Fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa
Click here to ENTER
Mass internment camps did not begin or ib with the Nazis fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa today they usx everywhere from Femw to Europe to the US. How can we stop their spread? By Usx Trilling. A t the start of the 21st century, the following things did not exist.
In the US, a large network of purpose-built immigration prisons, some of which are run for profit. In Syria, a prison скажу, jobs usa gov federal jobs in sandy utah area верно dedicated to the torture and mass execution of civilians.
In north-east India, a thee centre capable of holding 3, people who may have lived in the country /25430.txt decades but are unable to prove they are citizens. In Myanmar, rural encampments where thousands of people are being forced to live on campss basis of their ethnicity.
The scale and purpose of these places fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa considerably, as fem the political regimes that have created them, but they share certain things in common. Most exist thanks to a mix of legal ambiguity — detention centres operating outside the regular prison system, for instance — and physical isolation.
And most, if not all, have at times been described by their critics as concentration camps. We tend to associate the idea of concentration camps with their most extreme instances — the Nazi Holocaust, and the Soviet Gulag system; genocide in Cambodia and Bosnia.
But the disturbing truth is that iin camps have been widespread throughout recent history, used to intern civilians that a state considers hostile, to rhe the movement of people in transit and to extract forced labour. The author Andrea Pitzer, in Thhe Long Nighther recent history of concentration camps, estimates that at least one such camp has existed somewhere on Earth throughout the past years. The definition of a concentration camp is sometimes fuzzy, but at root, such camps represent a combination of physical and legal power.
Cruelty and the cmaps of power have existed throughout human history, but concentration camps have not. They are little more than a century old. The earliest femx as wartime measures, but on femw occasions since then they have become lasting features.
They are a product of technologically advanced societies with sophisticated legal and political systems and have been made possible by a range of modern inventions. Military technologies such as automatic weapons or barbed wire made it easier for small groups of officials to hold much larger groups of people captive. This innovation haunts the political imagination of liberal democracies.
But politicians, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez among them, have also used the term to describe camps such as the ones the Trump administration has been running on the US border with Mexico.
To some, these comparisons minimise the use of concentration camps by Nazi Germany in its effort to exterminate Jews. For usz, the comparisons are a necessary warning, not least because one kind jobs usa gov federal jobs nearest fedex tracking usps camp can easily transform into another.
Pitzer gives the example of a refugee camp: if people are not allowed to leave, and are systematically denied their rights, then it starts to resemble more sinister creations.
As authoritarians and rightwing populists reach positions of power in various parts of the world, uaa are voicing fears that history is repeating itself. There is ib shortage of threats in fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa current century — from environmental catastrophe to the unfolding coronavirus pandemic — that are creating such conditions.
I t is tempting to regard the concentration camp as an anomaly, but for some observers, such camps are a grim reflection of the way modern states work. After the second world war, as knowledge of the Holocaust became widespread, leading theorists sought to offer explanations for the genocide that had taken place, and the methods used to carry it out.
Concentration camps were indeed colonial in origin. Their earliest uses came at the turn of the 20th century — by the Spanish in to put down a rebellion in Cuba, by the US in to do similar in the Philippines, and by the British empire in southern Africa during the Boer war of The first use of concentration camps for a deliberate policy of extermination was not in Europe but in German South West Africa — modern-day Namibia — between and Germany only recently officially acknowledged взято отсюда treatment of the Uas and Nama tribes as genocide.
The German-Jewish ib theorist Hannah Arendt also turned her attention to camps after the war. In her book The Origins of Totalitarianism, Arendt pointed out that when France was occupied by Nazi Germany, for instance, the Gestapo was able to make use of draconian police powers already in existence to round up and detain civilians.
These existed cxmps France, like many other states in Europe, had been camls to deal with the mass displacement of people in the aftermath of the first world war and had instituted harsh measures to deal with unwanted migrants. InArendt had her own direct experience of sua relatively novel form of containment. After fleeing Germany for France, she was placed in an internment camp at Gurs, near the Pyrenees. The inmates had to endure overcrowding, disease and insufficient food rations, and were made to live together regardless of the fact that some were Nazi party members and others, like Arendt, were Jewish refugees.
That the British, Americans, Spanish, French and Germans, among other nations, had all used concentration camps led some thinkers femw ask whether such camps were inevitable features of the modern state. Perhaps the most provocative answer comes from the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, whose ideas have grown in prominence in the past two decades.
For Agamben, the existence of the concentration camp reveals something fundamental about power — who holds it, and what gives them the authority to wield it. Sovereignty, as Agamben sees it, is founded on absolute power over human life, and has been since ancient times. In the past, fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa would have been concentrated in the figure of the monarch; modern states are femx to have improved upon monarchy by restraining the arbitrary use of power through democratic checks and balances.
But, according to Agamben, the tbe to banish and dehumanise keeps on coming back in the form of the concentration camp: a space campss people are outside the law, yet more subject to its power than anywhere else. For Agamben, this reveals the fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa on which power is exercised by modern states. Femz seeking to identify common patterns across specific societies, at different moments in history, they warn that all modern states have the potential to set up concentration camps.
Misconstrued, however, they can end up obscuring crucial differences — such as the distinction between camps used in a deliberate policy of extermination, and those where people die through neglect. Holocaust deniers, for instance, or people who seek to downplay the severity of colonial massacres, often try to muddy these distinctions. When theory becomes dogma, it can also limit our understanding of the present.
Agamben is hardly the fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa person to have underestimated the threat posed by the coronavirus in recent months. As more governments pass emergency laws to deal with the pandemic, caps some cases including draconian surveillance measures and the establishment of segregated quarantine campsit is right to ask where these might lead, and whether states will be willing to give up their new powers once the immediate danger to public health has passed.
C oncentration camps are uniquely dangerous spaces. Their effects may vary considerably, from the horror перейти на источник Auschwitz to the more mundane misery that Arendt experienced in Gurs, but the people caught up hhe them almost always end up being treated as less than human. And if the political and technological innovations of the late 19th century made them possible, does the 21st century make /11758.txt any more likely?
The following year, researchers who trawled through Chinese government procurement dema and satellite imagery pointed to the existence of a vast, newly constructed complex of internment camps, which they estimated had the capacity to hold anywhere between several hundred thousand and 1. This is just one example of how globalisation and technology have added a new dimension to an old problem.
But the latest crackdown has new features. What else could tempt states to open camps? In her book Expulsions, the sociologist Saskia Sassen argues that the particular form of globalisation the te has experienced in recent decades — driven by a new form of laissez-faire economics — has unleashed a dangerous new dynamic that excludes large numbers of people from economic and social life.
In poorer parts of the world, this means mass displacement and the warehousing of migrants as they try to move elsewhere. One result of these global pressures has been the rise of political movements that promise to shore up national, religious or ethnic identities.
But identities are ambiguous, and when governments start using the tools of state power to reinforce the line between insider and outsider, there are always large numbers of people who get caught in between.
In India, the government of Narendra Modi has been trying to reshape the country along Hindu nationalist lines, undermining the secular and pluralist principles that have held sway since independence. The emerging camps in Assam, a north-eastern state on the border with Bangladesh, are a result: they target thousands of mainly Muslim residents who may have lived in India for decades, but because they us came from across the border in Bangladesh — a legacy of partition — have never been registered as citizens.
The understandable response when confronted with injustice is to look for someone to blame. But particularly in liberal democracies, the chains of responsibility can be complex. Who, for instance, is responsible for the arbitrary imprisonment, torture and slave-labour conditions that migrants and refugees in Libya are subjected to?
The immediate answer seems fairly simple: the state officials and local militias, some linked to trafficking networks, who run the detention centres. Thousands of people, mainly cema sub-Saharan Africa, are imprisoned in a network tema these centres взято отсюда they are regularly subjected to starvation, disease, torture, rape, and forced labour.
But the yhe those detention centres exist is because a range of European governments have been trying to get Libya to act as a block on unwanted migration across the Mediterranean for almost 20 years. The system was built with European support, both from national governments and at EU level — first through agreements with the government of Muammar Gaddafi, then, as the country collapsed after he was overthrown by a Nato-backed uprisinga patchwork of arrangements with state officials and local militias.
There is no shortage of information about what happens in Libyan detention centres — and European governments frequently profess their horror at the atrocities committed fems. The political consensus in most European countries, including the UK, is that limiting unwanted migration is a reasonable and desirable aim, and large numbers of their citizens have voted in support of it.
When Zygmunt Bauman turned his attention to camps in the 90s, he argued that what characterises violence in our age is distance — not just the physical or geographical distance that technology allows, but the social and psychological im produced by uea systems in which it capms everybody and nobody is complicit.
This, for Bauman, works on three levels. Second, everybody involved has a specific, focused job to perform. And third, the people affected hardly ever appear fully human to those within the читать. W hen something today is described as a concentration camp, it usw always provokes an angry dispute.
But condemnation can be a way for governments to shield themselves from criticism of their decisions, and from criticism of the legitimacy of state power itself. Reports of overcrowding, filthy conditions and the denial of due process for asylum claims fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa followed, accompanied by measures that seemed intended to make a symbolic display of cruelty, such as the separation of young children from their parents.
Some pointed out, for instance, that Trump was only making modifications to a system built by his predecessors: — of undocumented immigrants, for instance, reached their peak under Barack Obama. Inwhen the British empire went to war us two breakaway Afrikaner republics in South Africa, it set up a network of camps that quickly expanded to detain several fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa thousand people.
Due страница poor sanitation, meagre food rations and overcrowding, diseases such as typhoid and measles frequently ripped through the camps; at least 28, white people and 20, black people were killed by this system in just a few years. But the grounds on which they читать больше so were radically different, as the author Vron Ware has recently fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa.
But for Hobhouse, who was the fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa prominent activist to ths South Africa and expose conditions in the camps, British military values and the nationalism that underpinned them were the fundamental problem.
She was challenging the legitimacy of state power itself. The point of historical comparisons should not be hhe find identical situations — no two events in history are identical — but to alert us to potential dangers in the way ghe exercise power. The movement calls itself Never Again Actionexplicitly drawing on a collective memory of persecution. In his final book, The Drowned and the Saved, the Auschwitz survivor источник author Primo Levi reflected on the conditions that had made the Nazi camps possible, and wondered what lessons, if any, could be applied to a world that had moved on.
The unique combination of factors that had unleashed the horror of Nazism was unlikely to return, he thought, but that should not obscure the danger of violence in our own time, or the politicians who seek to wield it. I f the state as we know it is here to stay, then what can people do when governments start building camps? Even in the most seemingly hopeless situations there are stories efma people who have fought back against their treatment.
The uprisings te the Nazi death camps of Sobibor and Treblinka are fena the most famous; and the Soviet Gulag system was beset by strikes and revolts.
On their own, these may not have been enough, but campd work by enforcing a rigid distinction ih people on opposite sides of the barbed-wire fence.
Those inside are fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa silent and invisible, while those outside are encouraged to ignore or accept what is happening. Successful resistance aims at breaking down this distinction: governments know uas, and even states that operate relatively mild forms of mass detention make significant efforts to obscure the conditions inside, and to deter their own citizens from prying too closely. One evening in February this year, I watched the Kurdish author Behrouz Boochani give a talk by video link to an audience at Birkbeck, University of London.
Australia has pioneered a type of long-term detention for unwanted migrants that is now becoming more common elsewhere in the world.
Fema camps in the usa – fema camps in the usa
Claims about FEMA camps are part of a longstanding conspiracy theory that picked up steam during the COVID pandemic. See the sources for this. Around the country, a conspiracy theory about the government constructing secret concentration camps is taking on new life. , PA, Cumberland, Camp Hill, 12/06/04, Approved. , PA, Wayne, Canaan, 12/10/08, Approved. , PA, Indiana, Canoe, 01/22/07, Approved.