Hate Speech and Dialogue in Norway: Muslims ‘Speak Back’

Mårtensson, Ulrika

doi:10.1080/1369183x.2013.851473

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such repercussions should not necessarily entail complete exclusion (or "cordon sanitaire") of the politicians, as this may have a similar effect to allowing them to acquire the role of the martyr (Maussen & Grillo, 2014), but rather, they should involve developing means to confront their arguments. It is precisely here that the present study may be beneficial, as it allows us to see the rhetorical tools on which the hate-speech rests, and accordingly, helps to develop the means to respond to and counter such speech (M artensson, 2014;Van Noorloos, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Focusing on cultural-rather than racial-differences and threats protects the speaker from accusations of holding prejudiced views (Billig, 1988), while nevertheless allowing him or her to portray entire groups of people as inferior and undeserving Others. This pertains especially to anti-Muslim political discourse, where the entire Muslim community is held accountable for the threat that radical Islamist terrorism poses to Western or European countries, and where the speaker positions him-or herself as the defender of the nation, its people and culture (M artensson, 2014;Verkuyten, 2013;Wood & Finlay, 2008).…”

Section: Anti-muslim Political Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“Freedom of speech requires actions”: Exploring the discourse of politicians convicted of hate‐speech against Muslims

Pettersson

2019

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores how politicians convicted of hate‐speech against Muslims account for their actions in statements on their Facebook‐pages as well as in reported interviews. Taking a critical discursive psychological perspective, the study examines the strategies through which the politicians discursively claim and resist various subject positions, thus managing to construct their hate‐speech as everything from trivial mishaps to acts of virtue. The study examines the multifaceted dynamics of these constructions, and shows how elements from the Five Step Social Identity Model of the Development of Collective Hate are flexibly deployed in the discourse to serve distinct social and political purposes. By allowing the Social Identity and (critical) discursive approaches to challenge and develop each other, the study advances social psychological research on political communication and persuasion, and contributes to the debate on the boundaries between hate‐speech and freedom of speech.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Anti-muslim Political Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

“Freedom of speech requires actions”: Exploring the discourse of politicians convicted of hate‐speech against Muslims

Pettersson

2019

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such comments seem to be seen as non-racialised and thus acceptable in line with what scholars have shown in relation to 'culture' as one of the code words for race (Back and Solomos 2000;Gullestad 2006). The muslimification of racism, reported elsewhere in Europe, has also been identified in Norway (Bangstad 2014;Eriksen 2012;Mårtensson 2014;Vassenden and Andersson 2011), with concern about Islamophobic and racist online comments in Norwegian media (Andersson 2012). The comments furthermore depict refugees as undesirable, where the asylum seeker is constructed as 'a parasite upon the host nation and its welfare state' (Gibson 2006, 697).…”

Section: The Preferable Migrantsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Being a desirable migrant: perception and racialisation of Icelandic migrants in Norway

Guðjónsdóttir

Loftsdóttir

2016

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aftermath of the financial crisis that hit Iceland in October 2008, increased numbers of Icelanders migrated to Norway to seek employment due to difficult economic circumstances in Iceland. Using critical perspectives from postcolonial studies and critical whiteness studies, the paper explores how these Icelandic migrants in Norway make sense of their new position as economic migrants within a global economy characterised by a growing sense of precariousness, while past inequalities and racism continue to matter. We also examine how these migrants are perceived in Norwegian media, and how social discourses of Icelandic migrants reflect larger Norwegian debates on racism, desirability and cultural belonging. Media discourses in Norway and interviews with Icelandic migrants reveal a hierarchy of acceptability of migrants. Icelanders are positioned as highly desirable compared to other migrant groups due to the intersection of perceived racial belonging, nationality and class. Our discussion contributes, furthermore, towards a critical analysis of the category migrant, by exploring how the term immigrant (innvandrer/innflytjandi) is used in narratives of Icelandic migrants in Norway and in Norwegian media discussions, showing the negative and racialised connotations of the term immigrant and how its understanding is linked with vulnerable positions and discrimination. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…(Butler 1997, 19) Instead of immediately invoking the criminal law, we may instead try to open the avenues to 'speak back', she argues (see Mårtensson 2014).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politicisation of Hate Speech Bans in the Twenty-first-century Netherlands: Law in a Changing Context

Noorloos¹

2013

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation for published version (APA):van Noorloos, L. A. (2014). The politicisation of hate speech bans in the twenty-first century Netherlands: Law in a changing context. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(2), 249-265. General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.-Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research -You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain -You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLETaylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditionsThe Politicisation of Hate Speech Bans in the Twenty-first-century Netherlands: Law in a Changing Context Marloes van NoorloosIn the past decade, the intense debate about multiculturalism and immigration has led to a questioning of the limits of criminal law on hate speech in the Netherlands. The freedom of expression/hate speech dilemma, with its delicate relationship between freedom of expression, non-discrimination and freedom of religion, has itself become a battle ground in public discourse about multiculturalism. This paper seeks to analyse how legal developments around hate speech bans in the Netherlands (in legislation, case law and prosecution policy) have interacted with sociopolitical changes in a multicultural society in the twenty-first century...

show abstract

Hate Speech and Dialogue in Norway: Muslims ‘Speak Back’

Cited by 13 publications

References 19 publications

“Freedom of speech requires actions”: Exploring the discourse of politicians convicted of hate‐speech against Muslims

“Freedom of speech requires actions”: Exploring the discourse of politicians convicted of hate‐speech against Muslims

Being a desirable migrant: perception and racialisation of Icelandic migrants in Norway

The Politicisation of Hate Speech Bans in the Twenty-first-century Netherlands: Law in a Changing Context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About