Why Borders Matter

by Frank Furedi

Western society has become estranged from the borders and social boundaries that have for centuries given meaning to human experience. This book argues that the controversy surrounding mass migration and physical borders runs in parallel and is closely connected to the debates surrounding the symbolic boundaries people need to guide on the issues of everyday life.

Numerous commentators claim that borders have become irrelevant in the age of mass migration and globalisation. Some go so far as to argue for 'No Borders'. And it is not merely the boundaries that divide nations that are under attack! The traditional boundaries that separate adults from children, or men from women, or humans from animals, or citizens and non-citizens, or the private from the public sphere are often condemned as arbitrary, unnatural, and even unjust. Paradoxically, the attempt to alter or abolish conventional boundaries coexists with the imperative of constructing new ones. No-Border campaigners call for safe spaces. Opponents of cultural appropriation demand the policing of language and advocates of identity politics are busy building boundaries to keep out would-be encroachers on their identity.

Furedi argues that the key driver of the confusion surrounding borders and boundaries is the difficulty that society has in endowing experience with meaning. The most striking symptom of this trend is the cultural devaluation of the act of judgment, which has led to a loss of clarity about the moral boundaries in everyday life. The infantilisation of adults that runs in tandem with the adultification of children offers a striking example of the consequence of non-judgmentalism.

Written in a clear and direct style, this book will appeal to students and scholars in cultural sociology, sociology of knowledge, philosophy, political theory, and cultural studies.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Sociology, Philosophy

202 pages, Hardcover

Published July 13, 2020

About the author

Frank Furedi is a professor of sociology at the University of Kent, UK.

Reviews

[Carlos · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good news: contemporary and non-postmodern cultural commentary still exists. Frank Furedi makes a cogent case for borders in their broadest sense, pointing out how from Trump's wall, to Brexit, to the anti-scientific denial of differences between men and women, for example, the West's current Zeitgeist pretty much automatically frowns upon any form of "boundary", no matter if physical (e.g. borders between countries, biological differences between sexes) or metaphysical (i.e. definitions and concepts, which discriminate what something is from what it isn't), and without any consideration at all for their raison d'être; and how this imbalance in the lumper-splitter problem is the reason behind the ongoing crisis we evidence in our current political polarization, our lack of a unifying goal or ideal, the rise in mental health issues, and our overarching sense of meaninglessness.

While globalization and mass migration are undoubtedly challenging the relevance of traditional national borders; and while, in a similar manner, technological progress is changing the world at such a pace that, for instance, the intellectual advantage of older generations over younger ones is, in a way, shrinking, effectively undermining the adult-child distinction; and social media is hollowing out whatever separation remains between the public and the private spheres, between experts and non-experts, and, again, for that matter, between adults and non-adults; Furedi argues this is not just a matter of external forces at play. Since approximately the 1960s, postmodernism has infiltrated our higher education systems, seeping into every other aspect of our culture and rejecting any and all meaning in favor of a boundarylessness à la carte. This worldview, however, ignores (knowingly or not) that our societal norms and definitions, our mutually agreed traditions, values, and boundaries, are not entirely arbitrary. Our ability to assign meaning to experience, and ultimately our ability to act in the world, is fundamentally the act of defining boundaries. (Choosing to, let's say, go out for drinks with friends, already draws a boundary, i.e. a value judgement, between what is worth doing on that specific Friday night, and what isn't.) On the contrary, how can we denounce child abuse, for example, if we cannot agree on what the age of consent (in other words, the definition of a child) should be? Or how can we choose the "morally right thing to do" if we cannot set a boundary between what's right and what's wrong, because we can't risk offending another culture with different values? How do we study health issues that are specific to women, if we cannot determine what a woman is? How can we escape a dictatorship by seeking refuge in a different country, when the borders that actually define different countries have been erased (1) in the name of a supposed tolerance, and (2) in complete ignorance of the fact that the end of national borders necessarily leads to the end of democracy (Kant's 1795 essay Perpetual Peace, Hannah Arendt, and a long etc.)? Heck, how can I choose to play football if I can't even distinguish "football" from "eating a paper napkin"?

In what is possibly the most quotable of 20th century books, Pessoa writes that “civilization consists in giving something a name that doesn't belong to it, and then dreaming about the result.” Let's just ensure we can continue giving names to things, even if we're only able to do it imperfectly. The alternative is the opposite of civilization.

[A.J. Jr. · Rating 5 out of 5]

A cogent analysis of the ongoing crisis Western society is currently experiencing. The West's rejection of traditional moral norms and judgement is leading inexorably to the total implosion of our society. If you're wondering "What in the world is happening to Anglo-American society?!" read this book. Professor Furedi explains--in painful detail--exactly what's happening and why. He also points us to the way out. This book is a must read for anyone who values sanity in our insane world. It's sure to be unpopular with the cultural elites.

[Kathleen · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is so poorly argued that it's surprising to me that Routledge would publish it. Furedi's characterization of critics of borders relies on such a willful misreading of texts that it's obviously a bad faith argument. His argument depends a lot on the category of the "pre-political," which expands from kinship and community in the first chapter of the book, to being the basis of national identity just a few chapters in. The idea that national identities could be pre-political is just ridiculous.

His complete lack of meaningful engagement with the substance of his opponents arguments is apparent in chapter four. He has this juvenile gotcha moment that just underscores his bad faith engagement with his ideological opponents. As he correctly notes, many who argue against borders do so on the grounds that our place of birth is arbitrary. What opponents of borders mean there is that we have no control over where we are born; it is an accident of fate. So, assigning different moral valuation to the lives of humans based on where they happened to have been born is an arbitrary way to treat human beings, who should be seen as having equal moral worth as humans. From the perspective of open-borders advocates, the arbitrary fact of the location of your birth should not be morally-salient when determining what rights and obligations we have toward a particular person.

Furedi pulls some total 8th-grade boy bullshit when he (a) completely neglects to take up the substantive issue of the unequal distribution of rights, goods, resources, opportunities based on accidents of birth, and then (b) intentionally mischaracterizes his opponents' position as if what they were saying is that "borders are not morally salient" (54). His childish retort to his own mischaracterization of his opponents position is "If they genuinely believed that borders are not morally salient, than [sic] it is unlikely that they would send so much energy condemning them!" (54).

There's no reason to read more than the introduction and conclusion of this book, because his argument is not any better developed in the later chapters. He is a generous interpreter of people who share his ideological position, but completely unwilling to engage in the same generosity of consideration with folks who do not share his views. The fact that he can only argue his point of view by neglecting to take seriously the moral concerns of his opponents and mischaracterizing their positions, demonstrates how little substance there is to his argument.

Also, the cover art for this book couldn't be more perfect: A bunch of nondescript, identical white guys in business suits, standing behind their stupid line on the ground, facing down an imaginary opponent. Whoever did the cover art for this book really fucking nailed it.

[Baden Eunson · Rating 5 out of 5]

The historic pendulum swings back..Furedi always provides salutary correctives. He is a super-outlier.
He takes the concept of borders- between countries, between genders, between generations, between humans and animals - and surprisingly synthesizes these into a super-theory, pointing out the more ludicrous paradoxes we are bombarded with today: "No-Border campaigners call for safe spaces. Opponents of cultural appropriation demand the policing of language and advocates of identity politics are busy building boundaries to keep out would-be encroachers on their identity."
A quick read at 193 pp- buy it and read it and cause uproar at the next dinner/ party you attend. A sublimely politically incorrect book- un-PC today, the new paradigm of 2030.

[Douglas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Challenging but logical. makes one think about many current issues.

[Oolalaa · Rating 5 out of 5]

17/20

[Books Of The Way · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Why Borders Matter” is one of the most articulate, thorough & well researched pieces of work I’ve read for quite some time. Professor Frank Furedi cuts through the emotionalism & rhetoric, analysing just why the call for “no borders” has gained such popularity & what its consequences have been. Interestingly, he proposes that the supposedly progressive call for an end to the enforcement of national border controls has actually produced many regressive outcomes.
The present, popular narrative today is that borders are oppressive, exploitative, discriminatory & even violent. In parallel with the unease of physical borders in the West we have seen the increasing blurring of lines between symbolic borders too. The borders between adulthood & childhood, public life from private life, men & women, & even the concept of binaries have all been subject to obfuscation & revisionism, in the view of Prof. Furedi.
Paradoxically, the systematic & intellectual efforts to eradicate borders from life have inadvertently created a whole plethora of brand new borders & new boundaries. This is what Furedi calls the “paradox of borders”. Whilst national borders have eroded in importance or support, the quest for personal boundary setting has seen a massive increase. Divided communities within countries have emerged, & in the name of so-called progressive values we have even seen the growth of racially segregated events & activities at all levels of society, from protests to Government. On both sides of the political spectrum, the desire for “safe spaces” has emerged, policed environments where any form of questioning of existing opinions is strictly prohibited.
Fitting with the paradox, in an effort to tear down traditional conceptual borders, others have sprung up in place. The “traditional” position was that discussing your religion was seen as a rather pleasant & enlightening thing to share, but your antics in the bedroom should be kept to yourself. Now we enjoy the opposite – It’s culturally celebrated to announce your “kinks”, from bondage whips & ball gags to speculums & bukkake, the filthier the better. Very brave & very cool. But that religious person who wanted to tell you about how their faith helped their life? – Culturally the West no longer entertain such people. We now tell people like that to shut up & “keep it to themselves” – exactly our attitude towards sexual preferences 50 years ago.
Interestingly, exceptions to the rules are permitted if they are deemed culturally acceptable or advantageous for cultural/political elites. One example being the implicit current sentiment that wanting to defend ones own national borders is nothing more than repugnant, veiled xenophobia, but it’s considered noble & admirable to want to defend the borders of say, Ukraine, or perhaps demand the self-determination of a third word country. Admirable to desire for other countries, yet reprehensible to desire for your own.
It concludes with a reflection that we are wasting the best minds & efforts of Western civilization with this great turn inwards, a narcissistic self-obsession which Furedi insists is accelerated by our loss of borders, protection, defined space. Whilst India lands a spacecraft on the moon, Western countries waste their energies on ever-miniscule details & theories around race & gender; Self-flagellating over the past or proclaiming disaster for the future. A world of tightly policed abstraction.
The current demand for boundaries as they materialise now are too highly individualised & personalised to connect with the societal need for meaning & solidarity. Legitimate boundaries require the help of wider cultural norms & practices, & Furedi ends by suggesting that in order to answer the existential crisis of our era, we need to regain our cultural confidence & adopt a positive orientation towards discernment & judgement, to make moral distinctions. We need to learn to appreciate once more our physical & symbolic boundaries that developed organically over hundreds of years of culture & move past the failed social engineering projects that have been synthetically implemented by idealists living in ivory towers.

[Chris Gilligan · Rating 1 out of 5]

I started reading this book thinking it was going to be a book about immigration and border controls. Its not. Perhaps because the author doesn't appear to know very much about immigration policy, migration law, the sociology of migration or even any of the more in depth journalistic accounts of contemporary migration.

Instead it's a sprawling, at times internally inconsistent, opinion piece dressed up in academic clothing. The author previously wrote a book titled "Where Have All The Intellectuals Gone", which lamented the decline of intellectual standards in the contemporary world. This book is a good example of the kind of thing he was complaining about. Really shoddy work, that will only appeal to people looking for intellectual support for their own prejudices. https://bit.ly/44yZej4

[Seosamh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ogni tanto fa delle analisi interessanti, ma sostanzialmente è ridondante come molti saggi. Ho la sensazione che certe opinioni (soprattutto sulla religione e la sessualità) siano più parziali che "cogenti" come qualcuno le definisce.
Come si può definire "acuta" la solita storiella dei "vecchi valori che danno senso all'esistenza umana"?
È ciò che qualsiasi simil-conservatore dice, non ci vedo nulla di illuminante.

Però ottimo come contraddittorio, se la si pensa in maniera opposta.