Skip to main content

Territorialisation to control resources 'threatening' citizenship rights

By Bhabani Shankar Nayak* 

Working people have historically fought against various forms of oppression, including feudalism, capitalism, colonialism, imperialism, and religious fundamentalism, to advance democracy and secure citizenship rights. 
The anti-colonial and anti-imperialist struggles in Asia, Africa, the Americas, and the Arab world significantly contributed to the realisation and expansion of citizenship rights beyond the narrow ideology of the Westphalian framework, while also strengthening democratic systems of governance within Western Europe. 
These movements not only challenged the political and economic dominance of imperial powers but also inspired global solidarity among oppressed people across continents. The successes of these struggles underscored the interconnectedness of global movements for justice and highlighted the importance of collective action in achieving democratic ideals beyond narrow territorial borders. 
Consequently, the influence of these liberation movements extended beyond their regions, prompting reforms and progressive changes in political systems worldwide. This global ripple effect emphasised the universal quest for equality, justice, and democratic governance, reshaping political landscapes and encouraging a more inclusive approach to citizenship and human rights.
However, in recent times, democratic and citizenship rights are under threat from reactionary and anti-democratic forces who wish to continue and revive their hegemony over people to control resources by expanding the project of territorialisation. These forces aim to roll back the progress made by previous generations in securing democratic freedoms and rights. 
By undermining democratic institutions and spreading disinformation, the reactionary ruling classes seek to weaken public trust and erode the foundations of participatory and democratic governance. The resurgence of these authoritarian tendencies poses a significant challenge to the principles of equality, justice, and freedom that underpin democratic societies.
There are consistent attempts to spread the venom of territorial nationalism to weaken the universal approach to citizenship rights. These efforts aim to divide people along narrow sectarian lines, categorizing them as natives or foreigners, Hindus, Christians, Muslims, rich, poor, urban, rural, educated, illiterate, skilled, unskilled, migrants, and various racial and territorial nationalities. 
This strategy seeks to weaken unity and solidarity among the working masses. By fostering these divisions, reactionary forces create an environment of distrust and conflict, undermining collective efforts to achieve social and economic justice.
The division among and between people on territorial grounds weakens the collective and democratic foundations of citizenship rights. Our citizenship rights are interconnected, meaning that the weakening of one person's citizenship rights inherently weakens everyone's citizenship rights. 
When individuals are divided along territorial, racial, religious, or economic lines, the unity and solidarity necessary for a strong, democratic society are undermined. This fragmentation makes it easier for reactionary forces to erode democratic institutions and infringe upon individual freedoms. 
Therefore, it is crucial to recognize and protect the interconnected nature of our rights, ensuring that all citizens, regardless of their background, are afforded the same protections and opportunities beyond territorial lines.
Furthermore, territorialization often aligns with the interests of those in power, who use it as a tool to maintain control over resources and populations. Both the processes of territorialisation and deterritorialisation of citizenship rights are exclusionary and detrimental. Both the processes follow the requirements of capitalism and its various forms. They not only weaken citizenship rights but also dismantle people's abilities to reclaim these rights by fostering divisions along narrow, reactionary lines. 
There are consistent attempts to spread the venom of territorial nationalism to weaken the universal approach to citizenship rights
Territorialisation imposes rigid boundaries that prioritise the rights of certain groups over others, leading to discrimination and inequality. On the other hand, deterritorialisation can create a sense of statelessness and disenfranchisement, leaving many without a clear claim to rights or protections.
These processes spread division by categorising people based on arbitrary distinctions, such as nationality, ethnicity, religion, or socioeconomic status. This fragmentation undermines collective action and solidarity, essential components for defending and advancing citizenship rights.
It is time to reclaim the legacies of various mass movements throughout history to reassert our citizenship rights beyond narrow and reactionary frameworks of the Westphalian ideology. By doing so, we can put an end to so-called nationalist wars that primarily serve to protect the power and interests of corporate capital. 
Historical mass movements have shown that collective action and solidarity can achieve significant advancements in democracy, equality, and justice. These movements have fought against various forms of oppression, from feudalism to imperialism, and their successes offer valuable lessons for today's struggles to reclaim the inalienability and universality of citizenship rights. 
By learning from these historical examples, we can work towards the deepening of global democracy based on the interests of people and the planet 
The triumphs of past movements demonstrate the power of collective action and solidarity in overcoming systemic injustices. These movements have shown that it is possible to challenge and dismantle oppressive structures through unified efforts. 
In the contemporary context, this means advocating for citizenship rights that are inclusive and universal, transcending narrow, reactionary frameworks that divide us. Reclaiming these rights involves resisting the forces that seek to undermine democratic principles and promoting policies that prioritise human well-being over corporate interests. 
By fostering global solidarity and inclusivity, masses can build a democratic system that reflects the interconnectedness of our world and addresses the needs of all people, regardless of their background. 
Ultimately, the lessons from historical mass movements remind us that the fight for citizenship rights and global democracy is ongoing. It requires continuous effort, vigilance, and a commitment to justice and equality for all. By embracing these principles, people can only create a more equitable and sustainable future for generations to come.
---
*London Metropolitan University, UK

Comments

TRENDING

US govt funding 'dubious PR firm' to discredit anti-GM, anti-pesticide activists

By Our Representative  The Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) has vocally condemned the financial support provided by the US Government to questionable public relations firms aimed at undermining the efforts of activists opposed to pesticides and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in India. 

Modi govt distancing from Adanis? MoEFCC 'defers' 1500 MW project in Western Ghats

By Rajiv Shah  Is the Narendra Modi government, in its third but  what would appear to be a weaker avatar, seeking to show that it would keep a distance, albeit temporarily, from its most favorite business house, the Adanis? It would seem so if the latest move of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) latest to "defer" the Adani Energy’s application for 1500 MW Warasgaon-Warangi Pump Storage Project is any indication.

Bayer's business model: 'Monopoly control over chemicals, seeds'

By Bharat Dogra*  The Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) has rendered a great public service by very recently publishing a report titled ‘Bayer’s Toxic Trails’ which reveals how the German agrochemical giant Bayer has been lobbying hard to promote glyphosate and GMOs, or trying to “capture public policy to pursue its private interests.” This report, written by Joao Camargo and Hans Van Scharen, follows Bayer’s toxic trail as “it maintains monopolistic control of the seed and pesticides markets, fights off regulatory challenges to its toxic products, tries to limit legal liability, and exercises political influence.” 

105,000 sign protest petition, allege NestlĂ©’s 'double standard' over added sugar in baby food

By Kritischer Konsum*    105,000 people have signed a petition calling on NestlĂ© to stop adding sugar to its baby food products marketed in lower-income countries. It was handed over today at the multinational’s headquarters in Vevey, where the NGOs Public Eye, IBFAN and EKO dumped the symbolic equivalent of 10 million sugar cubes, representing the added sugar consumed each day by babies fed with Cerelac cereals. In Switzerland, such products are sold with no added sugar. The leading baby food corporation must put an end to this harmful double standard.

Militants, with ten times number of arms compared to those in J&K, 'roaming freely' in Manipur

By Sandeep Pandey*  The violence which shows no sign of abating in the ongoing Meitei-Kuki conflict in Manipur is a matter of concern. The alienation of the two communities and hatred generated for each other is unprecedented. The Meiteis cannot leave Manipur by road because the next district North on the way to Kohima in Nagaland is Kangpokpi, a Kuki dominated area where the young Kuki men and women are guarding the district borders and would not let any Meitei pass through the national highway. 

'Flawed' argument: Gandhi had minimal role, naval mutinies alone led to Independence

Counterview Desk Reacting to a Counterview  story , "Rewiring history? Bose, not Gandhi, was real Father of Nation: British PM Attlee 'cited'" (January 26, 2016), an avid reader has forwarded  reaction  in the form of a  link , which carries the article "Did Atlee say Gandhi had minimal role in Independence? #FactCheck", published in the site satyagrahis.in. The satyagraha.in article seeks to debunk the view, reported in the Counterview story, taken by retired army officer GD Bakshi in his book, “Bose: An Indian Samurai”, which claims that Gandhiji had a minimal role to play in India's freedom struggle, and that it was Netaji who played the crucial role. We reproduce the satyagraha.in article here. Text: Nowadays it is said by many MK Gandhi critics that Clement Atlee made a statement in which he said Gandhi has ‘minimal’ role in India's independence and gave credit to naval mutinies and with this statement, they concluded the whole freedom struggle.

Can voting truly resolve the Kashmir issue? Past experience suggests optimism may be misplaced

By Raqif Makhdoomi*  In the politically charged atmosphere of Jammu and Kashmir, election slogans resonated deeply: "Jail Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Jail’s Revenge, Vote) and "Article 370 Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Article 370’s Revenge, Vote). These catchphrases dominated the assembly election campaigns, particularly across Kashmir. 

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Will Bangladesh go Egypt way, where military ruler is in power for a decade?

By Vijay Prashad*  The day after former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina left Dhaka, I was on the phone with a friend who had spent some time on the streets that day. He told me about the atmosphere in Dhaka, how people with little previous political experience had joined in the large protests alongside the students—who seemed to be leading the agitation. I asked him about the political infrastructure of the students and about their political orientation. He said that the protests seemed well-organized and that the students had escalated their demands from an end to certain quotas for government jobs to an end to the government of Sheikh Hasina. Even hours before she left the country, it did not seem that this would be the outcome.