Immigration and racism?

· Immigration and the presence of "different" communities in Britain

have attracted much interest within the last few decades.
· New major developments in the world order - such as the
political shifts from a bipolar world order to what came to be
known as a 'new world order', and the emergence of new
socio -political/ cultural 'blocs' , along with (constructed and
actual) threats of 'terrorism' have all contributed to
emergence of discourses of urgency in the demarcation of
'us' and 'them' among many modern European

·These processes translate into a tendency towards

'conservative' ideologies and identity convergence in several
European countries (Wodak & Van Dijk 2006, Wodak 1996,Van
Dijk 1991).
·Within such grand changes in the world arena and on a more
local level within Britain there have emerged concerns/interests
on issues of 'national identity', 'Britishness' and immigration in
terms of what is to be constr sted as in -group 'home'
communities and it- group 'other' communities.
·In this context, the hegemonic majority power and
the tendency to marginalise and 'cast out' the
constructed out-groups have intertwined with
modern liberal and egalitarian discourses in modern
societies -which prevailed after the Second World
War (Van Dijk 1991). This meant that “older"
discriminatory discourses on argumentative
elaboration focusing on “culture" and religiously
avoiding "race” in their discursive construction of
'us' vs. 'them' (Billig 2006, Van Dijk 1991:25).
· However, abandoning the strict 'racialised' definition
of racii, does not necessarily entail abolishment of
these Ascourses altogether.
·The people who practice this 'new racism'
believe in the basic values of democratic
egalitarianism, and would emphatically
deny that they are racist, they would speak
or act in such a way that distances
themselves from the ethnic minority,
engaging in discursive strategies that
blame the victims for their circumstances
on their own social,economic and even
cultural disagantage.
·In addition, metaphors have proved to be an
important discursive strategy in an analysis
of
the representation of 'foreigners'.Several
studies found that metaphors of aliens,
water,
natural disasters, pollution and impurity,
war/fighting,house/building,disease/infection,
animals,goods and the economy are salient
to the argumentative structure of discourses
of immigration and similar topics (Reisigl and
Wodak 2001, Woda k & van Dijk 2006,van
Dijk 1097,2004,Santa Ana 1999,Flowerdew
&
Tran202,Sedlak 2006).
·The use of metaphors like "flood" and "tide"
do not seem to be working towards negative
presentation of the refugees and in fact they
seem to argue for more humanitarian help. It
seems that the use of typical metaphors for
refugees or immigrants does not
automatically create a negative
representation of them, and thefunction of
metaphor use strictly depends on the
social,cultural, and political and and cognitive
elements constituting the 'interpretive
·In Britain and in the UK,race and ethnic affairs have been and
continue to be a major political issue throughout the
twentieth/twenty-first century.
·Analysis of the discourse of political elites on these issues may
contribute:
-to our insight into the discursive reproduction of racism
to an understanding of the more general political context of these
reproduction oracesses in other.
Governments, parliaments, political parties, the bureaucracies are involved
in the discursive practices of policy debates, decision making, and legislation
about what they define as “pressing ethnic issues", such as
increasing illegal immigration
waves of refugees

housing
black crime,
Unemployment
-multicultural education
-poverty
 (White)politicians
·are mainly (white) middle-class people who
share ideas with the groups that support them
·get feedback from their constituencies
·are influenced by academic and other
experts (e.g.through reports and other forms
of institutional discourse
·are influence by the media (and in turn
influ■ce the media)
The context
·Since World War II there has been a slow development
toward more tolerant and even multicultural attitudes,
discourses, and practices in politics.
·Emergence of discourses on equality, human rights
and the necessity of migrations has pushed 'racist'
discourse on the background.However, racism is still a
fact of life in contemporary Europe and North America,
and politicians contribute to it.

·This does not mean that the majority of the mainstream

political elites still advocate explicitly racist positions, as
is the case for some extremist right-wing parties in most
European countries.

·On the contrary, most governments and most

mainstream parties emphasize their distance toward
explicit racist attitudes and practices-if only because
these are generally against the law.

· Parliamentarians also know, that their talk is "for the record,"and

they act accordingly.
1) they do not speak merely to argue for or against a policy, a bill, or
other political activities >they also make official statements that
reflect party positions, which are to be inserted into the records and
which may be quoted in the news media
· 2) they know they may be held politically and morally responsible
FOR WHAT THEY SAY. This is especially crucial in the domain of
ethnic affairs since the controversiality and sensitive nature of most
ethnic topics require that the politicians be aware of what they can
say, and what should not be said.
3) in other wwords, control and monitoring of self and others are
crucial in political texts and talk about ethnic and immigration affairs,
and this will particularly affect the ways opinions are formu
 Positive Self-Presentation:
Nationalist Rhetoric

·Parliaments and political discourse are the prime

setting for nationalist rhetoric.
pride
self-glorification
positive comparisons with other countries
other forms of positive self-presentation
Especially in debates about immigration and ethnic

affairs in general, it is important to show that Our

party, Our country, Our people,are humane,

benersient, hospitable,tolerant, and modern.

·Such affirmations would be a natural self-
defense tactic if there were attacks on or explicit
doubts about these civic virtues; however,we
also find them when no such attacks or doubts
have been voiced.
·They function as a defense against potential
doubts or possible objections, they are used to
block negative inferences about negative things
said about immigrants or minorities.
(EXCUS IO NON PETITA ACCUSATIO
MANIFESTA?)
Cfr.excerpt from a speech about immigration of a Conservative MP in the
British House of Commons:

I believe that we are a wonderfully fair country.We stick to the rules unlike
some foreign Govemments.(Great Britain,Sir John Stokes, May
15,1990,columns 842-S44)

·Self-praise for British immigration policies and practices is often formulated in the
familiar terms of good sportsnianship ("fair," "sticking to the rules").

Negative comparison with other countries ("unlike some foreign

Govemments") not only lightly implies that other countries do not

stick to the'es (of the so-called Immigration game),but also enhances

the alleg■pecial merits of Britain.

·Grand claims are made about tolerance:
(e.g."'we have a long history of tolerance")
·Hospitality and tolerance, are not merely ad
hoc policies,but rather the inherent national
virtues of a long tradition.
 Disclaimers and the Denial of
Racism

Debates about Immigration,minorities, and civil rights are replete with exalted

claims of freedom,democracy,tolerance,hospitality,and other lofty ideals of a "long

tradition"
 ·To understand the broader ideological,sociopolitical,and local argumentative

function of such passages, we need to examine the context in which they are

uttered

such statements seemn to be responses to other, opposed that

claim
is, denials of implicit or explicit accusations >
s,
you do not respect your/our values,
you are not tolerant,
You are not hospitable,and so on.

Sometime th counter-claims are really made, typically by the

opposition
·The general structure of disclaimers in
discour about ethnic affairs usually is
We do/are positive, but They do/are
negativ (e.g. We are very tolerant, but They
abuse our tolerance).
· It may also start with a denial of a negative
property of the own groupfollowed by a neg
property attributed to others, or followed by
negative decision (e.g. We have nothing agair
immyants, but we can't let evervhodi-
·The denial of racism also has the overall format
of a positive property associated with Us,followed
by a clause, starting with but and then saying or
implying something negative about the Others.

·The positive self-description here, however, is

indirect. It does not say that we are tolerant or
democratic, but only that "they have rights,"
paternalistically implying that we have given
them■ese rights.
·At the same time,this statement presupposes that They are not
fulfilling their duties, although We,the State,guarantee their rights.

·The rhetoric sounds like this:

We have done our best, we have done everything for you we

could, but now it is your turn. And politically more relevant, it also
implies: If our minority policy has failed, it is your fault because
you did not fulfill your duties and you have ■et taken us seriously.
·Often political texts express humanitarian Ideals: care and sympathy
for the oppressed, as they are legally required according to international
agreements, such as the Geneva refugee treaty.Then follows a "but" which is
generally predictable, mentioning "measures" that impair the chances of
refugees or other immigrants.

The use of "of course" (instead of, say, "unfortunately") implies that such a realistic
policy is onlynatural: We are forced to be less generous because of special
circumstances.

The usual argument involved might simply and stralghtforwardly run like this:
"There are too many of them and therefore we can't handle (house, employ,
etc.)them."
Reasonable,rational,necessary
·That we are "reasonable and
rational" is of course a standard
ideological proposition of
Eurocentrism.

·Preference for the game metaphor, in which

We play by the rules, and we award the "prize"
to the winner.
·At the same time, there is the well-
known opposition between
 "reasonable" and "necessary," as
we -ball see the ubiquitous
Reasonable,rational,necessary

·That we are "reasonable and

rational" is of course a standard
ideological proposition of
Eurocentrism.

·Preference for the game metaphor, in which

We play by the rules, and we award the "prize"
to the winner.
·At the same time, there is the well-known
opposition between "reasonable" and
"necessary," as we also shall see the
ubiquitous
·Necessity, interpreted here as political and social obligation,
entails limited responsibility: We have to restrict immigration.

Citizenship is the prize, which not only presupposes the

metaphorical domain of games, fairness,and let-the-best-
win,but also that British citizenship is not a right, and that
such citizenship is something very special,which of course is
a standard component of nationalist
·Positive self-presentation,face-keeping,
keeping up appearances, and related strategies
of impression formation in ethnic affairs
discourse not only emphasize our positive
properties but also, and even more
emphatically,deny conceal,play down, excuse,
or otherwise mitigate our negative ones,
according to the standarrl formula: "We are r
racist,but."
 Negative Other-Presentation
·The derogation of other ethnic or racial groups forms the core of racist attitudes,
Ideologies, and practices.However,there Is a significant difference between the
explicit verbal defamation in much elite discourse of the past, and more subtle or
indirect ways.

We generally should not expect explicit racial slurs in Western parliaments -but this
does not mean that ethnlc attitudes have fundamentally changed.

Instead of categorizing the members of another group as less inteligent, as

lazy, or as criminal, the white elites may represented them as
oversensitive,underachieving, or too demanding.

Blatant derogatory labels are being replaced by seemingly innocent concepts.

 Firm, but Fair
· One other way to play on immigration is to combine quasl-negative and positive
self-descriptions and invoke the routine rhetorical pair firm,but fair (or tough,but
fair).
This phrase is mostly used to legitimate immigration restrictions or other
limitations of (or refusals to extend) the rights of refugees, immigrants,or
resident minoritles. Sell-description as being "firm" or "tough" or admissions that
one has been "too soft" mayhardlyseem positive, but the combination with the
positive qualification "fair" does make the pair positive.
Firmness in that case is like that of the stern father, or the wise doctor, whose
firmness only benefits his children or clients. The addition of "fair" also suggests
that there is no question of being too firm:
Falrness prevails in all decisions.

This paleralistic strategy is apparent In many parliamentary debates

·It is fair to establish visa controls as long as
there is mutual agreement about them
between the countries involved. They are the
best way to control immigration fairly, so that
those who properly qualify to come here or to
leave this country to visit other countries can
do so. Such controls make sure that people
have the right qualifications for travel.
(Great Pritain, Mr. Hanley, May 15,
1990,c.849)
 For Their Own Good
This paternalistic view of Immigration and race relations is evident in arguments
that suggest that the speaker is doing all these firm things "for their own good."

This Apparent Empathy or Apparent Altruism move is again a functional

part of the overall strategy of positive self-presentation:We are doing
something good for Them.

A standard argument,heard in everyday conversations as well as in racist

propaganda about immigrants, is that they should go back to thelr own
(poor) country, and help to build it up. That is, limiting immigration
would not be better for us, but for them, because that would be good for

their country.
 Vox Populi

Sympathy with the oppressed is a noble sentiment. There are, however,

even more forceful argumentative moves to persuade both liberal white
elites and minorities, namely,the threat of intolerance, discrimination, and
racism.
Who would be in favor of racism; who would condone popular resentment?

·In order to persuasively argue against immigration one only needs to

conjure up the specter of racist reactions among the white population at
large.

· Obviously, this is a specific elite strategy, because it exclusively attributes

potential racism to the white lower class, and in particular to those in the
inner cities.
The argint is:Stop immlgration because othewwill get even morer
 The Numbers Game

·Another well-known move in the negative presentation of

immigration is the numbers game, which is also familiar in the
press. This rhetorical use of quasi-objective figures, convincingly
suggesting how many "come in" every day, week, month, or
year, is one of the most compelling scare tactics in the formation
of public opinion.
Figures need not be lied about or exaggerated. It is the way they
are presented or extrapolated that makes them impressive. For
instance, they are always given in absolute numbers, so that
thousands or even hundreds of thousands of refugees or
immigrants arriving each year appear to be quite impressive. In
percentages of the total population, even aminorities and
immigrants counted together amot :o only a small percentage,
at least in Europe.
We see that this numbers rhetoric operates in several ways.

1) "thousands" may be mentioned, without saying whether this is per

week,month,or year,

2) The use of absolute numbers, instead of percentages, is more impressive

in this case

·3)"Flows" are presented as being out of control;

· 4) Famlly reunification and of course the birthrale are used as
arguments to suggest that it is not merelylarge numbers, but also the
explosion of a demographic time bomb that must be feared.

" birthrates in immigrant communities generally approach the average of

the native population > references to high birthrates are a familiar
disparaging qualification of "backward" peoples: modern people have
birth controll