Afghans Ante Portas: Looking at Immigrants in Turkiye Through Google's Peephole

Introduction

As one of the pioneering cultures of contemporary urban civilisations, Rome, which bequeathed symbolic borders and gates to the world today, actually transformed a fear of the East into a socio-genetic predisposition as a comprehensive civilisational bias. The social upheaval caused by the fear of the invading strangers, which is constantly reproduced in the proverb “Hannibal Ante Portas”, which means “Hannibal is at the gates” and is still in use today, has always imbued perceptions and attitudes towards strangers within the framework of a border experience. In fact, Titus Livius’ (Livy) work “Ab Urbe Conditas”, meaning “from the foundation of the city”, which is an important work on urbanisation, a cultural legacy of Rome, and on how to establish relations with those beyond the city walls, contains the following statement to this day: “There is war at the gates (ante portas), if it is not driven out from there, it will already be within the walls, and many citizens will either flee or suffer”. This fear is relevant in today’s world and serves as a key collective sentiment for the alienation, othering and racist exclusion faced by many immigrants”. This study aims to integrate the border effect of the expression ‘ante portas/at the gates’ into migration studies by combining the effects of ‘looking across the border’ and ‘looking at the outside from the inside’.

The main reason why we keep watch on the other side of the border and want to use our gates not as areas of passage but as areas of exclusion is that migration, one of the mass movements we define as invasion, has appeared at our doorstep. Migration occurs when the conditions of the space/environment in which the individual lives threaten and challenge their vital existence (Akokpari, 1998, p. 219). Considering that the organic relationship that individuals establish with the conditions of existence is shaped by spatial attachment, the problem of belonging and identity created by leaving one’s place becomes more understandable. This is because the environment in which individuals live has a deterministic effect on the identity developed and the relationships related to this identity. Each individual gains their perception of their own self-existence as a result of the relationship they establish with the space they are in. The homelessness caused by migration leads to the destruction of spatial attachment and the loss of the individual’s sense of belonging.

Forced migration, on the other hand, occurs when an individual leaves their place of residence due to a real or perceived threat to their life (Deng, 1999, p. 484). What is noteworthy in this definition is that the primary reason for migration is the threat to living conditions, even if the individual perceives it rather than it being real. Therefore, individuals or groups may engage in forced migration based on a perception of threat, even if there’s no actual danger to life. Social conditions such as wars, terrorism, state policies, natural disasters, etc., can all turn into threats to life. In such cases, the individual seeks a new place to secure their life. However, upon moving towards this new place, they become strangers, unwelcome wherever they go. Indeed, strangers are generally unwelcome everywhere. This initially alienating and seemingly anachronistic attitude has strong historical and political justifications.

The concept of the stranger has historically elicited distrust due to its inherent unknowability and mystery. When society lacks controlling knowledge about the ‘other’, the ‘other’ is perceived as dangerous. This social threat associated with the concept of the stranger is closely tied to the origins of the word. In Ancient Greece, anything outside of the culture was labeled as ‘barbarian’, a term later replaced in Western civilization with ‘savage’. Both terms imply being outside of human culture, and thus, they are excluded from social life because they do not conform to societal norms (Levi-Strauss, 2010, p. 26). This demeaning perspective towards those outside of society also influences the perception of refugees and asylum seekers, as they are seen as wild and belonging to the wilderness, not to society. Their inclusion in society is often met with fear of moral panic and rejection due to the concern that it will ‘civilize’ society.