Skip to main content

“This Country Will Be Big Racist One Day”: Extreme Prejudice as Reasoned Discourse in Face-to-Face Interactions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Political Communication

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Discursive Psychology ((PSDP))

Abstract

While there is a strong research tradition into analysing prejudiced and racist discourse, the study of explicit, face-to-face allegedly racism is a rarer aspect of discursive research. Previous studies of racist discourse tend not to be of face-to-face interactions with the victim of prejudice. We analyse two publicly available video recordings: the first, taken from a mobile phone recording of a Kenyan woman in Finland at the receiving end of racist abuse from a Finnish woman and, the second, a woman recorded on a mobile phone verbally abusing Muslim women on a bus in London. These recordings are reminiscent of other videos of people being recorded using racist language, which subsequently made their way into social media. We perform a discursive psychological analysis to show how speakers use language that can be construed as allegedly racist, while also trying to frame such talk as in some way justifiable, and how threats are managed in this context. The findings suggest that similar strategies used by speakers when trying to disguise talk as “not racist” are also used to justify talk that is explicitly racist. We conclude by making the argument that face-to-face racism should be analysed in depth and as a phenomenon in its own right and for understanding potential avenues of combating such talk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A white New Zealander, as opposed to a Māori.

  2. 2.

    This in itself is indicative of a “norm” against accusations of prejudice (see Goodman 2010, 2014).

  3. 3.

    See Extract 8.1 title for the original Finnish caption.

  4. 4.

    Video has since been removed by the uploader, as of August 2019.

  5. 5.

    Not featured in the extracts of this chapter, but a frequent insult used by S in the full clip.

  6. 6.

    What Potter (1996) means with this is how a particular description is designed to come across as “mere” description. This orientation is paired with the action orientation of accounts. Thus, accounts are designed to perform actions and to come across as a simple reflection of how things “really” are. Edwards (2003) makes a similar point in relation to racism.

  7. 7.

    That is, “prejudice” is not a given but has to be rhetorically worked up or rhetorically undermined—whether something or someone is prejudiced is subject to debate and a number of rhetorical moves (e.g. Billig 1985; Durrheim et al. 2016).

  8. 8.

    This raises the interesting question of how the seemingly inclusive category of “everyone” can be used for excluding purposes. That is, however, beyond the scope of our chapter.

  9. 9.

    See Billig et al. (1988) for an overview of the complex relationship between Enlightenment values and prejudice.

References

  • Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antaki, C., & Leudar, I. (2001). Recruiting the record: Using opponents’ exact words in parliamentary argumentation. Text, 21(4), 467–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashmore, R., & DelBoca, F. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. In D. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behaviour (pp. 1–36). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Augoustinos, M., & Every, D. (2007). The language of ‘race’ and prejudice: A discourse of denial, reason, and liberal-practical politics. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26(2), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X07300075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Augoustinos, M., Tuffin, K., & Every, D. (2005). New racism, meritocracy and individualism: Constraining affirmative action in education. Discourse and Society, 16(3), 315–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926505051168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Augoustinos, M., Tuffin, K., & Rapley, M. (1999). Genocide or failure to gel? Racism, history and nationalism in Australian talk. Discourse and Society, 10(3), 351–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (1978). Fascists: A social psychological view of the national front. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (1985). Prejudice, categorization and particularization: From a perceptual to a rhetorical approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15(1), 79–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (1991). Ideology and opinions – studies in rhetorical psychology. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (2001). Humour and hatred: The racist jokes of the Ku Klux Klan. Discourse and Society, 12(3), 267–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926501012003001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (2002). Henri Tajfel’s ‘cognitive aspects of prejudice’ and the psychology of bigotry. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(2), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602760060165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological Dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, S. (2018). The ‘othering’ of Jews and Muslims in the Britain first solidarity patrol. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 28(5), 365–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, S., & Goodman, S. (2012). “Bring Back Hitler’s Gas Chambers”: Asylum seeking, Nazis and Facebook: A discursive analysis. Discourse and Society, 23(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926511431036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byford, J. (2006). ‘Serbs never hated the Jews’: The Denial of Antisemitism in Serbian Orthodox Christian culture. Patterns of Prejudice, 40(02), 159–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P., Goodman, S., & Jowett, A. (2019). ‘I don’t think there is any moral basis for taking money away from people’: Using discursive psychology to explore the complexity of talk about tax. Critical Discourse Studies, 16(1), 84–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Condor, S. (1988). ‘Race stereotypes’ and racist discourse. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 8(1–2), 69–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condor, S. (2006). Public prejudice as collaborative accomplishment: Towards a dialogic social psychology of racism. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 16(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culpeper, J., Iganski, P., & Sweiry, A. (2017). Linguistic impoliteness and religiously aggravated hate crime in England and wales. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 5(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Masso, A., Castrechini, A., & Valera, S. (2014). Displacing xeno-racism: The discursive legitimation of native supremacy through everyday accounts of ‘urban insecurity’. Discourse and Society, 25(3), 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P., & Walker, T. (2009). Going too far: Complaining, escalating and disaffiliation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(12), 2400–2414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durrheim, K. (2016). ‘Race stereotypes’ and ‘racist’ discourse. In C. Tileagă & E. Stokoe (Eds.), Discursive psychology – Classic and contemporary issues (pp. 257–270). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durrheim, K., Quayle, M., & Dixon, J. (2016). The struggle for the nature of “prejudice”: “prejudice” expressions as identity performance. Political Psychology, 37(1), 17–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D. (2003). Analyzing racial discourse: The discursive psychology of mind-world relationships. In H. van den Berg, M. Wetherell, & H. Houtkoop-Steenstra (Eds.), Analyzing race talk (pp. 31–48). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D. (2005). Discursive Psychology. In K. L. Fitch and R. E. Sanders (Eds.) Handbook of Language and Social Interaction (pp. 257–273). New Jersey: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive Psychology. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (2017). Some uses of subject-side assessments. Discourse Studies, 19(5), 497–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Migration Network. (2017). Annual report on migration and asylum policy – Finland 2016. European Migration Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2018). Hate crime recording and data collection practice across the EU. Retrieved from fra.europa.eu. [17th June 2019].

    Google Scholar 

  • Every, D., & Augoustinos, M. (2007). Constructions of Racism in the Australian Parliamentary Debates. Discourse and Society, 18(4), 411–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507077427

  • Faulkner, N., & Bliuc, A. (2016). ‘It’s okay to be racist’: Moral disengagement in online discussions of racist incidents in Australia. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39(14), 2545–2563. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2016.1171370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fozdar, F., & Pederson, A. (2013). Diablogging about asylum seekers: Building a counter-hegemonic discourse. Discourse and Communication, 7(4), 371–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481313494497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1979). Footing. Semiotica, 25, 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S. (2010). “It’s not racist to impose limits on immigration”: Constructing the boundaries of racism in the asylum and immigration debate. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines, 4(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S. (2014). Developing an understanding of race talk. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8(4), 147–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S., & Burke, S. (2010). ‘Oh you don’t want asylum seekers, oh you’re just racist’: A discursive analysis of discussions about whether it’s racist to oppose asylum seeking. Discourse and Society, 21(3), 325–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S., & Carr, P. (2017). The just world hypothesis as an argumentative resource in debates about unemployment benefits. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 27(4), 312–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S., & Johnson, A. J. (2013). Strategies used by the far right to counter accusations of racism. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines, 6(2), 97–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerin, B. (2003). Combating prejudice and racism: New interventions from a functional analysis of racist language. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guimarães, A. S. A. (2003). Racial insult in Brazil. Discourse and Society, 14(2), 133–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepburn, A., & Potter, J. (2010). Threats: Power, family mealtimes, and social influence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Home Office. (2018). Hate crime, England and wales, 2017/18. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/748598/hate-crime-1718-hosb2018.pdf. [15th July 2019].

  • Jackson, C. (2011). Interaction, gender, identity: A conversation analytic examination of person reference. PhD thesis, University of York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leach, C. W. (2005). Against the notion of a ‘new racism’. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 15(6), 432–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (n.d.). Violence and language: The signs that hurt. Retrieved April 26, 2020, from http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-1.2/Language.htm

  • Lynn, N., & Lea, S. (2003). ‘A phantom menace and the new apartheid’: The social construction of asylum-seekers in the United Kingdom. Discourse and Society, 14(4), 425–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926503014004002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, T., Kielser, S., & Siegel, J. (1987). Group and computer mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(5), 917–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies, 9, 219–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality – discourse, rhetoric and social construction. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, B. (2019, October 15). Hate crimes double in five years in England and wales. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/uk. [16th October 2019].

  • Reynolds, E. (2015). How participants in arguments challenge the normative position of an opponent. Discourse Studies, 17(3), 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1988/1989). From interview to confrontation: Observations on the bush/rather encounter. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 22, 215–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simone Joseph Admits Viral Racist Bus Rant. (2015, 19th of October). Retrieved from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34571284. [31st October 2015].

  • Stokoe, E., & Edwards, D. (2007). ‘Black this, black that’: Racial insults and reported speech in neighbour complaints and police interrogations. Discourse and Society, 18(3), 337–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taponen, T. (2015, 24th of October). Käsittämätönpurkaustallentuivideolle: “Maamme on tällainen, koskaoletmusta”. Iltalehti. Retrieved from https://www.iltalehti.fi/uutiset/a/2015102420553621. [8th August 2016].

  • Tileagă, C. (2005). Accounting for extreme prejudice and legitimating blame in talk about the Romanies. Discourse and Society, 16(5), 603–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926505054938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tileagă, C. (2006). Representing the ‘other’: A discursive analysis of prejudice and moral exclusion in talk about Romanies. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 16(1), 19–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tileagă, C. (2007). Ideologies of moral exclusion: A critical discursive reframing of depersonalization, delegitimization and dehumanization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46(4), 717–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tileagă, C. (2013). Political Psychology. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tileagă, C. (2016). The nature of prejudice – society, discrimination and moral exclusion. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tileagă, C. (2019). Communicating misogyny: An interdisciplinary research agenda for social psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(7), e12491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, T. A. (1992). Discourse and the Denial of Racism. Discourse and Society, 3, 87–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926592003001005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verkuyten, M. (2013). Justifying discrimination against Muslim immigrants: Out-group ideology and the five-step social identity model. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(2), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02081.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wahlbeck, Ö. (2019). To share or not to share responsibility? Finnish refugee policy and the hesitant support for a common European asylum system. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 17(3), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2018.1468048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, S., & Potter, J. (2008). Discursive psychology. In C. Willig & W. S. Rogers (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 73–90). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, C., & Finlay, W. M. L. (2008). British national party representations of muslims in the month after the London bombings: Homogeneity, threat, and the conspiracy tradition. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4), 707–726. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466607X264103

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shani Burke .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Burke, S., Demasi, M.A. (2020). “This Country Will Be Big Racist One Day”: Extreme Prejudice as Reasoned Discourse in Face-to-Face Interactions. In: Demasi, M.A., Burke, S., Tileagă, C. (eds) Political Communication. Palgrave Studies in Discursive Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60223-9_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics