Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Public Debate
Author(s): Didier Fassin
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Anthropology Today, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Feb., 2001), pp. 3-7
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2678317 .
Accessed: 08/06/2012 11:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Anthropology Today.
http://www.jstor.org
The
Undocumented
DIDIER FASSIN
DidierFassinis Professorat
theEcoledeshautes?tudesen
sciencessocialesandat the
University
ofParisNorth,and
Directorof theCentre
for
ResearchonPublicHealth
Issues.He hasconducted
researchinSenegal,Ecuador,
Southern
AfricaandFrance,
andhismaininterestis in the
politicalanthropology
of
health.Hisemailis:
dfassin@ehess.fr.
I amgratefulto Miriam
Ticktinforhervaluablehelpin
thetranslation
fromthe
French,to Dalby,Pancho,
PessinandPlantuforagreeing
to reproduction
of theirwork,
andto ATrefereesforhelping
meclarifymyperspective
on
someof theissuesdiscussedin
thistext.
1. Fortheconsequences
of
thesans-papiers
on
movement
intellectual
andpoliticallife,
seeJ.Benthall(1997).Foran
analysisof theissueas a
whole,seeD. Fassin,A.
MoriceandC. Quiminal
(eds)
1997.
2. Publicization
of racial
discrimination
is alsoa major
issuein theBritishandNorth
American
debate,as shownby
M. Banton(1999).Foran
to thephenomenon
approach
in France,seeP. Bataille
(1998).
3. WhileFoucaultdidnot
discussthethemeof
immigration
explicitly,his
from
analysesarepertinent,
theadministration
of the
suffering
bodywhichis
inscribed
in thelogicof 'help
to live andallowto die'of
biopolitics(1976),to the
handlingof theracialized
body
whichis incorporated
in his
pieceonthe 'racewars'
(1997).
4. Thecollectedworksof
GodelierandPanoff(1998)
shedlighton thisquestionin
relationto societiesthatare
eithersociallyor
distant,butare
geographically
totallysilenton theproduction
of thebodyin the
Westernworld.
contemporary
5. Thesestatisticsforthe
period1988-97arepublished
by theFrenchOfficefortheProtection
of Refugeesand
StatelessPeople(OFPRA).
Therisein 1998doesnot
thisanalysis,since
contradict
halfof theagreements
concern
childrenof refugeeswhohave
reachedtheageof majority,
leadingLegoux(1999)to
estimatetherealnumber
of
newrefugeesat2200.
6. Theseunpublished
fromthe
figureswereobtained
of
biopolitics
foreigners
and
otherness
racial
ANTHROPOLOGY
TODAYVOL17 NO 1, FEBRUARY
2001
discrimination
in French
public
debate
of
Directorate
Departmental
SocialandHealthWelfare
(DASS)of theSeine-SaintDenisd?partement,
wherethe
statisticsweregathered
as part
of a research
projectrunby D.
Delettre(1999),andfromthe
of PublicLibertyat
Directorate
theHomeOffice,where
statisticsweregathered
froma
poolof 38,000appealsto the
Ministry.
7. Infact,thisrightis
limitedby theknowledge
of
andusagebyadministrative
officialsandsocialworkers
withwhomimmigrants
come
intocontact(Bourdillon,
Antoniet al. 1991);
Lombrail,
of thelaw
however,reminders
issuedbyboththestateand
associations
community
contributed
to greateraccessin
the 1990s.
8. Theroleof physicians
in
therecognition
of therightof
sickforeigners
to be treated,
whatever
theirlegalstatus,has
beencrucial,butit is
remarkable
thattheir
and
professional
organizations
unionshaveremained
silenton
thesubject,which,hasbecome
thecentralcauseof medical
associations
in
intervening
issues
generalhumanitarian
sansfronti?res,
(M?decins
M?decins
dumonde,etc.)or
morespecificallyfor
(Comede,Remede,
immigrants
thestriking
etc.).Nevertheless,
is therelative
phenomenon
noveltyof thiscommitment
andthepublicsupportit has
received.
9. Infact,theproductive
valueof theimmigrant
body
hasnotcompletely
Itis maintained
in
disappeared.
threemainforms:thepresence
of temporary
andpermanent
the
workers;
agricultural
of active
development
informal(illegal)economiesin
sectorssuchas construction
andclothing;andmore
recently,thecallfora highly
qualifiedworkforce
specificallyin thecomputer
Ineachof these
industry.
cases,we cannevertheless
of
speakof a marginalization
theimmigrant
workforce,
to a
corresponding
frombelow'
'globalization
(Portes1999).
10.Theword'race'
obviouslydoesnotdesignatea
biologicalorphysicalreality,
butrefersto a socialconstruct
basedon therecognition
of a
biologicalorphysical
foundation
of differenceand
in a historical
produced
contextof economicand
politicaldomination.
11.Thisideologyandthe
rhetoricrelate
corresponding
moreto thenational
thanto social
mythology
realities.As demonstrated
by
Noiriel(1988),the
G?rard
of
stigmatization immigrants
hasbeena permanent,
albeit
featureof
unrecognized,
Frenchhistorysincetheendof
the 19thcentury.
12.Cf. SocialistPrime
Fabius'
MinisterLaurent
famousphraseaboutthe
political approaches to the immigrant body: the legitimacy of the suffering body proposed in the name of a
common humanity is opposed to the illegitimacy of the
racialized body, promulgated in the name of insurmountable difference. In the first case, the Other comes from
outside and the treatment of his/her body depends on the
hospitality of the host country. In the second, the Other is
already inside and the treatment of his/her body calls into
question the social order. The body has become the site
of inscription for the politics of immigration, defining
what we can call, using Foucauldian terminology,3 a
biopolitics of otherness. Analysis of this issue can provide a means to understand the unprecedented anthropological dimensions of the production of the body4 in
contemporary societies.
CartoonbyThierry
'sarticleon
TaharBen-Jelloun
Dalbyillustrating
racismin LeMonde,29-30March1998.
The recognition
of bodies
In France, as in most Western European countries, the
question of illegal immigration has become a critical
public policy issue. The creation of the Schengen space
represented an attempt to bring a policy solution at the
European level - but one whose limits are clearly revealed
by the continuing influx of immigrants from the Balkans to
the Italian coast and from Africa to Spanish beaches. The
rhetoric surrounding this question has been clearly
exposed in the public debate: on the one hand, the rich
countries cannot absorb 'the poverty of the earth', as
former socialist Prime Minister Michel Rocard put it; on
the other hand, strict regulation of the undocumented is a
prerequisite for integration of the documented, justifying
the slogan 'zero illegal immigration' devised by Charles
Pasqua, former conservative Minister of the Interior.
Yet this apparently coherent argumentation has been
contradicted by the evidence that a rapidly growing
number of undocumented foreigners do not correspond
to the stereotype of the 'clandestine', but rather have a
certain legitimate claim to legal status through the
number of years they have spent in the host country, the
services they have provided, the family ties they have
developed, or the threats they would face if they should
return home. This evidence debunks the official rhetoric,
indicating that the country is confronted not only with
poverty from abroad, but also with the results of its own
political processes, and that the boundary between documented and undocumented is much less clear than was
previously maintained, since it is possible to lose or gain
residence permits depending on changes in legislation.
Thus, the question is less about who is legally present
than who can legitimately claim legal status. In publishing the ministerial instruction of 24 June 1997, which
specifies the various criteria for legalization of undocumented migrants, and in proposing the law of 11 May
1998 which defines the conditions of entry and residence
for foreigners, the French government took this shift into
NationalFrontleader:'MrLe
Penasksgoodquestionsto
whichhegivesbadanswers.'
Duringthisperiod,successive
of boththeright
governments
andtheleftthrewthemselves
intoa legislativecompetition
thataimedto setincreasingly
restrictive
immigration
to
policies.Thiscontributed
the 'immigration
question'
beingplacedatthecentreof
publicdebate(Lochak,1997).
13.Thefiguresaretaken
fromtwoarticlesin LeMonde,
dated16March2000and10
to the
August2000.According
authors
of thestudy,the
of peoplewhocall
percentage
- 29%
themselves'non-racist'
- is 'thelowestsincethe
creationof thispoll'.
14.Drawingonthe
made
projections
population
on
by theHighCommission
in 1980andonthe
Population
that
polemicaldiscussions
fiveyearslaterin the
appeared
generalandscientificpress,le
the
Bras(1997)questioned
ideological
premisesforequal
treatment
of theforeign
andthepopulation
population
of foreignorigin,producing
dramatic
demographic
(entitled'Will
extrapolations
we stillbe Frenchin 30
years?').Inherhostile
his
response,despitecriticizing
andrhetorical
methodological
moves,Tribalat
(1997)failed
to addressthecentralpointof
hisargument,
whichis about
relianceon a biological
definitionof immigration.
15.JacquesChirac,notyet
of the
atthetimepresident
onthe
Republic,commented
of Africanfamilies'
annoyance
'odours'in Frenchinnercities;
thisshockeda portionof the
Frenchpublic,becausethe
cultural
practicesthatwere
denounced
(theirtable
evokedphysical
manners)
atthesametime
characteristics
an
(andthusrepresented
formof racism).
ordinary
16.Themostfamous
of thisdisciplinein
promoter
France,TobieNathan,pleaded
for 'ghettosso thata family
wouldneverhaveto abandon
its culturalsystem'and
denounced
childrenof African
parentsraisedin Franceas
whitenedin
'janissaries
schools'(Fassin
republican
2000c).
??*/
foufs
^?'??
lui
DoNwfc
;>-.
EgliseSaint-Bernard.
Today13(4):
Anthropology
1-2.
E. 1997.
Bonilla-Silva,
racism.
Rethinking
American
Sociological
Review62:465-479.
F., Lombrail,
P.,
Bourdillon,
Antoni,M.et al. 1991.La
sant?despopulations
en
d'origine?trang?re
France.SocialScienceand
Medicine32 (11):12191227.
Delettre,D. 1999.Lemaintien
des?trangers
pourraison
m?dicalesurle territoire
fran?ais.Rennes:Ecole
nationale
de sant?publique.
et
Fassin,D. 1999.L'indicible
Gimpens?:
La 'question
dansles
immigr?e'
dusida.Sciences
politiques
socialeset sant?17(4):536.
? 2000a.Politiques
duvivant
et politiques
de la vie.Pour
de la
uneanthropologie
et
sant?.Anthropologie
soci?t?s24 (1):95-116.
? 2000b.Lasupplique:
et
rh?toriques
Strat?gies
constructions
identitaires
de
dansles demandes
secours.Annales.Histoire,
sciencessociales55 (5):
953-981.
? 2000c.Lespolitiques
de
La
l'ethnopsychiatrie:
des
psych?africaine
aux
coloniesbritanniques
banlieuesparisiennes.
L'Homme
153:231-250.
? 2001.Unedoublepeine:La
conditionsocialede
maladedusida.
l'immigr?
158
L'Homme,
(forthcoming).
?, Morice,A. andQuiminal,
C. (eds).1997.Us loisde
Lasoci?t?
Vinhospitalit?:
des
fran?aise? l'?preuve
Paris:La
sans-papiers.
D?couverte.
M. 1976.Histoirede
Foucault,
la sexualit?,tomeI: La
volont?de savoir.Paris:
Gallimard.
? 1997.7/fautd?fendre
la
soci?t?'.Coursau Coll?ge
de France1976.Paris:
HautesEtudes-GallimardSeuil.
Godeiier,M.andPanoff,M.
(eds).1998.Laproduction
ducorps:Approches
et
anthropologiques
Amsterdam:
historiques.
Editionsdesarchives
contemporaines.
Heller,A. 1996.Has
biopoliticschangedthe
conceptof thepolitical?
Somefurther
thoughts
aboutbiopolitics.InHeller,
A. andS. Puntscher
Riekmann
(eds)Biopolitics:
Thepoliticsof thebody,
raceandnature,3-15.
Aldershot.
Avebury:
M. 1995.Thelocal
Kearney,
andtheglobal:The
of
anthropology
and
globalization
Annual
transnationalism.
24:
Reviewof Anthropology
547-565.
Le Bras,H. 1997.Dix ansde
de la
perspectives
?trang?re.
population
F^VJCH-o
'
1
Sorry,butmyclientswouldn'tlikethecolourofyourtie... Cartoonby
PanchofromLeMonde,7 April1999.
1990): the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man and
Citizen serves as a totem protecting against attempts to
impose ethnic divisions on social groups. Marceau Long,
president of the High Council for Integration, expresses
this in locating France's choices with respect to immigrants and their descendants (the word Minorities' is banished from public discourse) within a 'logic of equality'
which is true to Trance's very essence'.1 ' Officially then,
the state has had a strategy to avoid the communitarian and
racialized policies of other Western countries, which serve
as a convenient foil for France's own policies.
Origin' as a new frontier
However, this fa?ade of a Trance of integration'
(Schnapper, 1991) began to crumble in the 1980s, and the
process intensified in the 1990s under the weight of the
political and social racialization of French society.
Politically there was the remarkable increase in electoral
support for the extreme right party, the National Front,
whose leitmotif is Trance for the French' - a unique postWorld War II phenomenon. Their support rose to one in
six voters at the national level and one in two or three in
some cities, with electoral victories in a few municipalities. However, it would be wrong to attribute the rise of
racism in political life only to the extreme right, since at
the end of the 1970s, in a period when labour immigration,
which had been abruptly halted, was giving way to permanent settlement, the Communist Party was the first to suggest that immigrants' right to employment, housing and
social services were unfounded. Furthermore, during the
1980s, when the National Front succeeded in exploiting
popular frustrations, the other political parties, including
the Socialists,12 followed its lead in questioning whether
foreigners might be the source of socio-economic difficulties (Schain 1996). While the political discourse did not
explicitly refer to race, which remains a prohibited term,
the populations targeted by this rhetoric and these laws
were increasingly those designated explicitly as 'unassimilable' and whose children are often distinguished as
'Beurs' (youth of Arab origin). In fact, there has been a
growing lexical confusion, leading to the designation of
French people born in France as 'Maghr?bins', 'Africans',
'foreigners' or 'immigrants', revealing how skin colour
and supposed origin have overwhelmed the legal definition of the Other.
On the social front, during the same period, the phenomenon of segregation on the basis of nationality or ethnicity was increasing: on the outskirts of large cities, the
low-cost housing developments today concentrate high
?^
<Js& Amt***
<M?oj
P**^,.
o*4*
borders'.InJune2000,58 would-be-immigrants
Openingof European
in thesealedlorryin whichtheywerebeing
fromChinasuffocated
smuggledintoBritain.CartoonbyPlantu,LeMonde,20 June2000.
2001
TODAYVOL17 NO 1, FEBRUARY
ANTHROPOLOGY
Population1: 103-134.
Legoux,L. 1999.Lesp?pites
d'orde l'OFPRA.Plein
Droit44: 7-10.
Lochak,D. 1997.Les
politiquesde l'immigration
auprismede la l?gislation
InFassin,
surles ?trangers.
D., A. MoriceandC.
Quiminal(eds)Lesloisde
29-45.Paris:
Ginhospitalit?,
LaD?couverte.
T.H.1965.Class,
Marshall,
andsocial
citizenship
NewYork:
development.
Doubleday.
Noiriel,G. 1988.Lecreuset
fran?ais:Histoirede
XIXe-XXe
l'immigration
si?cles.Paris:Seuil.
Portes,A. 1999.La
mondialisation
parle bas:
des
L'?mergence
communaut?s
Actesde la
transnationales.
en sciences
recherche
sociales,129:15-25.
J.J.1971.Discours
Rousseau,
surl Origineet les
de l'in?galit?
fondements
Paris:
parmiles hommes.
1st
Garnier-Flammarion.
edition1754.
Sayad,A. 1999.Ladouble
absence:Des illusionsde
de
l'?migr?auxsouffrances
Seuil:Paris.
l'immigr?.
Schain,M.A.1996.The
of immigration
racialization
policy:Biopoliticsand
InHeller,
policy-making.
A. andS. Puntscher
Riekmann
(eds)Biopolitics:
Thepoliticsof thebody,
raceandnature,157-177.
Avebury,Aldershot.
D. 1991.La
Schnapper,
Francede l'int?gration:
Sociologiede la nationen
1990.Paris:Gallimard.
Sim?ant,J. 1998.Lacausedes
Paris:Presses
sans-papiers.
nationale
de
de la Fondation
sciencespolitiques.
Simon,P. 1998.La
Contexte
discrimination:
et perception
institutionnel
Hommes
parles immigr?s.
et migrations1211:49-67.
Simpson,B. 2000.Imagined
geneticcommunities:
Ethnicityandessentialism
in thetwenty-first
century.
Today16 (3):
Anthropology
3-6.
Taguieff,P.A. 1991.Les
m?tamorphoses
duracismeet
id?ologiques
In
la crisede Gantiracisme.
P.A.Taguieff(ed.),Faceau
racisme,vol. 2, 13-63.
Paris:LaD?couverte.
M. 1997.Une
Tribalat,
de
r??criture
surprenante
l'histoire.Population1:
137-148.
Weil,P. 1991.LaFranceet
L'aventure
ses ?trangers:
d'unepolitiquede
de 1938?
l'immigration
nosjours.Paris:Gallimard.
M. 1993.La
Wieviorka,
? l'?preuve:
d?mocratie
Nationalisme,
populisme,
ethnicit?.Paris:La
D?couverte.
Wilkinson,R. 1996.Unhealthy
societies:Theafflictionof
London:
inequality.
Routledge.
2001
TODAYVOL17 NO 1, FEBRUARY
ANTHROPOLOGY
biopolitics
According to Agnes Heller (1996), biopolitics is 'intimately linked to the question of identity polities'. I have
tried to show that it also implies necessarily a politics of
otherness. Based on the recognition of 'difference of
bodies' which have race, sex, ethnicity and genes as their
foundation, biopolitics, as she interprets it, is 'ultimately
defending the Body itself, its nature, integrity and health'.
By renouncing 'membership in a common political body',
biopolitics thus exemplifies a retreat from, and even a negation of 'politics' in the Arendtian sense of the recognition
of human diversity from a universal perspective. However,
examination of French immigration politics in the 1990s
allows for a less pessimistic and more nuanced reading.
The contemporary biopolitics of otherness in France
rests on one major foundation: the recognition of the body
as the ultimate site of political legitimacy. But this recognition takes two parallel paths. On the one hand, the suffering body manifests itself as the ultimate (but not
unique) resource, supplanting all other social justifications
for immigrants to be granted legal status and residing in a
basic right to keep oneself alive as long as possible. This is
a minimalist vision, but one which tends toward a universal horizon. On the other hand, the racialized body
extends from the foreigner to the national and introduces
internal frontiers founded on physical difference. This is a
discriminatory concept, which creates hierarchies between
people. In the first case, the reduction in political asylum
is a corollary of the rise in the humanitarian rationale: the
recognition of the suffering body imposes a legitimate
order defining citizenship on purely physiopathological
grounds. In the second, threats to human diversity lead to
a response by civil society and the state, reminding us of
shared political values: the recognition of the racialized
body as principle of an illegitimate order allows for a
measure of return to politics through the denunciation of
this principle by the victims and their supporters.
That is to say, despite common perceptions, biopolitics
does not proceed by one logic. It demonstrates a tension,
inscribed in the body, between the supreme universality of
life (which allows a sans-papiers with AIDS to be recognized by the state in the name of his/her pathology) and the
exaltation of difference, for which biology offers an
apparently insurmountable foundation (allowing each
person to perceive a natural source of inequality in the
physical characteristics of others). If we can recognize, in
an unusual form, the eternal anthropological theme of the
unity and diversity of the human condition, the questions
raised here certainly call for a renewed commitment from
social scientists to the critique of the contemporary foundations of politics #