This paper aims to explore how neo-nationalism and neoliberalism interact in the context of French higher education (HE) policy. A focus on the affective dimension allows the analysis to cut across multiple scales and disciplines, shedding light on the dynamics tying the two paradigms together in the domain of HE policymaking. Within this wider framework, the present paper is dedicated to international students’ migration, subject to debate and legislation in both Paris and Brussels. Relying on the inherent diversity of educational research, the analysis builds on concepts and approaches developed in different disciplines, applying them across the individual, institutional, nation-state and EU scales.

According to Andre Gingrich and Mark Banks (2006), neo-nationalist forces constitute “new and recent variants of nationalism” sharing distinct anti-immigration and anti-European stances, combined with “pro-law-and-order elements” (Gingrich, 2006, p. 215). This conceptualization was further elaborated, as neo-nationalist parties began looking towards the left for their economic policies, embracing welfare-chauvinism (Eger & Valdez, 2019), and replaced their tout-court hostility against the EU with calls for an alternative vision of the Union (Coman & Leconte, 2019). Most importantly, the policies and stances advocated by neo-nationalist forces have been increasingly appropriated by the so-called mainstream parties, located around the centre of the political spectrum (Brøgger, 2022). Most of the policies adopted by these parties, nevertheless, are still commonly identified as an expression of neoliberalism, that this paper addresses as “a system of thought bound up with market capitalism” (Lazzarato, 2009, p. 110).

My fieldwork in France began, therefore, with the intention to explore whether and to what extent neo-nationalist trends were co-existing with neoliberal discourse and policies. While conducting interviews with university staff, affect prominently entered the scene: among others, experiences of resentment, disillusion, and fear for the future. The paper builds on the extensive scholarship that developed from the “affective turn” of the mid-90s and early 2000s (Gregg & Seigworth, 2010). In other words, the analysis will assign a key role to emotions – or affects, going beyond dichotomous definitions of the two and seeing them, with Sarah Ahmed (2014), as “a matter of how we come into contact with objects and others” (p.208).

In the wake of a flourishing literature focusing on affect within educational research (e.g. Taylor & Lahad, 2018; Staunæs & Brøgger, 2020), this paper was greatly inspired by the works of Riyad Shahjahan (2020; 2022). Shedding light on the relationship between temporality and affects in academia, Shahjahan (2020) argues for a multi-scale analysis of the different ways individuals, institutions and nation-states affectively engage with temporal norms. On the individual level, neoliberal governmentality leads to the adoption of different “survival tactics” (Shahjahan, 2020) and the profusion of what Lazzarato (2009) – building on Deleuze and Guattari (1980) – defines as “micro-politics of little fears” (Lazzarato, 2009, p.120).

Moving from the individual to the nation-state level, the paper builds on William Walters’ concept of “domopolitics” (Walters, 2005) and Nandita Sharma’s “home economics” (Sharma, 2006). Encouraging us to reflect on the government of the nation-state as a home (domus in Latin), these works contribute to highlighting the affective dimension of migration management and the often-overlooked links between border security and social security systems (Walters, 2005), and therefore HE policy. 

The “Bienvenue en France” strategy, launched by the French government in 2018, serves as a case study to explore how different agendas intertwine, on multiple levels, in the domain of international students’ migration. Following the fil rouge of affects, the paper works across the policy framework provided by the EU, the measures adopted at state level, the reactions of HE institutions and the concerns of their staff.

The research supporting this paper has relied on qualitative analysis of interviews and documents, with secondary consideration of participant observation of relevant meetings and colloquiums. Interviews were conducted between March 2022 and January 2023. Participants included faculty members and administrative staff of three different HE institutions, selected according to a number of context-sensitive criteria. These criteria aimed at orienting the choice to institutions having different relationships to the State, due to their legal - and perceived - statuses, type of student population, size and geographical position. In addition to university staff, interviews addressed French ministry officials at the national and local levels, political representatives, members of state agencies and professional organizations. The choice of interviewees among policy officials and political representatives was guided by their affiliation to relevant ministry departments and their involvement in HE-related political debates, and ultimately determined by access and availability. To this day, 42 semi-directive interviews have taken place, the vast majority in person and the rest online. The document analysis is based on publicly available policy documents including legislation, press statements, transcripts of parliamentary debates and internal circulars. Speeches and declarations – including statements on social media - from government members and other political authorities have also been an integral part of the analysis. The latter has focused on the period between 2015 and 2022. Looking beyond the national level, the research has also included policy documents published by individual HE institutions and relevant texts adopted by the EU. Empirical work has been supported by secondary literature discussing the modern and contemporary history of French, European and global HE.

My interviews and analysis of policy documents have emphasized how different interests and rationales intermingled in the policymaking process around international students’ migration, and the extent to which the adopted policies have played and unfolded their effects on the affective dimension. Preliminary findings indicate a mutually reinforcing dynamic linking neo-nationalist stances and neoliberal agendas: an unlikely alliance operating through the different stages of HE policymaking and across multiple levels of analysis. The analysis of interviews and policy documents suggests that these dynamic works through affect and, more specifically, through different forms and degrees of fear. Interviews conducted with university staff highlighted how recent policies and political discourse have been mobilizing issues that feed into existing insecurities, exacerbated by years of market-driven reforms and chronic underfunding in French HE. A good example in this regard is the reference to “demography” and “demographic” challenges, which recurrently appeared in the empirical material. Charged with a very material, bodily dimension and closely connected to different types of fears and concerns, the term “demography” runs through EU policy documents, interviews with French ministry officials and academic staff. It relates to job market and competitiveness demands – inherent to neoliberal rationales – while at the same time speaking to a seemingly inescapable need to manage population flows, from within and without the borders – those of the EU, of the nation-state and even those of HE institutions. This is but a single example of how neoliberal agendas can meet neo-nationalist calls for enhanced border security and welfare chauvinism. The paper will build on this and other examples in order to shed light on the affective "fil rouge" that may give us access to the complexities of the relationship between neo-nationalist trends and neoliberal policymaking in HE.

Ahmed, S. (2014). The Cultural Politics of Emotion (ed.). Edinburgh University Press. Brøgger, K. (2022). Post-Cold war governance arrangements in Europe: the University between European integration and rising nationalisms. Globalisation, societies and education, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2022.2075832 Coman, R., & Leconte, C. (2019). Contesting EU authority in the name of European identity: the new clothes of the sovereignty discourse in Central Europe. Journal of European Integration: Understanding Conflicts of Sovereignty in the EU, 41(7), 855-870. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2019.1665660 Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1980) Mille plateaux. Paris: Les editions de Minuit. Eger, M. A., & S. Valdez (2019). “The Rise of Neo-Nationalism.” In P. Bevelander and R. Wodak (eds.). Europe at the Crossroads: Confronting Populist, Nationalist, and Global Challenges, 113–134. Lund: Nordic Academic Press. Gingrich, A., & M. Banks (2006). Neo-nationalism in Europe and Beyond: Perspectives from Social Anthropology. New York: Berghahn Books. Gregg, M., & Seigworth, G. J. (2010). The Affect theory reader. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822393047 Lazzarato, M. (2009). Neoliberalism in Action: Inequality, Insecurity and the Reconstitution of the Social. Theory, culture & society, 26(6), 109-133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409350283 Shahjahan, R. A. (2020). On 'being for others': time and shame in the neoliberal academy. Journal of Education Policy, 35(6), 785-811. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2019.1629027 Shahjahan, R. A., & Grimm, A. T. (2022). Bringing the 'nation-state' into being: affect, methodological nationalism and globalisation of higher education. Globalisation, societies and education, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2022.2036107 Sharma, N. (2006). Home Economics: Nationalism and the Making of Migrant Workers in Canada. University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442675810 Staunæs, D., & Brøgger, K. (2020). In the mood of data and measurements: experiments as affirmative critique, or how to curate academic value with care. Feminist theory, 21(4), 429-445. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700120967301 Walters, W. (2004). Secure borders, safe haven, domopolitics. Citizenship studies, 8(3), 237-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/1362102042000256989 Taylor, Y., & Lahad, K. (2018). Feeling Academic in the Neoliberal University : Feminist Flights, Fights and Failures (1st edition. ed.). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64224-6