The Alignment of Local Borders

Abstract

Even as diverse bordering processes have proliferated well beyond the edges of contemporary states, local understandings of international borders have aligned with national expectations. Historically borderland residents were often granted leeway in their cross-border activities and this provided an initial acceptance of the concept of national borders that continued even as boundaries became more rigid. Among the indigenous Tohono O'odham varying interpretations on the effective extent of the US–Mexico border co-existed for well over a century. Where the geopolitical border and the understanding of local communities differed, the latter was generally of greater importance in defining effective limits. National and international dynamics gradually reversed this, however, merging diverse border interpretations. External forces built upon local distinctions to achieve acceptance of the concept of a border among a group that initially had no vested interest in such a division and then narrowed that flexible interpretation to one more accommodating to national priorities premised on a strict linear conception of the extent of sovereignty. The coalescing of multiple layers of distinction in the vicinity of national boundaries sheds light on scale-based conflict over bordering and points to the overwhelming priority given to homogenizing forces and uniformity of control in the modern state.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.