![]() ![]() Nor have we been able to shift the ‘public understanding of migration,’ as the wider public, political and media debates on migration are still very much couched in the language, boundaries and imaginaries of the nation-state and its history.Įxpanding the Spatial and Temporal Axes of Migration In the twenty years since its publication, we had the development of a field that promised explanatory categories, priorities and explanations striving to go beyond methodological nationalism.ĭespite its transnational promise, and the warnings of critical migration scholars such as Wimmer and Glick Schiller, however, it is difficult to say that the field of migration studies has sufficiently moved away from methodologically nationalist perspectives and frameworks. Wimmer and Glick Schiller defined methodological nationalism as ‘the naturalization of the nation-state by the social sciences.’ They challenged how the nation-state was taken as the natural unit of analysis in social sciences in general, but also unpacked its consequences for migration studies. I argue, however, that without overcoming what I call ‘methodological amnesia,’ migration studies will not be able to challenge methodological nationalism effectively. The article rightfully challenged methodological nationalism. The seminal article by Wimmer and Glick Schiller laid the foundations of what came to be known as critical and reflexive migration studies scholarship.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |