Self-determination is a central concept for political philosophers. For example, many have appealed to this concept to defend a right of states to restrict immigration. Because it is deeply embedded in our political structures, the principle possesses a kind of default authority and does not usually call for an elaborate defense. In this paper, I will argue that genealogical studies by Adom Getachew, Radhika Mongia, Nandita Sharma, and others help to challenge this default authority. Their counter-histories show that the principle was used to justify, strengthen, and adapt imperial rule in the twentieth century. In particular, the idea that controlling a population's composition through regulating immigration is an essential aspect of self-determination emerged as a response to White anxieties about the migration of negatively racialized groups. Genealogies have not been adequately appreciated as a critical tool within the mainstream of political philosophy. I show that these genealogies have a critical role to play because they unsettle our uncritical attachment to the structures of the nation-state system and raise serious questions about the meaning and emancipatory force of the principle of self-determination.

Last modified

• 05/23/2023

Creator

• Menge, Torsten

DOI

• https://doi.org/10.21985/n2-vrq0-ze89

Alternate Identifier

• https://doi.org/10.1017/apa.2022.23

Keyword

• Genealogy
• Nation-state
• Colonialism
• Race
• Self-determination
• Immigration
• Counter-history

Date created

• 2022

Related url

•  https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-american-philosophical-association/article/colonial-genealogies-of-national-selfdetermination/24C11668EB279BA7288C2190F768280C

Resource type

• Article

Source

• Journal of the American Philosophical Association

Rights statement

• In Copyright