Discursive deracialization in talk about asylum seeking

Simon Goodman, Shani Burke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper we explore the extent to which 'discursive deracialization', the removal of 'race' from potentially racially motivated arguments, is taking place in talk about asylum seeking. A discourse analysis is conducted on the part of a corpus of data collected from focus groups with undergraduate students talking about asylum seeking, in which they were asked if they considered it to be racist to oppose asylum. We show that speakers use three arguments for opposing asylum that are explicitly framed as non-racist: opposition is based on (1) economic reasons (2) religious grounds and the associated threat of terrorism and (3) the lack of asylum seekers' ability to integrate into British society. These findings are discussed with regard to the implications they have for our understanding of discursive deracialization in which it is shown that there is a common knowledge understanding, albeit one that needs qualifying, that opposition to asylum is not racist.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)111-123
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Community and Applied Social Psychology
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2011

Fingerprint

Terrorism
Refugees
Focus Groups
opposition
Economics
Students
common knowledge
asylum seeker
discourse analysis
terrorism
threat
lack
ability
economics
Group
student
Society

Cite this

@article{0e5e9c104ffc47209b073d4a5ba62b4d,
title = "Discursive deracialization in talk about asylum seeking",
abstract = "In this paper we explore the extent to which 'discursive deracialization', the removal of 'race' from potentially racially motivated arguments, is taking place in talk about asylum seeking. A discourse analysis is conducted on the part of a corpus of data collected from focus groups with undergraduate students talking about asylum seeking, in which they were asked if they considered it to be racist to oppose asylum. We show that speakers use three arguments for opposing asylum that are explicitly framed as non-racist: opposition is based on (1) economic reasons (2) religious grounds and the associated threat of terrorism and (3) the lack of asylum seekers' ability to integrate into British society. These findings are discussed with regard to the implications they have for our understanding of discursive deracialization in which it is shown that there is a common knowledge understanding, albeit one that needs qualifying, that opposition to asylum is not racist.",
author = "Simon Goodman and Shani Burke",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/casp.1065",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "111--123",
journal = "Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology",
issn = "1052-9284",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "2",

}

Discursive deracialization in talk about asylum seeking. / Goodman, Simon; Burke, Shani.

In: Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 2, 01.03.2011, p. 111-123.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Discursive deracialization in talk about asylum seeking

AU - Goodman, Simon

AU - Burke, Shani

PY - 2011/3/1

Y1 - 2011/3/1

N2 - In this paper we explore the extent to which 'discursive deracialization', the removal of 'race' from potentially racially motivated arguments, is taking place in talk about asylum seeking. A discourse analysis is conducted on the part of a corpus of data collected from focus groups with undergraduate students talking about asylum seeking, in which they were asked if they considered it to be racist to oppose asylum. We show that speakers use three arguments for opposing asylum that are explicitly framed as non-racist: opposition is based on (1) economic reasons (2) religious grounds and the associated threat of terrorism and (3) the lack of asylum seekers' ability to integrate into British society. These findings are discussed with regard to the implications they have for our understanding of discursive deracialization in which it is shown that there is a common knowledge understanding, albeit one that needs qualifying, that opposition to asylum is not racist.

AB - In this paper we explore the extent to which 'discursive deracialization', the removal of 'race' from potentially racially motivated arguments, is taking place in talk about asylum seeking. A discourse analysis is conducted on the part of a corpus of data collected from focus groups with undergraduate students talking about asylum seeking, in which they were asked if they considered it to be racist to oppose asylum. We show that speakers use three arguments for opposing asylum that are explicitly framed as non-racist: opposition is based on (1) economic reasons (2) religious grounds and the associated threat of terrorism and (3) the lack of asylum seekers' ability to integrate into British society. These findings are discussed with regard to the implications they have for our understanding of discursive deracialization in which it is shown that there is a common knowledge understanding, albeit one that needs qualifying, that opposition to asylum is not racist.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951531006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/casp.1065

DO - 10.1002/casp.1065

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 111

EP - 123

JO - Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology

SN - 1052-9284

IS - 2

ER -