All Ears to the Ground in other literature and are not the focus of this article, which considers collective forms of resistance.72 B Modes of Resistance This Part identifies five modes of collective resistance relating to the modes of citizenship violence in Part II and provides examples from the three case studies. It also explores structural factors that limit their effectiveness. The modes focus on resistance to bureaucratic and symbolic forms of state violence that are closely associated by communities of resistance with citizenship stripping or citizenship violence. Accordingly, organised resistance with more general aims, such as armed or political movements, are beyond the scope of this article. 1 Countering re-categorisation through collective refusals Statelessness is not always a problem of being unregistered or undocumented by the state. Sometimes people are issued documents by state authorities that recategorise them as foreign, stateless, or fix them into a prolonged state of liminality regarding their legal status. 73 Other registration and documentation processes are associated with forced assimilation, denying people the right to self-identify. For example, people may not be allowed to record names that signify their linguistic or religious background, or they may be assigned an alternative ethnic identity.74 Registration procedures, censuses and other bureaucratic tools support the processes of re-categorisation. Forms of collective resistance that respond to re-categorisation violence include protests, strikes, refusal to participate in registration and data collection drives, as well as other forms of civil disobedience. This Part provides examples of collective refusals relating to data collection and the issuance of identity documents. One of the most visible examples of this relates to Myanmar’s census and ID system. Many Rohingyas in Myanmar refused to take part in the national census of 2014,75 in which they were not allowed to self-identify as Rohingya — a term which denotes belonging to both Myanmar and the Rakhine region of the country. International development funding and technical assistance was provided for this 72 73 74 75 Forms of resistance beyond the scope of this chapter include legal challenges and strategic litigation relating to citizenship rules and implementation. In the contexts of the on the ground resistance explored in this Part, citizenship rules and bureaucracies had been weaponised in such a way as to preclude effective action in this regard. However, reports and literature from civil society organisations explore the use of strategic litigation to combat statelessness in other contexts including Malaysia, Kenya and the Dominican Republic. See, Jamie Chai Yun Liew, ‘CYM v Malaysia: Landmark Decision for Adopted Stateless Children Has Little Traction beyond Apex Court’ (2023) 5(1) Statelessness & Citizenship Review 100; Bridget Wooding, ‘Contesting discrimination and statelessness in the Dominican Republic’ (2009) Forced Migration Review 23; Andrew Songa, ‘Addressing Statelessness in Kenya Through a Confluence of Litigation, Transitional Justice, and Community Activism: Reflecting on the cases of the Nubian, Makonde and Shona communities’ (2021) 5(1) African Human Rights Yearbook 253. Bronwen Manby, ‘Schrödinger’s Citizenship: Framing Perspectives for the Resolution of Statelessness’ (2024) 6(2) Statelessness & Citizenship Review 5. Engin Sustam, ‘Kurdish Art and Cultural Production: Rhetoric of the New Kurdish Subject’ in Hamit Bozarslan, Cengiz Gunes and Veli Yadirgi (eds), The Cambridge History of the Kurds (Cambridge University Press 2021). International Crisis Group (‘ICG’), Counting Costs: Myanmar’s Problematic Census (Update Briefing, Asia Briefing Nº 144, 15 May 2014) <https://www.refworld.org/reference/countryrep/icg/2014/en/99356>, archived at <perma.cc/P6M7-U8H2> (‘Counting Costs’). 19