Diasporas and the Transnationalization of African Politics

Author(s):  
Terrence Lyons

Political outcomes in Africa are increasingly shaped by ideas, actors, and processes that are transnational in character. Diasporas and transnational communities living in new host countries but still connected to homelands provide resources, leadership, and other forms of support that shape political outcomes in the country of origin. African politics take place in these transnational spaces, less restricted by the need to be close geographically. From civil war in Burundi and Somalia, electoral outcomes in Liberia, Ghana, and Kenya, and civil society initiatives in Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of Congo, actors and processes that are globally distributed and linked through transnational networks are increasingly at the center of African politics. Much of the literature on diasporas emphasizes cultural links or specific forms of identity whereby residents at a distance remain deeply connected with their kin back home in a form of “long-distance nationalism.” From the perspective of seeking an understanding of the transnationalization of African politics, however, it is more useful to see diasporas as the outcomes of processes of political mobilization, constituencies activated by political entrepreneurs to advance specific political agendas. Leaders invest in creating and sustaining diasporas because these networks are strategic assets that allow them to deploy specific identity frames and categories, to make claims for resources and loyalty, and to engage in diverse activities in dispersed locations to maximize impact. In many cases African governments wish to engage with diasporas in order to encourage remittances and investments in the homeland. Many have created special directorates for diaspora affairs and some have considered different forms of dual citizenship or overseas voting in order to build these linkages. Diasporas play important roles in lobbying new host governments to either increase pressures on homeland regimes or to increase donor support. In addition, politically mobilized populations in the diaspora often play key roles as sources of financial support for opposition political parties and through diaspora media that can shape the nature of political debates. Liberian and Ethiopian politicians often campaign and fundraise in the United States. In authoritarian settings such as Zimbabwe and Togo, the closing of political space at home makes the diaspora even more important as a means to fill the vacuum. Civil wars always have transnational dimensions as both rebels and incumbent regimes reach beyond their borders for political support and resources. Whether it is African National Congress’s (ANC’s) de facto embassies during apartheid, diaspora support for the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front, refugee recruits to rebel movements in the Mano River region of West Africa, or exiled politicians attempting to stage-manage peace talks in Darfur from Paris, the contentious politics of armed conflict is rarely contained by borders. Extended civil wars and political crises that generate substantial refugee flows, particularly to Europe and North America, have created cases where transnational politics is most pronounced. “Conflict-generated diasporas” may be more categorical in their political positions and therefore limit options for homeland politicians dependent on the diaspora’s support. A complete analysis of African politics therefore requires consideration of how transnational mobilization can shape outcomes. Political actors on the continent, whether they are governments, opposition parties, civil society organizations, or rebels, recognize that linking their goals to the resources and ideas based in diasporas provides advantages in their struggles at home. Increasingly, scholars have recognized that understanding political processes and outcomes in Nigeria, Cameroon, or Zimbabwe entails consideration of transnational dimensions. This seems to be even more the case in countries that have experienced conflict, such as Liberia, Somalia, or Eritrea.

2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (9) ◽  
pp. 1240-1265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin L. Read

Theories of civil society set high expectations for grassroots associations, claiming that they school citizens in democracy and constrain powerful institutions. But when do real-life organizations actually live up to this billing? Homeowner organizations in the United States and elsewhere have sparked debate among political scientists, criticized by some as nonparticipatory and harmful to the overall polity and defended by others as benign manifestations of local self-governance. With this as a backdrop, China's emerging homeowner groups are used as a testing ground for exploring variation in three criteria of performance: self-organization, participation, and the exercising of power. Comparisons are drawn cross-nationally, among 23 cases in four Chinese cities and over time within neighborhoods. The article puts forward several factors affecting the properties of grassroots groups, highlighting the role of conflict, the political—legal environment, and collective action problems in shaping the way they engage their members and take political action.


2008 ◽  
Vol 50 (02) ◽  
pp. 1-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Hochstetler ◽  
Elisabeth Jay Friedman

AbstractThis article takes up the question of whether civil society organizations (CSOs) can and do act as mechanisms of representation in times of party crisis. It looks at recent representation practices in Argentina, Bolivia, and Brazil, three countries where political parties have experienced sharp crises after several decades of mixed reviews for their party systems. At such moments, any replacement of parties by CSOs should be especially apparent. This study concludes that the degree of crisis determines the extent that CSOs' representative functions replace partisan representation, at least in the short term. Where systems show signs of re-equilibration, CSOs offer alternative mechanisms through which citizens can influence political outcomes without seeking to replace parties. Where crisis is profound, CSOs claim some of the basic party functions but do not necessarily solve the problems of partisan representation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenic Vitiello ◽  
Arthur Acolin

How has the diversity of post-1965 immigration to the United States influenced newcomers’ housing experiences and civil society’s housing support systems? Planning scholars have shown immigration’s role in revitalizing cities and housing markets, but we have done less to parse the variety of housing problems that immigrants experience and the ways civil society addresses them. This article examines the recent history of civil society organizations’ housing support strategies in Chinese, Southeast Asian, and African communities in Philadelphia. We find that the diversity within and between groups has shaped largely distinct “institutional ecosystems” and approaches to housing support.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anwar Faraj ◽  
Narmeen Ahmed

The tolerance is one of the issues that have aroused the interest of specialists and activists in political and cultural affairs in various countries of the world. Especially those countries whose societies have suffered from: societal crises, national or religious differences, and civil wars or internal or external political conflicts. Because of the developments in the human rights movement and the activities of international organizations and their role in alleviating conflicts and building peace in many countries, the issue of tolerance has become one of the global issues that receive the attention of global institutions, including global civil society organizations, which have witnessed an expansion in their activities by developments in Information and communication technology, to contribute an effective role in the cause of tolerance in various countries of the world, and is attracting interaction at the level of the international community.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 514-535
Author(s):  
YOUNG SOO KIM ◽  
JOONGBUM SHIN

AbstractThe US and Japan, despite their shared reputation as leading donors for international development, remarkably varied in their foreign aid policy for HIV/AIDS in the 1980s and 1990s. Unlike the US, who initiated and increased global AIDS funding dramatically, Japan was lukewarm in its contributions. I claim that the distinctive pattern depends on how the pandemic was domestically framed and understood. The policy commitment was more likely when the internationally shared idea (international norms) of threats requiring immediate international cooperation was congruent with the domestic perception of the epidemic. The research undertakes a comparative examination of the determinants of the distinctive domestic perceptions of the two cases, including the number of individuals infected with HIV, the attitude and role of the media, and the civil society organizations dealing with HIV/AIDS. They played significant roles as intervening variables that conditioned domestic diffusion or internalization of the international norms for foreign aid policy development. The US had a favorable domestic condition based upon the relatively large number of those infected with HIV, a media that adopted a constructive approach, and active civil society organizations associated with the disease. In contrast, in Japan the number of HIV cases was lower, the media had a distorted view of the epidemic, and civil society organizations were not strong enough to offer much support until the early 1990s.


Author(s):  
Catherine E. Herrold

For decades, the United States has funded democracy promotion programs in the Middle East to little avail. Delta Democracy: Pathways to Incremental Civic Revolution in Egypt and Beyond argues that there is another way forward for US democracy aid. Drawing upon the author’s ethnographic research on Egypt’s nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in the wake of the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, Delta Democracy uncovers the strategies that local NGOs used to incrementally build a more democratic and just society. As it takes the reader inside the walls of Egypt’s NGOs, the book illuminates local activists’ perspectives on democracy in Egypt and reveals how savvy organizations promoted it as they navigated rapidly evolving opportunities and constraints in the years following the uprisings. Departing from US democracy brokers’ heavy-handed attempts to reform national political institutions, local organizations worked with grassroots communities to build a culture of democracy through public discussion and debate, free expression, and rights claiming. By weaving this democracy building work into public-facing economic development projects, Egypt’s NGOs managed to persevere through years of government crackdowns on civil society. Taking lessons learned from the Egyptian case, Delta Democracy advances our scholarly understanding of how civil society organizations maneuver state repression to combat political authoritarianism. It also offers a concrete set of recommendations on how US policymakers can restructure foreign aid to better connect with global contemporary civic revolutions for democracy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Els de Graauw ◽  
Irene Bloemraad

Supporting and investing in the integration of immigrants and their children is critically important to US society. Successful integration contributes to the nation's economic vitality, its civic and political health, and its cultural diversity. But although the United States has a good track record on immigrant integration, outcomes could be better. A national, coherent immigrant integration policy infrastructure is needed. This infrastructure can build on long-standing partnerships between civil society and US public institutions. Such partnerships, advanced under Republican- and Democratic-led administrations, were initially established to facilitate European immigrants' integration in large American cities, and later extended to help refugees fleeing religious persecution and war. In the twenty-first century, we must expand this foundation by drawing on the growing activism by cities and states, new civil society initiatives, and public-private partnerships that span the country. A robust national integration policy infrastructure must be vertically integrated to include different levels of government and horizontally applied across public and private sector actors and different types of immigrant destinations. The resultant policy should leverage public-private partnerships, drawing on the energy, ideas, and work of community-based nonprofit organizations as well as the leadership and support of philanthropy, business, education, faith-based, and other institutions. A new coordinating office to facilitate interagency cooperation is needed in the executive branch; the mandate and programs of the Office of Refugee Resettlement need to be secured and where possible expanded; the outreach and coordinating role of the Office of Citizenship needs to be extended, including through a more robust grant program to community-based organizations; and Congress needs to develop legislation and appropriate funding for a comprehensive integration policy addressed to all, and not just humanitarian immigrants. The federal investments in immigrant and refugee integration we propose are a big ask for any administration; they seem especially unlikely under the Trump administration, whose efforts focus on enforcement and border control, targeting undocumented and legal immigrants alike. Yet immigrant integration is not and should not be a partisan issue. Federal politicians across the political spectrum need to realize, as many local officials and a large segment of the public already do, that successful immigrant integration is a win-win for everybody. When immigrants have more opportunities to learn English, to improve their schooling and professional training, to start businesses, and to access citizenship, we all benefit. A majority of the American public supports immigrant integration, from proposals for learning English to a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Local and state governments are setting up initiatives to promote integration. If the federal government will not act, cities, states, and civil society organizations must continue to work together to build an integration infrastructure from the bottom up.


10.1068/a4412 ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 2934-2952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Martin

Low-wage migrant workers in the United States confront a perilous labor market, where wages are low, the risk of injury on the job is high, and the fear of apprehension by immigration authorities is widespread. There is increasing empirical evidence that civil society organizations are becoming involved in mediating labor-market problems, but work remains to be done in developing a robust theoretical conception of why such organizations are involved in this arena and how we might evaluate the impacts of their interventions. This paper presents a framework for interpreting the role of migrant civil society organizations as labor-market intermediaries, by extending Karl Polanyi's theory of the ‘double movement’ and more recent writing to neoliberalism and precarious work. On the basis of data collected from migrant nonprofit organizations in Chicago, I theorize migrant civil society organizations as part of the creation of a new countermovement that protects the interests of both workers and employers from the destructive nature of an unregulated labor market, as predicted by Polanyi. I catalogue organizations' responses to precarious work and create a generalizable framework for evaluating the contingent outcomes of their strategies. Organizations' work is interpreted as complex and sometimes contradictory: the potential to shield workers and advocate for progressive change is in constant tension with the neoliberal patterns of state and economic restructuring that such organizations can support.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document