Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T05:31:09.578Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Family matters in racial logics: Tracing intimacies, inequalities, and ideologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 December 2019

V. Spike Peterson Open the ORCID record for V. Spike Peterson [Opens in a new window]
V. Spike Peterson*
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article seeks to advance our understanding of how intimate relations and racial logics are co-constituted and matter – subjectively, culturally, materially, and politically – in our colonial present of economic inequalities, nationalist populisms, anti-migrant discourses and xenophobic hostilities. Addressing these crisis conditions is urgent, yet critical interventions indicate that prevailing accounts inadequately address the scale, complexity, and fluidity of racisms operating today. This article proposes to think racial logics ‘otherwise’ by drawing on interdisciplinary scholarship and intersectional analytics to produce a genealogy of state/nation formation processes, imperial encounters, and legitimating ideologies that illuminates how ‘intimacy builds worlds’.1 A deep history of political centralisation reveals that regulation of intimate, familial relations is a constitutive feature of successful state-making and crucial for understanding how modernity's ‘race difference’ is produced and how the racialisation of ‘Other’ (‘non-European’, undesirable) sexual/familial practices figures in contemporary crises. Locating intimate relations – ‘family’ – in (birthright) citizenship, immigration regimes, and political-economic frames helps clarify the amplification of global inequalities and the power of stigmatisations to fuel nationalist attachments and anti-migrant hostilities. Foregrounding intimacy and integrating typically disparate lines of inquiry advances our analyses of today's often opaque yet intense racisms and their globally problematic effects.

Keywords

InequalityState FormationColonialismEurocentrismRace/RacismSexualityFamilyNationalismBirthrightImmigrationCitizenship
Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 177 - 196
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Berlant, Lauren, ‘Intimacy’, Critical Inquiry, 24 (1998), p. 282CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Brennan, Teresa, Between Feminism and Psychoanalysis (London: Routledge, 1989), p. 12Google Scholar.

3 Stoler, Ann L., ‘Intimidations of empire’, in Stoler, Ann L. (ed.), Haunted by Empire (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006), pp. 13–14Google Scholar, emphasis in original.

4 In this article I engage intimacy by foregrounding a constellation of sexual/familial relations – ‘family’ (distinguished throughout by scare quotes) – that encompasses sensual, sexual, and reproductive activities, conjugal and familial/kinship relations, and household sites of domesticity and resource pooling. Defining ‘race’ is notoriously problematic. I address varying aspects of this dilemma throughout the article, but briefly here: I understand ‘race’ as a fluid category or ‘mobile essentialism’ emerging in early modernity and assuming varying forms and effects into the present. Stoler, Ann L., Duress (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2016), pp. 239–42Google Scholar. When referencing the modern era, I follow Stevens in preferring ‘state/nation’, to emphasise the state's juridical power and how its formation precedes and produces national ‘identifications’. See Stevens, Jacqueline, Reproducing the State (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), p. 43Google Scholar.

5 Agathangelou, Anna, ‘Neoliberal geopolitical order and value’, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 15:4 (2013), pp. 453–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Anievas, Alexander, Manchanda, Nivi, and Shilliam, Robbie, ‘Confronting the global color line: An introduction’, in Anievas, Alexander, Manchanda, Nivi, and Shilliam, Robbie (eds), Race and Racism in International Relations (New York: Routledge, 2015), pp. 1–15Google Scholar; Rutazibwa, Olivia U., ‘From the everyday to IR’, Postcolonial Studies, 19:2 (2016), pp. 191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Issue, Conference, ‘Racialized Realities in World Politics’, Millennium, 45:3 (2017), pp. 267–510Google Scholar; Walker, R. B. J., Shilliam, Robbie, Weber, Heloise, and du Plessis, Gitte, ‘Collective discussion: Diagnosing the present’, International Political Sociology, 12:1 (2018), pp. 88–107Google Scholar.

6 Bleiker, Roland and Hutchison, Emma (eds), ‘Emotions and world politics’, International Theory, 6:3 (2014), pp. 490–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Åhäll, Linda and Gregory, Thomas, Emotions, Politics and War (London: Routledge, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Weber, Cynthia, ‘From queer to queer IR’, International Studies Review, 16 (2014), pp. 596–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Weber, Cynthia, Queer International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016)Google Scholar.

7 Agathangelou, Anna, Bassichis, Daniel, and Spira, Tamara L., ‘Intimate investments’, Radical History Review, 100 (2008), pp. 120–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Richter-Montpetit, Michelle, ‘Beyond the erotics of orientalism’, Security Dialogue, 45:1 (2014), pp. 43–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; D'Aoust, Anne-Marie, ‘Love as project of (im)mobility’, Global Society, 28:3 (2014), pp. 317–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Turner, Joe, ‘Internal colonization’, European Journal of International Relations, 24:4 (2018), pp. 765–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Turner, Joe, Bordering Intimacy (Manchester: Manchester University Press, forthcoming 2020)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Persaud, Randolph B. and Walker, R. B. J., ‘Apertura: Race in international relations’, Alternatives, 26:4 (2001), pp. 373–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Anievas, Manchanda, and Shilliam (eds), Race and Racism in International Relations; Vitalis, Robert, White World Order, Black Power Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2015)Google Scholar; Barder, Alexander D., ‘Review essay: Race and international relations’, International Studies Review, 19:3 (2017), pp. 509–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see further below.

9 By ‘colonial present’ I reference the uneven, tenacious, tangible, and intangible continuities of colonialism in today's neo-imperial formations. See Gregory, Derek, The Colonial Present (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004)Google Scholar; Turner, ‘Internal colonization’.

10 Extensive scholarship supports the following general claims; references in support of more specific arguments appear throughout the article.

11 See, for example, Muis, Jasper and Immerzeel, Tim, ‘Causes and consequences of the rise of populist radical right parties and movements in Europe’, Current Sociology, 65:6 (2017), pp. 909–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; ‘A dangerous waltz; European populism’, Economist (3 February 2018), pp. 33–4; Steele, Brent and Homolar, Alexandra, ‘Ontological insecurities and the politics of contemporary populism’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 32:3 (2019), pp. 214–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Spruyt, Hendrik, ‘The origins, development, and possible decline of the modern state’, Annual Review of Political Science, 5 (2002), pp. 127–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Abramson, Scott F., ‘The economic origins of the territorial state’, International Organization, 71 (2017), pp. 97–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Acharya, Avidit and Lee, Alexander, ‘Economic foundations of the territorial state’, American Journal of Political Science, 62:4 (2018), pp. 954–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In an incisive, persuasive critique, Niang shows how IR's Westphalian conception of the state disregards contrasting forms and their histories, suppresses the importance and cultural aspects of securing legitimacy, and effectively compromises what we ‘know’ about contemporary states, stateness, and ‘non-states’: Niang, Amy, The Postcolonial African State in Transition (New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2018)Google Scholar.

13 Goldberg, David Theo, ‘Racial states’, in Goldberg, David Theo and Solomos, John (eds), A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies (Oxford: Blackwell, 2008), pp. 233–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Thompson makes the following distinction: ‘If racialism [the operationalisation of race] concerns the fabrication of homogeneous social groupings, racism hierarchically orders those so marked, polices the boundaries that separate racial groups for possible transgressions and keeps those on the bottom from moving surreptitiously upwards without payment or punishment.’ See Thompson, Debra, ‘Through, against and beyond the racial state’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 26:1 (2013), pp. 133–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Thelen, Tatjana and Alber, Erdmute, ‘Reconnecting state and kinship’, in Thelen, Tatjana and Erdmute (eds), Reconnecting State and Kinship (Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018), pp. 1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Goldberg, ‘Racial states’.

17 To be clear: my interest here is not in arguing ‘for or against’ states/nations, families, civilisation, or development – as the costs, benefits, and summary appraisals of each are rightly and intensely debated – but in illuminating processes, practices, and patterned effects of their historically contingent manifestations, especially those less familiar in IR. The arguments presented are part of a larger, ongoing project that builds on extensive research already undertaken (genealogical work on social hierarchies, state/nation formation, and global political economy) and more recent investigation of racial logics shaping nationalist populisms, anti-migrant animosities, and biosecurity practices. Only a schematic overview can be offered here; for more elaboration and additional bibliographic resources, see my publications: Peterson, V. Spike, ‘Security and sovereign states’, in Peterson, V. Spike (ed.), Gendered States (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1992), pp. 31–64Google Scholar; ‘Sexing political identity/nationalism as heterosexism’, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 1:1 (1999), pp. 21–52Google Scholar; A Critical Rewriting of Global Political Economy (London: Routledge, 2005)Google Scholar; ‘The intended and unintended queering of states/nations’, Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 13:1 (2013), pp. 57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Sex matters: A queer history of hierarchies’, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 16:3 (2014), pp. 389–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Problematic premises: Positivism, modernism and masculinism in IPE’, in Elias, Juanita and Roberts, Adrienne (eds), Handbook on the International Political Economy of Gender (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2018), pp. 23–36Google Scholar; and ‘Intimacy, informalization and intersecting inequalities’, Labour and Industry, 28:2 (2018), pp. 130–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Berlant, ‘Intimacy’, p. 282.

19 Peterson, ‘Sex matters’.

20 Scott, James C., Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017), p. 27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Morse, George L., Nationalism and Sexuality (New York: Howard Fertiz 1985)Google Scholar; Stoler, Ann L., Race and the Education of Desire (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1995)Google Scholar; McClintock, Anne, Imperial Leather (New York: Routledge, 1995)Google Scholar.

22 Chambers, Deborah, A Sociology of Family Life (Cambridge: Polity, 2012)Google Scholar; McDougall, Sara and Pearsall, Sarah M. S., ‘Introduction: Marriage's global past’, Gender & History, 29:3 (2017), pp. 505–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Stevens, Reproducing the State; Vucetic, Srdjan, ‘Black banker, white banker’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 26:1 (2013), pp. 27–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Goldberg, David Theo, The Racial State (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2002)Google Scholar; Venn, Couze, ‘Neoliberal political economy, biopolitics and colonialism’, Theory, Culture & Society, 26:6 (2009), pp. 206–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brubaker, Rogers, Grounds for Difference (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Stoler, Ann L., with Daniel, E. Valentine, ‘Interview’, Public Culture, 23:3 (2012), pp. 487–508, emphasis in original (p. 492)Google Scholar.

26 Stoler, Duress, p. 239.

27 Ibid., pp. 261–2, 264.

28 Ibid., pp. 261–2, 240.

29 Ibid., p. 260.

30 Marx, Anthony, ‘Race-making and the nation-state’, World Politics, 48:2 (1996), pp. 180–208 (p. 180)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Shaw, Brent D., ‘Review of The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity’, Journal of World History, 16:2 (2005), pp. 227–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar; also Isaac, Benjamin, The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Robinson, Cedric J., Black Marxism: The Making of the Black Radical Tradition (London: Zed, 2000 [orig. pub. 1983])Google Scholar.

33 Foucault, Michel, Society Must be Defended: Lectures at the College de France 1975–1976, trans. Macey, David (New York: Picador, 2004)Google Scholar.

34 Goldberg, The Racial State.

35 Thornton, Arland, ‘The development paradigm, reading history sideways, and family change’, Demography, 38:4 (2001), pp. 449–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Sinha, Mrinalini, ‘Nations in an imperial crucible’, in Levine, Phillipa (ed.), Gender and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 135–55Google Scholar.

37 Mills, Charles W., ‘Decolonizing Western political philosophy’, New Political Science, 37:1 (2015), pp. 1–24 (p. 10)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Goldberg, David Theo, Racist Culture (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1993)Google Scholar.

39 Ibid., p. 80.

40 For reasons given, I locate race in the modern era, but I do not dismiss alternative interpretations or presume a single, sedimented, or ‘fixed’ definition of race.

41 Anievas, Manchanda, and Shilliam, ‘Confronting the global color line’, p. 9.

42 Doty, Roxanne L., ‘The bounds of “race” in international relations’, Millennium, 22 (1993), pp. 443–61 (p. 445)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Persaud and Walker, ‘Apertura’, p. 373.

44 Thompson, ‘Through, against and beyond the racial state’, p. 135.

45 This scholarship appears not only in a surge of research publications but also in conference papers and panels, online forums, and special issues (re)centering ‘race in IR’. In the past decade an incomplete list includes Jones, Branwen Gruffydd, ‘Race in the ontology of international order’, Political Studies, 56 (2008), pp. 907–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jones, Branwen Gruffydd, ‘Definitions and categories’, Postcolonial Studies, 19:2 (2016), pp. 173–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Krishna, Sankaran, Globalization and Postcolonialism (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2008)Google Scholar; Lake, Marilyn and Reynolds, Henry, Drawing the Global Colour Line (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shilliam, Robbie, The Black Pacific (London: Bloomsbury, 2015)Google Scholar; Shilliam, Robbie (ed.), International Relations and Non-Western Thought (London: Routledge, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Agathangelou, Anna M. and Ling, L. H. M., Transforming World Politics (London: Routledge, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mittelman, James H., ‘The salience of race’, International Studies Perspectives, 10 (2009), pp. 99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sabaratnam, Meera, ‘IR in dialogue … but can we change the subjects?’, Millennium, 39:3 (2011), pp. 781–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ling, L. H. M., The Dao of World Politics (London: Routledge, 2014)Google Scholar; Ling, L. H. M., ‘Decolonizing the international’, International Theory, 6:3 (2014), pp. 579–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Danewid, Ida, ‘White innocence in the Black Mediterranean’, Third World Quarterly, 38:7 (2017), pp. 1674–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Disorder of Things symposia on books by Hobson, John M., The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vitalis, White World Order, Black Power Politics; forums on ‘race in IR’: see International Studies Perspectives, 10:1 (2009)Google Scholar, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 26:1 (2013)Google Scholar, and on Hobson's 2012 book, see Postcolonial Studies, 19:2 (2016)Google Scholar; Barder, ‘Review essay’; and a special issue of Millennium, 45:3 (2017), pp. 267–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Key texts include Vitalis's (White World Order, Black Power Politics) archival exposé of the discipline's racial past and complicities, and Hobson's (Eurocentric Conception of World Politics) examination of Eurocentrism and racism in an array of canonical IR thinkers (from 1760 to 2010), which ‘paints a devastating picture of a field that simply amplifies the voices of the world's privileged and constantly finds new justifications for their advantage’. Murphy, Craig N., ‘It's the economy, stupid’, in Booth, Ken and Erskine, Toni (eds), International Relations Theory Today (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2016), pp. 109–24 (p. 120)Google Scholar.

47 Sajed, Alina, ‘Race and international relations’, Postcolonial Studies, 19:2 (2016), pp. 168–72 (p. 168)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; also Grovogui, Siba N., Sovereigns, Quasi Sovereigns, and Africans (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996)Google Scholar; Hobson, John M., The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hobson, John M., ‘Is critical theory always for the white West and for Western imperialism?’, Review of International Studies, 33 (2007), pp. 91–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hobson, Eurocentric Conception of World Politics; Anievas, Alexander and Nicancioglu, Kerem, How the West Came to Rule (London: Pluto Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rutazibwa, ‘From the everyday to IR’; Jones, ‘Definitions and categories’; Hawkesworth, Mary E., Embodied Power (New York: Routledge, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Jones, ‘Definitions and categories’, p. 173.

49 Goldberg, The Racial State, pp. 108–09.

50 Anievas, Manchanda, and Shilliam, ‘Confronting the global color line’, pp. 10, 11.

51 Berlant, ‘Intimacy’, p. 282.

52 Briefly: periodisation locates the emergence of race in one or another ‘era’ of human history; developmentalism distinguishes temporally concurrent populations according to differentially valourised (superior–inferior, civilised–primitive) ‘stages’ of human development. See Thornton, ‘The development paradigm’; also on psychoanalytic framings of ‘sexual development’, see Hoad, Neville, ‘Arrested development or the queerness of savages’, Postcolonial Studies, 3:2 (2000), pp. 133–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; on effects of human, not quite human, and non-human statuses, see Wheleliye, A., Habeas Viscus (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2014)Google Scholar; on developed, ‘underdeveloped’, and ‘undevelopable’ sexualised orders, see Weber, Queer International Relations.

53 Scott, Against the Grain, p. 58. Repressive features of state-making were earlier noted: see Lerner, Gerda, The Creation of Patriarchy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986)Google Scholar; Mann, Michael, The Sources of Social Power, Vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McNeil, William H., The Rise of the West (New York: The New American Library, 1991 [orig. pub. 1963])CrossRefGoogle Scholar, but Scott (Against the Grain) offers the most current research and comprehensive critique of conventional state narratives; see his chs 4 and 5 on the primacy of labour demands and extensive coercion in early, agricultural states. See Niang, The Postcolonial African State in Transition for an insightful and nuanced study of states, stateness, and statelessness.

54 Scott, Against the Grain, pp. xii, 30 and ch. 7.

55 This depiction conforms to conventional accounts; see for example, Cohen, Ronald and Service, Elman R. (eds), Origins of the State (Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues, 1987)Google Scholar; Claessen, Henri J. M. and Oosten, Jarich G. (eds), Ideology and the Formation of Early States (New York: E. J. Brill, 1996)Google Scholar; Buzan, Barry and Little, Richard, International Systems in World History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000)Google Scholar. On ideological legitimation, see Claessen, Henri J. M. and Skalnik, Peter (eds), The Early State (The Hague: Morton Publishers, 1978), p. 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McNeil, The Rise of the West, p. 51.

56 On the significance of writing technologies, see Goody, Jack, The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mann, The Sources of Social Power; Lerner, The Creation of Patriarchy; Peterson, ‘Security and sovereign states’; Peterson, ‘Sex matters’; Scott, Against the Grain, pp. 139–49. On (revised) cosmologies ‘normalising’ asymmetric sex difference, see Lerner, The Creation of Patriarchy; Peterson, ‘Security and sovereign states’; Peterson, ‘Sex matters’; Stearns, Peter N., Gender in World History (2nd edn, New York: Routledge, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bolger, Diane L., ‘The dynamics of gender in early agricultural societies of the Near East’, Signs, 35:2 (2010), pp. 503–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 Levy, Janet E., ‘Gender, heterarchy, and hierarchy’, in Nelson, Sarah Milledge (ed.), Handbook of Gender in Archaeology (Lanham, MD: AltaMira, 2006), pp. 219–46 (p. 220)Google Scholar; see also Niang, The Postcolonial African State in Transition.

58 Maisels, Charles, The Archeaeology of Politics and Power (Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2010), p. 16Google Scholar.

59 Exceptions include Frederick Engel's pioneering work, The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (New York: Pathfinder, 1972 [orig. pub. 1884]) and extensive feminist studies of patriarchal state theory/practice since the 1970s.

60 Hall, Edith, Inventing the Barbarian (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989)Google Scholar; Golderg, David Theo, ‘Modernity, race and morality’, Cultural Critique, 24 (1993), pp. 193–227 (pp. 198–200)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stearns, Gender in World History.

61 Scott, Against the Grain, p. 27.

62 Goldberg, The Racial State, p. 9.

63 For research criticising ahistorical (‘naturalised’) understandings of sex, sexualities, family, kinship, and social hierarchies, see Schneider, David, A Critique of the Study of Kinship (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schmidt, Robert A. and Voss, Barbara L. (eds), Archaeologies of Sexuality (London: Routledge, 2000)Google Scholar; Franklin, Sarah and McKinnon, Susan (eds), Relative Values (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bolger, ‘The dynamics of gender in early agricultural societies of the Near East’; Peterson, ‘Sex matters’; Kinsella, Helen M. and Sjoberg, Laura, ‘Family values? Sexism and heteronormativity in Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) research’, Review of International Studies, 45:2 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64 This and what follows are necessarily condensed and selective depictions of intensive, extensive, and exceedingly complex processes, as well as wide-ranging and often contradictory literatures interpreting them. While integral, addressing how religion figures in producing and practicing racial logics is beyond the scope of this article.

65 Coontz, Stephanie, ‘The world historical transformation of marriage’, Journal of Marriage and Family, 66:4 (2004), pp. 974–9 (pp. 976–7)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Vivek Swaroop Sharma, ‘Kinship, property, and authority’, Politics & Society (2015), pp. 1–30; McDougall and Pearsall, ‘Introduction’.

66 Goldberg, ‘Modernity, race and morality’, p. 202.

67 Scholars conventionally cited include Franz Fanon; Edward Said; Gayatri Spivak; Partha Chatterjee; Ann Stoler; Paul Gilroy; Anne McClintock; Dipesh Chakrabarty; see further below.

68 Mosse, George L., Nationalism and Sexuality (New York: Howard Fertiz, 1985)Google Scholar; Yuval-Davis, Nira and Anthias, Floya (eds), Woman-Nation-State (London: Macmillan Press, 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Balibar, Etienne and Wallersteing, Immanuel (eds), Race, Nation, Class (London: Verso, 1991)Google Scholar; Hyam, Ronald, Empire and Sexuality (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1991)Google Scholar; Parker, Andrew, Russo, Mary, Sommer, Doris, and Yaeger, Patricia (eds), Nationalisms and Sexualities (New York: Routledge, 1991)Google Scholar; McClintock, Anne, Imperial Leather (New York: Routledge, 1995)Google Scholar; McClintock, Anne, Mufti, Aamir, and Shohat, Ella (eds), Dangerous Liaisons (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Yuval-Davis, Nira, Gender and Nation (London: Sage, 1997)Google Scholar; Stevens, Reproducing the State; Levine, Phillipa (ed.), Gender and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press. 2004)Google Scholar; Brubaker, Rogers, ‘Ethnicity, race, and nationalism’, Annual Review of Sociology, 35:1 (2009), pp. 21–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Voss, Barbara L. and Casella, Eleanor Conlin (eds), The Archaeology of Colonialism: Intimate Encounters and Sexual Effects (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012)Google Scholar.

69 Turner, ‘Internal colonization’.

70 Points in this section build on Foucault's work, see especially Foucault, Society Must be Defended; Foucault, Michel, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the College de France, 1977–78, trans. Burchell, Graham (New York: Palgrave, 2007)Google Scholar, Foucault, Michel, The Birth of Biopolitics, trans. Burchell, Graham (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008)Google Scholar and subsequent engagements with and revisions of it, including Goldberg, Racist Culture; Goldberg, The Racial State; Stoler, Ann L., ‘Making Empire respectable: The politics of race and sexual moralilty in 20th century colonial cultures', American Ethnologist, 16:4 (1989), pp. 634–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stoler, Race and the Education of Desire; Stoler, Duress; Povinelli, Elizabeth, The Empire of Love (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Venn, ‘Neoliberal political economy, biopolitics and colonialism’; Isin, Engin F., ‘Citizens without nations’, Environment and Planning D., 30 (2012), pp. 450–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Turner, ‘Internal colonization’; Howell, Alison and Richter-Montpetit, Melanie, ‘Racism in Foucauldian security studies’, International Political Sociology, 13:1 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71 As Chambers, Deborah, A Sociology of Family Life (Cambridge: Polity, 2012), p. 16Google Scholar, emphasis in original, writes, ‘The aim was to prove that the acceptable version of monogamous marriage is the final, correct and highest stage of social evolution.’ Also Coontz, ‘The world historical transformation of marriage’; Thornton, ‘The development paradigm’; McDougall and Pearsall, ‘Introduction’.

72 This vast literature includes Mosse, Nationalism and Sexuality; Brown, Wendy, Manhood and Politics (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield, 1988)Google Scholar; Pateman, Carole, The Sexual Contract (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1988)Google Scholar; Halperin, David, One Hundred Years of Homosexuality and Other Essays on Greek Love (New York: Routledge, 1990)Google Scholar.

73 See references in fns 67, 68. Paraphrasing McDougall and Pearsall, ‘Introduction’, p. 515: indifference to monogamous marriage became ‘shorthand’ for signalling ‘inferior’ people who ‘could never be trusted’. Effects were especially stark – and enduring – in settler colonies, see for example, Beier, J. Marshall, International Relations in Uncommon Places (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Povinelli, The Empire of Love; Morgensen, Scott Lauria, ‘Settler homonationalism’, GLQ, 16:1–2 (2010), pp. 105–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bhambra, Gurminder, Connected Sociologies (London: Bloomsbury, 2014)Google Scholar; Lowe, Lisa, The Intimacies of Four Continents (Durham: Duke University Press, 2015)Google Scholar.

74 Stevens, Reproducing the State; Povinelli, The Empire of Love; McDougall and Pearsall, ‘Introduction’.

75 Stevens, Reproducing the State; Goldberg, The Racial State; Isin, ‘Citizens without nations’.

76 Goldberg, The Racial State, p. 9.

77 Spade, Dean, ‘Under the cover of gay rights’, 37 N.Y.U. Rev. L. & Soc. Change, 79 (2013), pp. 79–100 (p. 94)Google Scholar.

78 Stevens, Reproducing the State, p. xv.

79 Stoler, Duress, pp. 240, 244–5.

80 Turner, ‘Internal colonization’, pp. 782, 783.

81 Goldberg, David Theo, ‘Vanishing points: Reflecting on my respondents’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39:13 (2016), pp. 2278–83 (p. 2280, emphasis in original)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Mills, ‘Decolonizing Western political philosophy’.

82 Some of the following points overlap with arguments I develop in a different (global political economy) article currently under review.

83 Milanovic, Branco, Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Murphy, ‘It's the economy, stupid’.

84 ‘[T]he past tends to devour the future: wealth originating in the past automatically grows more rapidly, even without labor, than wealth stemming from work, which can be saved. Almost inevitably, this tends to give lasting disproportionate importance to inequalities created in the past, and therefore to inheritance.’ See Piketty, Thomas, Capital in the 21st Century, trans. Goldhammer, A. (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 2014), p. 378CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

85 Peterson, V. Spike, ‘Family matters: How queering the intimate queers the international’, International Studies Review, 16:4 (2014), pp. 604–08 (p. 607)Google Scholar.

86 Stevens, Reproducing the State, p. 131; Shachar, Ayelet and Hirschl, Ran, ‘Citizenship as inherited property’, Political Theory, 35:3 (2007), pp. 253–87 (p. 254)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

87 Shachar and Hirschl, ‘Citizenship as inherited property’, pp. 254–5; Milanovic, Branco, ‘Global inequality of opportunity: How much of our income is determined by where we live?’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 97:2 (2015), pp. 452–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

88 Shachar, Ayelet, The Birthright Lottery (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), p. 5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

89 See Milanovic, Branko, ‘Global inequality: From class to location, from proletarians to migrants’, Global Policy, 3:2 (2012), pp. 125–34 (p. 129)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who also addresses measurement debates.

90 Milanovic, ‘Global inequality’; Brubaker, Grounds for Difference, p. 159, fn. 11, cites global survey data (2009–11) indicating 13 per cent of the world's adults would prefer to emigrate.

91 Milanovic, ‘Global inequality’; Milanovic, Grounds for Difference.

92 Milanovic, ‘Global inequality’; Milanovic, Grounds for Difference.

93 See Shachar, The Birthright Lottery; Shachar, Ayelet, ‘Introduction: Citizenship and the “right to have rights”’, Citizenship Studies, 18:2 (2014), pp. 114–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Milanovic, ‘Global inequality; Piketty, Capital in the 21st Century; Brubaker, Grounds for Difference.

94 Shachar and Hirschl, ‘Citizenship as inherited property’, pp. 253–4.

95 Brubaker, Grounds for Difference, p. 45.

96 Goldberg, The Racial State, pp. 117, 133.