judith’s thought

PRECONDITIONS:

A: Person X is from Afghanistan

B: Person X applies for a Visa to Russia

C: Person X is refused to get a VISA

QUESTION:

Why does Person X get no VISA?
 Circumstances?
o 1. Lack of necessary documents
o 2. No allowment for people of this origin
o 3. A special case/special circumstances of that person make it impossible to give a VISA (e.g. criminal past…)
o 4. Arbitrary treatment/decision-making by institutions or/and individuals

Solutions/Approaches:

To 1.) provide all needed documents
 partly in applicants responsibility
 partly applicants dependence on others
(analog: Why does Person X does not get the required documents? -> Circumstances…)

To 3.) Person X is probably incapable of changing anything about this decision (in case
his special preconditions are proven and acknowledged [by ?])

Number 2 (???) and 4 go together considering their absence of valid and internationally acknowledged rules in the determination of the reasonable neglection of VISA:

To 2. and 4.) Person X can look for judicial opportunities to
claim his rights
 possible institutions/judicial background:
o human rights
o court of justice (international context)
o UNO?

Precondition:

1. Person X is from Afghanistan

2. Person X is refused to get a VISA for Russia

3. The refusal is not based on any reasonable or internationally acknowledged basis.

Question:

Why Person X is refused to get a VISA?
 Circumstances?
o Individual decision
o Inofficial set of rules
o Bureaucratic structures

Approach (not solution!):

The level of individual
The level of institutional
Both intertwined?

Both levels base their decisions on the same criteria as racism does?

The determination of the human individual and its qualities and weaknesses
through their origin, their appearance, their language.

Within this framework the individual does not even have the right or the
opportunity to proof its individuality.

The result is the stigmatization of a certain group of people who are described as
having decisive aspects in common, such could be religion, ideology, thinking,
same solutions for conflicts, goals, world view etc.

Through this the individual is no longer acknowlegded as such. It is dissolved in
stereotypes, which is in fact other people’s ideas of the group the individual is
associated with.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: