In the decades after the Second World War, in the context of decolonization and of Western Europe’s post-war reconstruction and economic boom years, immigration from the colonized or formerly colonized world became a massive phenomenon that would transform Western Europe into a world region with a significant net surplus of immigration. As more and more formerly colonized people from Africa, the Caribbean, and Asia arrived—in quest of work, education, and social mobility, or in search of refuge from poverty, famine, violent conflict, or group-specific persecution—it seemed to many Western European politicians, professional commentators, social workers, and regular citizens alike that ‘empire was coming home’ like a boomerang. This perception was reinforced by a simultaneous development: Alongside Brown and Black people, another group from the former colonies was arriving massively in the Western European metropoles at the time: the so-called ‘repatriates,’ i.e., White Europeans who were fleeing the independence of African and Asian colonies. Based on recent scholarship and zooming in on select aspects of the immigration histories of France, the United Kingdom, and Portugal from the 1940s to the 1990s, this seminar will look at the colonized-turned-immigrants and the settlers-turned-immigrants together, as part of the same analytical field. It suggests a comparative and relational perspective that can highlight differences, commonalities, interactions, and racialized hierarchies between all those who came (back) to Europe, settling into nations that had to reinvent themselves in the process of decolonization.
The exceptionalism of the American welfare state is largely taken for granted in both policy and academic discourse. The U.S. spends less on welfare, offers less generous benefits, covers a smaller proportion of the population than its U.S. counterparts, and as a result has worse outcomes whether measured in terms of life expectancy or child poverty. This course will introduce students to the key explanations for this distinctiveness, including a cultural valorization of individualism, the primacy of racial exclusion in social policy, and the weakness of the American labor movement. However, this course will also consider two correctives to this perspective: first, a much larger American welfare state may exist but be less visible in cross-national analyses because it is delivered differently: via private tax breaks, non-profit contracting, and within the criminal justice system. Second, contemporary reforms to welfare states in other advanced democracies in response to pressures around immigration, multi-culturalism, and austerity may lead to convergence. As a result, this course will consider whether the U.S. will remain an exception or serves rather as a harbinger of things to come.
• How much do political parties matter for governance in MENA? This broad question is the starting point for an assessment of electoral dynamics in North Africa and guides the course.
Interest in the role of political parties and elections in North Africa is a rather recent phenomenon brought about by the changing reality on the ground. First authoritarian regimes liberalised progressively their political systems with the introduction of multi-party politics and regular elections. Later, processes of democratisation led to the setting up of genuine competitive politics, providing further empirical evidence on parties and elections. The course first traces the history of party politics in the region (Catusse and Karam, 2010; Hinnebusch, 2017) in the context first of authoritarian upgrading (Heydemann, 2007) and authoritarian elections (Schedler, 2002 and 2006) and later of democratisation (Resta, 2023). It focuses on the role and functions of political parties in North Africa (Storm 2013) and the way in which elections are conducted and for what purposes (Lust, 2006). Second, and following on from this broad debate on the relationship between parties, elections, authoritarianism and democratization, the course examines party families. First of all, it looks at the nature (Schwedler, 2006; Schwedler 2011; al-Anani 2012; Kandil, 2015), policy preferences (Kienle, 2013; Wegner and Cavatorta, 2019) and electoral strategies (Hamid, 2011; Pellicer and Wegner, 2014; Masoud, 2014) of Islamist parties. Second, the course explores the rise and fall of leftist parties and movements (Jebari, 2020) as well as the reasons behind the current failure to make electoral inroads (Resta, 2018; Sallam, 2022), linking this discussion to the broader literature on the recent failures of the left in Europe and elsewhere (Hopkin, 2020). Third, we look at former single parties and how they operate in liberalised environments (Koheler, 2020) as well as Salafi parties, a relative novelty on the political scene (Lacroix, 2016; Amghar and Cavatorta 2022), linking it to the broader literature on rising populism. Fourth, we examine voter-party linkages and the how specific social constituencies participate (or do not participate) parties. “Finally, the course explores the case of Tunisia in some detail because it represents the way in which political parties and elections have ‘performed’ during authoritarianism, democracy and back to authoritarianism (Koehler, 2023).
Ce séminaire propose une introduction aux enjeux liés à l'Intelligence Artificielle, et spécifiquement dans l'enseignement. Le but étant pour les étudiants de faire des recommandations quant à l'usage de l'IA au sein de l'IEP.
Un week-end de convention étudiante sur l'IA (du 4 au 6 avril) sera proposé pour ceux qui le souhaitent.