8 STEPS OF DISCOURSE HISTORICAL APPROACH (DHA) BASED ON FRASER

ANNING’S STATEMENT (CHRISTCHURCH ATTACK IN NEW ZEALAND)

1. Activation and consultation of preceding theoretical knowledge

 How does “racism” means according to existing (scientific) literature.

Based on Memmi (as cited in Wodak and Reisegl, 2009), racism is a general evaluation

that one community has more advantages compared to other communities. Memmi also

added that those evaluations existed was due to the “biological differences” that

eventually leads to xenophobia.

 What is the connection between power and ideology based on the literature

review.

According to Collin (as cited in Briscoe and Muhammad, 2015), power is a tool that

influence people’s ideology on certain issues. Briscoe and Muhammad (2015) added

that conflict that happened within the society helps people to see on how power shapes

different ideologies.

2. Systematic collection of data and context information

3. Selection and preparation of data for specific analysis

The selection of the analysis will be based on the representatively, intertextuality and

interdiscursivity. In context of representatively, the analysis will be made based on the

author’s perspective (Fraser Anning) on response to the christchurch attack and how

the author used linguistic elements to represent the group of Muslims and the terrorist.

The intertextuality will be made from different articles in order to grasp a full

understanding on the issue that has been mentioned in the current text (Fraser Anning’s

statement).

4. Specification of the research question and formulation of assumptions

  How the power and authority were used to build a racist ideology?

 How the dichotomy on Us versus Them are presented in the text?

The analysis of the text will be addressed based on the research questions that have

been formulated in this section in order to see how the author of the text whom is Fraser

Anning used the authority and power as a politician to instill the racist ideology on the

reader. The analysis also will be based on how Fraser Anning create a gap between the

Muslims and White people (New Zealanders and Australian people).

5. Qualitative pilot analysis

6. Detailed case studies

In response to the power and authority used to build a racist ideology:

 Fraser Anning used the honorifics and anthroponym “Senator” to indicate the

power that he possessed in the political area. Therefore, by using the title

“Senator”, he is using his opportunity to make a racist statement towards the

Muslims. Fraser Anning also use his authority to promote the “Islamophobia”

by saying that the increasing number of Muslims will result to the fear of the

people in Australia.

In response to the dichotomy of “Us versus Them”:

 Fraser Anning clearly mentioned the pronoun “us” to refer non – Muslims

people in New Zealand and Australia and uses pronoun “them” to refer the

Muslims. The clear division used by Fraser Anning between Muslims and non

– Muslims clearly shows that he tried to create a gap between the Muslims and

non – Muslims.

 The “us” in the text always associated with negative connotations while the

“them” in the text always associated with the neutral connotations.

 In overall pattern, the speech made by Fraser Anning clearly shows the racist ideology

towards Islam.

7. Formulation of critique

8. Application of the detailed analytical results