History in the Service of Politics: Constructing Narratives of History During the European Refugee “Crisis”

Abstract

It is common for politicians to refer to "our proud history of supporting refugees," yet the historical record regarding responses to refugees is not straightforwardly positive. So how is history drawn upon in political debates regarding refugees? Applying discursive psychology, this article analyzes the use of history in five U.K. parliamentary debates that took place from September 2015 to January 2016 on the European refugee "crisis." The analysis identifies six "functions" of the use of the history: resonance, continuity, reciprocity, posterity, responsibility, and redemption. It shows how references to historical events create narratives regarding the United Kingdom's history of supporting refugees in order to construct the nation in particular ways, mobilize collective identities, and legitimize or criticize political actions. Specifically, references to the United Kingdom's role in providing refuge to Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Germany functions as a hegemonic narrative that reinforces the United Kingdom's "heroic" position and constructs the Syrian conflict as involving an oppressive dictator and innocent refugees in need to help, thereby legitimizing support for Syrian refugees. The analysis demonstrates the flexibility of historical narratives, reformulates the distinction between "psychological" and "rhetorical" uses of historical analogies, and reflects on the social and political implications of such uses of history.

National Days, National Identity, and Collective Memory: Exploring the Impact of Holocaust Day in Israel

“…Their ongoing studies have revealed that collective memory exerts a distinct impact on public opinion that cannot be explained using the typical explanations offered by right‐wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and social identification. Other studies have also demonstrated how collective memory influences contemporary political issues and intergroup relations (see Kirkwood, ; Schori‐Eyal, Klar, Roccas, & McNeill, ). More specifically, the ways in which history is remembered affect differences in national identification and nationalism (Hirschberger, Kende, & Weinstein, ; Smeekes, Verkuyten, & Poppe, ).…”

Adjusting to the canon

“…Nonetheless, any understanding of the recent historical past must be aligned with the endorsed cultural memory representations in order to maintain the historical continuity (Connerton, 1989;Jetten & Wohl, 2012). A sense of historical continuity emerging from the interaction between the two modi memorandi is motivated by a need for group identity (e.g., Kirkwood, 2019;Schwartz, 1996;Schwartz et al, 1986).…”

Redefining the Meaning of Negative History in Times of Sociopolitical Change: A Social Creativity Approach

“…Particularly in times of change and uncertainty, politicians draw upon the past to find guidance and legitimize actions in the present (Brändström, Bynander, & Hart, 2004; Ghilani et al, 2017). In doing so, they primarily refer to heroic images of the past in their attempt to convince others of their policies (Kirkwood, 2019). In this article, however, we aim to contribute to a better understanding of how nations whose negative past dominates their contemporary narrative negotiate their history in political discourse and to identify strategies that may deviate from the ones established in previous research.…”