to a spike

in diesel and petrol prices in November2018, but quickly gainedmomentum andarticulatedmoregeneralcausesofdiscon-tentment with Macron’s presidency andtheFrenchgovernment.SomeGilet Jaune demandsincludetaxreformsaimingtoaidlow-incomepeople,andtheestablishmentof a citizen’s initiative referendum–a di-rect-democratic constitutional amendmentwhichwould allow forFrench citizens todirectlypetition thegovernmentforrefer-enda, without permissive steps taken bytheparliamentorpresidency.Everysevendays,fromNovember17thtoMarch16th,theYellowVestsoccupiedthestreetsofParis, while parallel movements emergedall across France. March 16th, 2019,marked the “ultimatum,” as some takingpart in the grassrootsmovement term the19thwaveof protests.Thatweekend200protestersweretakenintocustodyandPar-is Mayor Anne Hidalgo deployed nearly6,000 police officers, two drones, and anentourage of teargas and police weapon-ry.PresidentMacronthreatenedtoinvolveanti-terroristmilitary forcescomeanotherwave of protests. News outlets have re-ported that theYellowVest movement isbeginningtofalter;Macronisappealingtosomeofitsdemandswhileheighteningthethreat of anti-protestmilitary force.Werethe“conditionsnotripe”?Ifleftistorgani-zationstaketheyellowvestsasanexampleofgrassrootsinsurgency,whatdotheysee?Bright yellowvests, 40,000people in the

The French State geometry territori-alizes and borders French Guiana and, as such, the “condi-tions are not ripe,” regardless of the actual injustices which constitute

the territory.

French Guiana exists territorially

and segmentarily, but as such it is a highly politicized

entity.


streets,blockedroads,andnervouspoliti-cians:ultimatelyafailedmovement.

Excursus 3DeleuzeandGuattariwrite:

“Forintheend,thedifferenceisnotatallbetweenthesocialandthe individual (or interindividu-al),butbetweenthemolarrealmof representations, individualor collective, and themolecularrealm of beliefs and desires inwhich distinction between thesocialandtheindividuallosesallmeaning since flows are neitherattributable to individuals norovercodable by collective signi-fiers.”

Politicalrelations,mediatedbytheborder,must not be understood in dichotomous,arborized,opposingways.Indeed,themul-tiplicitous politicality of French Guianamust be reckonedwith in order to poten-tializetheantifascistflowofitsactivism.

Segment 3Tioukavoicedconcernsover theenviron-mental damage the Columbus gold minewould cause in his country: “The forestisendangeredbecauseof legalandillegalmining. Our environment is completelypolluted.Wefindtracesofmercuryintherivers we fish in. People are ill becausethe whole food chain is contaminated.Thisshouldn’tjustbeabouteconomicde-velopment.” But in the history of FrenchGuiana,activismhasneverbeenjustaboutenvironmental concerns. A recent arti-cle in The Washington Post recounts forthe protests that surged inFrenchGuianaduring the 2017French presidential cam-paign accordingly: “FrenchGuianans feellegitimately neglected by Paris: Poverty,inequalityandlackofadequatepublicser-vicessuchasschools,policeandhospitalsarecompoundedbyawaveofimmigrationfromnearbyBrazilandHaiti.”Theauthor,Manu Saadia, describes how grassrootsactivists organized against the sale of anonprofit hospital in Kourou to a privateadministrator. Saadia notes that activistsinFrenchGuiana,criticallypreceding theYellowVests, set up highway roadblocks

denyingaccesstotheGuianaSpaceCenter.The protest aggrandized and transformedinto a sustained, month-long movementwith demands including better public ed-ucationandinfrastructure.SaadiadeclaresFrench Guianan victory. The pressure ontheFrenchgovernmenttoacknowledgetheactivismof FrenchGuiana as they did inParis,whichinvolvedmajoreconomicdis-ruptionsandafewviolentprotests,forcedthe French government to concede threebillioneurostoFrenchGuiana’sinfrastruc-turaldevelopment.Still,FrenchGuianaismarkedbythetracesofasegmentedterrito-rialization.HadtheFrenchGuiananswornyellowvests?Howdoesthispoliticalrela-tion—that of the territory, the border, thecitizen—problematize the leftist analysisofsomethinglikethe“grassroots”idealsoftheYellowVestmovement?What ifrootsare thoughtof in termsof theirextractiveandcolonialmeans?Doestheyellowvestmovement only embolden–and border–itsappearance by excluding and extractingfromitsterritorialroots?

Lines of Flight: DestratificationWho can wear a gilet jaune? Can theFrenchGuianans?AFrenchGuiananmaybe a citizen of France, but does this citi-zenship grant them a stake in grassrootsactivism?OrdoesFrenchactivism,whileclaiming “roots,” remain segmentary andterritorialized,insistingendlesslythat“theconditions are not ripe” when in fact theintensitiesof itsflowsarecutshortby itscolonial andextractive roots,whichcloseand rigidify themovementswhichgive itallofitspotential?Thehighlyvisiblelinesegments plastered on the bodies of pro-testers in France only serve to border itsparticipants in an inscrutablymicrofascistmacropolitics. These visible borders en-close French Guianian leftism within itscolonialsphere,butitisnotwithinthecer-tainvisionoftheYellowVeststoextendtherootsoffuller,“grassroots,”Frenchcitizen-shiptoFrenchGuiana.Untilthelogicandremnantsofcolonialityandtheviolenceofitsterritorialityareaddressedinfullbytheleft, a leftistworkers’movementwill nottranscenditsfatalsegmentarity.

How does this political

relation-that of the territory, the

border, the citizen-

problematize the leftist analysis

of something like the “grassroots”

ideals of the Yellow Vest movement?


City & citizenan interview with dr. nasser abourahme

by: Chris Russo

Dr.NasserAbourahme is a Princ-eton-Mellon/Humanities Coun-cil Fellow and a scholar on theintersectionofurbanstudiesand

postcolonial thought. He has writtenforavarietyofpublications includingthe International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Public Culture, andCITY,whereheisthespecialfea-tureseditor.ChrisRussosatdownwithDr.Abourahme todiscuss citizenship,liberalcities,andhowwemightunder-stand the crises ofWestern democra-cies in the era ofTrump, through thelensofcolonialhistory.

CR: In your essay “Of Monsters and Boomerangs,” you talk about how we can understand the crises of Western democracies as a return of the modes of repression and control of colonial-ism to the metropole and especially the liberal city. How do you under-stand New York City today, an exem-plary liberal, cosmopolitan city? NA:NewYork is exemplary but alsoquite unique in a lot ofways. I thinkNewYork displays a lot of the char-acteristicsIhadinmindwhenItalkedaboutthedemiseofwhatwecanthinkof as the liberal city. I try to identifyina slightlygestural sense,howwhatwetookforgrantedastheliberalcity—thatis,acityoffreecirculation,acityoffreemovement,acityinwhichfree-dom of individual subjects is not justthe aimof forms of rule but the verybasisofrule—isnolongerthesame. After 9/11, after the War on Ter-ror,NewYorkCityhasbecomeahy-per-securitizedcity.Itisacitysubject

to forms ofmass surveillance and allothernewformsofrepressivecontrol.The expansion and intensification ofpolicepowerisquiteclearinNewYorkCity.NewYorkwasoneoftheleadingadopters in this country of stop-and-frisk policies, which have since beenrolledback.Thecitycameunderheavycriticismfor theway informantswereusedinMuslimcommunitiesaspartofcounterterrorism. People have talked before aboutmodes of accumulation, modes ofwealthextraction inurbanspaces,butwhatI’vetriedtodoisexplorethere-lationshipofourpresentandwhatusedto be understood as its colonial past.This era is not really finished, but isalive inallof theseprocesses thatareextendingandintensifying. CitylifeinNewYorkhaschanged,obviouslysincethe1970swhereIbe-gin to chart the story beginning withneoliberalism.What’sbilledasthedif-ficultdecadeofthe70sinthiscity—thecitygoesbankruptandisimaginedandarticulated by various political forcesas unruly and ungovernable. There’sabiglawandorderagendathatcomesout ofNewYork and forwhichNewYorkbecomesasortofcenterpieceasitgoesnationwide.ThatculminatesintheGiulianierawithwhatwasseenasthecleaningupofNewYork.Thesearetrends that have been there forwhile.Itrytopickuphowafterthecrisisof2008,afterausterity,they’reintensifiedandtakeamoreclearrole. Thisforcesus to thinkaboutwhatwetakeforgrantedinliberalurbanlifesuchthatweseeitastheoppositeofthethingthatwecalltheauthoritarianout

thereinthebadplacesinMiddleEastor in Latin America or in Asia—thedistinctionbecomeslessclearcut.I’mnot saying that there is no difference.Therearedifferentsystemsofpoliticsatplay,different instruments.Liberal-ism’s self-imagehasbeenconstructedon the idea that there is a typologicaldistinction. If you go back and readearly liberal thought—Mill, Montes-quieu, anyone—they’re building it inoppositiontoacertainimage,oftenofthe east: Oriental despotism, MiddleEasternsexuality,licentiousness. Having said all that, I would addthat New York City, like all cosmo-politan,diverse cities in theWest andelsewhere,can’tjustbereducedtoin-struments of repressive control or tothese large scaleapparatusesofurbanaccumulation.There’salotmoregoingoninthiscity.It’sarecalcitrantplace,and it can’t really be domesticated.WhenyouactualizetheabstractwayinwhichIwroteaboutitinacitylikethisitstopsbeingsoclearcut.

CR: Can you explain what you mean by the “subject,” as opposed to the “citizen”?

NA:Onewayistothinkaboutthesub-jectand thecitizenasdistinctcatego-ries.A citizen is someonewho is notsubject to the rule of others, but is afree individualwhoenters intovolun-tary contractual relationshipswith thestateandwithothersvis-à-viscivilso-ciety.Incolonialthoughtthereisasplitbetweencitizens in themetropoleandsubjectsinthecolony. Anotherwayistothinkaboutciti-


zensandsubjectsasantinomiouscou-plings—citizensarealwayssubjects,inacertainsense.Theemergenceof theinstitution of citizenship itself alwaysentails a form of subjection. There isa paradox at theheart of the concept,which is really a paradox at the heartofourpoliticalorder.Theveryconceptthatmarksyourfreedom,yoursubjec-tivity, your ability to do something,alsomarksyoursubjugationtoaformofpower.

To concretize this, this way wethinkaboutthecitizen-subjectinliber-aldemocracyas fundamentallyasub-jectoffreedom.Inacertainsense,youare controlled through your freedom.Today, we witness a space in whichthis relationship is no longer so clearcut. I thinkpartof theways inwhichobedience around the notion of citi-zenshipinacountrylikethisworksisbeginningtofray.Thesethingshavetobequalifiedbyraceandclass,butlet’stake an ideal type, awhitemale—thewaywe’veunderstooditintheoreticaltermsisthatobedienceinasocietylikethiscomesoutofconviction.Youdon’tobeythelawbecauseyou’reafraid,butyouobeythelawbecauseitisrightand

itisjustanditisthecontractyouhaveenteredintowiththestateandyourfel-lowcitizens.Youknowthatthereisanimperative somewhere, but you obeynotoutofcompulsion. Partofwhatweseeinthepost-aus-terity moment is the collapse of thegivenness of this conviction.You cansee this in the language of the far-right—an insurrectionary language, inwhichtherulesofthegameareupforgrabsagain. Inasense,Trump’selec-tionwasaprotestvote,butaprotestofwhat?Inaway,they’rerejectingpoli-ticsasawhole.Theideathatthepoliti-calorderanditsnormsareasjustascanbe,evenforthoseforwhomcitizenshipwasmeanttobeaguaranteeofastakein thegame,not its racializedminori-ties, isfraying.Thereisacrisisat theheartoftheinstitutionifwhiteproper-tiedmenarealmostinastateofrevolt;thecontractualdealcitizenshipheldinplace is not as stable as it once was.Thehingethatmovesonefromsubjectto citizenship, that makes you inter-nalizetheethicofpower—“Ioughttoobey”—isn’tasclearanymore.

CR: Hudson Yards [a $25 billion ul-tra- high end real estate development in Midtown Manhattan] has taken a lot of heat recently from architec-ture critics who see it as an epitome of the worst of NYC real estate de-velopment in recent years. What do you make of New York’s evolving architectural landscape? How does the lived urban environment relate to these crises of liberal cities?

NA: Iwouldhave toagreewithmostofthosecritics.HudsonYardsisagiantmess;that’snotthehillI’mgonnadieon.The triumphof the lawandorderagenda, of what’s called the Giulianiera “broken windows theory,” reallyis thebedrockof themovementoffi-nancial instruments intoNYCreales-tate.Themassgentrification thathap-pensinManhattanandinlargepartsofBrooklynreallyneedsasaprerequisitetheformsofincreasingrepressivecon-

trol—expansionofpolicepower,streetsurveillance, patrolling, stop-and-friskallmakethematerialpoliticalfounda-tionofprojectslikeHudsonYards.Be-causerealestatevalueistiedtoawidergeography,whattheycallthe“cleaningup”ofaneighborhoodprovidestheba-sis for valorization, for capitalization.They need the long arm of the state.Capitalalwaysneedsit. NewYorkreallyinthatsenseisnottoounique; it resemblesa lotofwhathasbeenhappening insocalledglob-al cities and big metropolises—realestatebecomesnot justafinancial in-strument,butatypeofcurrency.Oneofthestrikingthingsifyoulookatacitylike London or even parts of theUp-perEastSideareoccupancyratesandhow empty some of these apartmentsare for largepartsof theyear.This issomethingthatintensifiesquitestarklyafter2008andafter interest ratescol-lapse.Surpluscapitalneedsnewformstotake.Realestatereallyjustasawayof parkingmoney becomes central inthat,andNYCisattheforefront.Ifyoulookatthenumberofforeigninvestors,investment arms buying up propertyyou’dseeahugeincreaseinthepast10years.

“the forms of increasing repressive con-trol - expansion of police power, street surveil-lance, patrolling, stop-and-frisk - all make the material politi-cal foundation of projects like Hudson Yards.”

“the liberal city- that is, a city of free circulation, a city of free movement, a city in which freedom of individual sub-jects is not just the aim of forms of rule but the very basis of rule -is no longer the same.”


Architecturally, Manhattan is in-creasinglyan imprintof thatphenom-enon, though arguably it always hasbeen. I think it is more uniformly sothan ithasbeen in thepast,andHud-sonYardsisanexampleofthat.Thereareothers,andreallyintermsofanar-chitecturalaesthetic thereisreallynotmuchgoingonoutsidelargescalecor-poratearchitecture.HowmanyRenzoPianobuildingscanNewYorksustain?

CR: You’ve discussed before about how denaturalization is a particu-larly worrying encroachment on the rights of the citizen. What do you make of the Trump administration’s denaturalization pushes?

NA:Theinstitutionofcitizenshipwillnot necessarily protect bodies fromstateviolenceorfrombeingeffectivelystateless, even thoughyou are techni-cally and legally a citizen.Disenfran-chisement throughcriminalizationcanbethoughtofasaformastatelessness.But,therearewaysthateventhatfor-malstatusofcitizenshipisbeingrolledback. You see it in what are calledterror cases, in post-Bataclan Francewhere there is now the spectre of de-naturalization and denationalization.OfcourseTrumphasraisedthisspectrehere,ofdenaturalizationenmasse.For-mal, legal protectionswilt in the faceof executive power.Why is thiswor-

rying? Weknowthehistoryofit.Weknowthat denaturalization and denational-izationareusuallythefirststepsinei-thertheremovalor,sometimesworse,the elimination of groups of a pop-ulation. The history ofWWII in Eu-ropedemonstrates that formoststatesdenationalization is a first step in theencampment,andthentheeliminationofpopulations.The spectre that allofthis talk and its actualization raises isthe tangibility of the removal of peo-ples, either territorially, physically, ortheir removal frompoliticalparticipa-tionenmasse,ortheirencampmentinvarious sitesof concentration. It’snotbeyondimagination.Citizenshipisnotenoughtoprotectyou,butatthesametime,formsofstatepowerarereachingeven deeper or threatening to removethatformalandlegalguarantee.

CR: We tend to see Trump and far- right nationalism as a movement that comes from outside of big, lib-eral cities, and feels foreign to their residents. The anti-immigrant, Is-lamophobic rhetoric seems to par-ticularly go against what, say, New Yorkers or San Franciscans see as their values. You seem to think other-wise—can you explain how this polit-ical moment is deeply tied to liberal cities?

NA:There is something temptingandsomething to a degree true about thefactthattherearethesebicoastalliber-alcitiesthatareremovedfromthein-teriorof thecountry—what is seenasthebedrockoftheright,thebedrockofwhitenationalism,Trump’sbaseifyouwill.Certainlythoseofuswhoconsid-erourselvesNewYorkerssaywehavenothing to dowith thatmess.There’san ease and there’s a comfort in that,butIthinkit’sillusory. TrumpisaproductofNewYork’sfinancialandrealestateworld,andhisworldviewswereformedinNewYorkasmuchasanywhereelse.Ifyoucon-siderhisroleintheCentralParkFive-

the vilification, the demonization, thewitchhunt of thosefivekids of color-that’snotsomething thatwasformedintheRustBeltortheinterior,that’saNewYorkCityphenomenon. Inmorepolitical terms,onehas toquestion ata certain level this liberal civility andcentrismanditsentanglementandcom-plicitywiththeresurgenceofwhitena-tionalismandtheRightinthiscountry.Thesearenotnecessarilyoppositionalphenomena,even ifnowtheywant toraisetheireyebrowsandlookawayincontempt and join the so-called resis-tance.

CR: The #Resistance.

NA: It’s the policies of a liberal cen-trism that produced the world fromwhichTrump appears.Mass inequali-ty,whichliberalcentristsneverwantedtodoanythingabout;racism,imperialwar.Thesearetheconstituentelementsthatliberalcentrismwasperfectlyfinewith. There’s this notion that had wejust voted in HRC or another liberalcentristorhadanothertermofObamaand it would have all been fine—no,youwouldhavejustdelayedthisphe-nomenon another four years and itwouldhavecomebackjustthesame,ifnotstronger.

“The hinge that moves one from subject to citizen-ship, that makes you internalize the ethic of power - I ought to obey - isn't as clear any-more. ”

“Citizenship is not enough to protect you, but at the same time, forms of state power are reach-ing even deeper or threatening to remove that formal and legal guarantee. ”

THE PRINCETON PROGRESSIVE IS GENEROUSLY SUPPORTED BYTHE PRINCETON PROGRESSIVES (PPRO) ALUMNI GROUP.

OUR WORK IS MADE POSSIBLE BY DEDICATED SUPPORT FROM PRINCETONIANS COMMITTED TO PROGRESSIVE VALUES.

!

A note from - The Princeton Progressivetheprincetonprogressive.com/wp-content/uploads/... ·...

Documents

Transcript of A note from - The Princeton Progressivetheprincetonprogressive.com/wp-content/uploads/... ·...