How do societies that externalize the negative consequences of their ‘imperial mode of living’ to the Global South respond when the effects of this externalization return, particularly in the form of refugees? Judith Vey examines this issue by looking at exclaves: areas that are physically located within Germany but legally, socially, politically, and economically outside of German society.
*
The sociologist Stephan Lessenich argues in his book “Neben uns die Sintflut. Die Externalisierungsgesellschaft und ihr Preis” (short version in English) that capitalist societies externalize the negative consequences of their ways of living, such as environmental damage, economic inequality, and social exploitation, to poorer countries mainly in the Global South or to future generations. Lessenich calls this off-load of the costs of our way of living externalization.
Externalization is a structural feature of capitalist societies that drives forced migration within societies in the Global South. For the most part, this forced migration takes place within these countries. Much smaller numbers of people flee to other countries, and even fewer to those in the Global North. In this article, I address the following question: How do societies that externalize, such as Germany, respond when the effects of their externalization return, especially through the arrival of refugees? I argue that the response to this process is that externalization societies re-externalize these effects again. Refugees are not integrated into German society; instead, they are isolated in exclaves – spaces that, despite being physically within Germany, are legally, socially, politically, and economically outside of the German society. I will trace this process of re-externalization of refugees in different spheres of social life in the German society.
Exclaves within externalization societies
To understand the process of re-externalization, I refer to the term of exclaves and argue, that refugee accommodations in Germany and in other countries of the Global North must be understood as exclaves within the externalization society. An exclave is a space that, although it is geographically enclosed within a given country, is socially, legally, politically and economically separate from the broader social fabric of that country. Refugee accommodations are such exclaves. They are social spaces where the separation of refugees from the rest of society is constituted. And they are essential to maintain the logic of externalization.
This exclavation of refugees not merely takes place in physical spaces. Rather, these spaces are also and mainly constituted by social practices of exclusion. Critical Border Studies help us understand that borders are not just territorial lines or physical spaces between countries, but also social practices that can occur almost anywhere. Borders are continuously negotiated and often shift depending on who is drawing them for what purpose and for whom. Borders are therefore never fully stable or fixed, and they are constantly in the process of being reproduced.
Exclaves are produced within German society through legal, political, social, and economic practices that treat refugees as separate from the rest of the population. This includes restrictions on their mobility, access to the labor market, and social and political participation. These exclusions are not always visible in a material sense, such as physical walls or fences. Instead, they are often enforced through legal frameworks, bureaucratic procedures, cultural practices, and everyday actions of individuals and institutions that reinforce refugees’ status as externalized people.
Different forms of exclusion within the exclaves
To illustrate these practices of exclavation, I will give some examples. Refugees arriving in Germany are mainly placed in initial reception centers, where they are required to stay until their asylum claims are processed. These centers are designed to be temporary, but in practice, many refugees stay in them for months or even years due to bureaucratic delays. The conditions in these centers are often substandard, and refugees face overcrowding, poor living conditions, and a lack of privacy. These facilities often lack minimum quality standards, leading to disparities in the conditions refugees face.
In contrast to the accommodation of other vulnerable groups, there are no legally binding regulations regarding refugee accommodations on the federal level. For example, the quality standards in elderly care facilities are legally binding and regulated. The accommodations are subject to regular inspections and state subsidies can be reduced in the event of violations. On the contrary, refugee accommodations are left to the discretion of local authorities, leading to a lack of consistency in the quality of care and services provided. This practice is part of a broader exclusionary logic. By relegating refugees to these spaces, the state can control their access to resources, keep them separated from the rest of society, and prevent their integration into German society.
The picture is similar when it comes to care and provisions of refugees. Refugees are treated differently from other social groups, especially with regard to financial support. Under the Asylum Seekers’ Benefits Act (AsylbLG), refugees often receive in-kind benefits instead of cash payments, such as food packages or vouchers, which further restrict their autonomy and prevent them from integrating into society. If they receive cash payments, they are significantly lower than the standard social benefits that other residents of Germany receive (‘Bürgergeld’), which creates a two-tier system where refugees are systematically excluded from the basic standards of living that other groups are entitled to. Although this practice has already been denounced as illegal by the Federal Constitutional Court in 2012, the payments have not yet been fully adjusted.
AnkER facilities and intensified exclusion
One of the most striking examples of intensified exclusion is the AnkER facility system. These facilities, introduced in Bavaria in 2018, are designed to house refugees until their asylum applications are processed. They are highly controlled environments, with strict security measures, barbed wire, and restricted access to the outside world. Residents are not allowed to leave overnight, and they must go through multiple layers of control to access even basic services. This is a clear example of the creation of exclaves within the country, where refugees are further isolated from the rest of society.
The conditions in AnkER facilities, which often resemble prisons, are in stark contrast to those experienced by other residents of Germany. In some facilities, refugees are provided with only basic necessities like food and hygiene products, while other social benefits are kept to a minimum. These facilities represent a paradigm shift in refugee accommodation: from temporary shelters to permanent forms of exclusion that prevent refugees from engaging with the broader society.
Bordering and debordering: Opportunities for change
Despite the strong boundaries created by these exclusionary systems, I argue that these borders are not immutable. As we have learned from Critical Border Studies, borders are constantly negotiated. Through acts of debordering, these artificial boundaries are broken down. This can be done intentionally or unintentionally.
For example, Martina Blank’s research demonstrates how volunteers unconsciously blur the boundaries between the inside and outside by entering and exiting the accommodation as part of their daily routine. In my research, I examine how refugees campaign for the right to live in regular apartments, thereby also criticize the exclavation processes and boundaries that separate them from German society. Furthermore, unintended failures in border control can lead to irritation or a shift in these borders. Bureaucratic errors or logistical failures, such as those I observed during the introduction of electronic entry pass systems, can create opportunities for refugees to escape these isolated spaces, even if only temporarily.
A starting point for dismantling exclaves
As we have seen, the German accommodation, care and provision system for refugees produces exclaves within the externalization societies of the Global North. These spaces, although physically within Germany, are effectively outside the social, economic, legal, and political structures and social spaces of German society. Through the lens of Critical Border Studies, we are able to understand how these borders are continuously produced and negotiated. While these exclusionary practices are pervasive, I emphasize that debordering –through volunteer efforts, political resistance, and even bureaucratic failures – is possible, and ultimately, can serve as a starting point for dismantling these exclaves in societies based on externalization.