Journals / Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: Özel

“They Can Stay, But We Are Leaving!” Populism and Euroscepticism in the Discourse of the UK Independence Party

“ONLAR KALSIN, BİZ GİDİYORUZ!” BİRLEŞİK KRALLIK BAĞIMSIZLIK PARTİSİ’NİN SÖYLEMLERİNDE POPÜLİZM VE AVRUPA ŞÜPHECİLİĞİ

Pages
119–153
Publication Date
2024-01-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, the article reveals that the EU is the most-referred actor under the “Them” category and that the European integration is addressed through three master frames: Costs/Benefits of EU Membership, National Sovereignty, and British Identity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper sets out to empirically assess the ways in which the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and the long-time party leader Nigel Farage “framed” the issues concerning the European Union (EU) as a political actor and European integration as an idea or a process in their rhetoric prior to the Brexit referendum.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The frame analysis of all textual documents which were shared on behalf of the UKIP and Farage on the Party’s official website between 2013 and 2015 identifies the discursive frames through their constitute elements (diagnosis, prognosis, motivation) and under four thematic dimensions (political, economic, cultural, legal) while categorizing all of the actors that are addressed in the rhetoric under the dichotomy of “Us” versus “Them”.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, the article reveals that the EU is the most-referred actor under the “Them” category and that the European integration is addressed through three master frames: Costs/Benefits of EU Membership, National Sovereignty, and British Identity.
🔬Design:Makale
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This paper sets out to empirically assess the ways in which the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and the long-time party leader Nigel Farage “framed” the issues concerning the European Union (EU) as a political actor and European integration as an idea or a process in their rhetoric prior to the Brexit referendum. It uses the ideational approach to the concept of populism, which has been gaining growing prominence in the populism literature in recent years. The frame analysis of all textual documents which were shared on behalf of the UKIP and Farage on the Party’s official website between 2013 and 2015 identifies the discursive frames through their constitute elements (diagnosis, prognosis, motivation) and under four thematic dimensions (political, economic, cultural, legal) while categorizing all of the actors that are addressed in the rhetoric under the dichotomy of “Us” versus “Them”. In conclusion, the article reveals that the EU is the most-referred actor under the “Them” category and that the European integration is addressed through three master frames: Costs/Benefits of EU Membership, National Sovereignty, and British Identity.

Özet

Bu makale, Birleşik Krallık Bağımsızlık Partisi'nin (UKIP) ve partiye uzun süre liderlik eden Nigel Farage’ın Brexit referandumu öncesi söylemlerinde bir siyasi aktör olarak Avrupa Birliği’ne (AB) ve bir fikir ya da süreç olarak Avrupa bütünleşmesine ilişkin konuları nasıl “çerçevelediğini” son yıllarda popülizm literatüründe giderek ağırlık kazanan fikirsel kavramsal yaklaşım bağlamında ampirik olarak değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. 2013 ve 2015 yılları arasında UKIP ve Farage adına partinin resmi internet sayfasında paylaşılan tüm yazılı belgelerin çerçeveleme analizi yaklaşımıyla kodlanmasıyla tamamlanan niteliksel içerik analizi, çerçeveleri temel yapısal öğelerine (tanı, çözüm, amaç) ayırarak ve dört farklı tematik boyutta (siyasi, ekonomik, kültürel, hukuki) tespit etmekte ve bahsi geçen tüm aktörleri “Biz” ve “Onlar” ikili ayrımında kategorilere ayırmaktadır. Makale, söylemlerde AB’nin “Onlar” kategorisinde en başta yer aldığını ve Avrupa bütünleşmesinin üç ana çerçeve altında ele alındığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu üç çerçeve, AB Üyeliğinin Faydaları/Maliyetleri, Ulusal Egemenlik ve Britanya Kimliği olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENYUVA, Ö., ÖZBEY, E. E. (2024). “They Can Stay, But We Are Leaving!” Populism and Euroscepticism in the Discourse of the UK Independence Party. Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: Özel, 119–153. https://ajindex.com/articles/1023045

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. Betz, Hans-Georg. Radical Right-Wing Populism in Western Europe, New York: Macmillan Press, 1994.
  2. Gamson, William A. Talking Politics, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
  3. Gifford, Chris. The Making of Eurosceptic Britain, 2. Baskı, Farnham: Ashgate, 2014.
  4. Goffman, Erving. Frame Analysis, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974.
  5. Hawkins, Kirk. Venezuela’s Chavismo and Populism in Comparative Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
  6. Hix, Simon. What’s Wrong with the Europe Union and How to Fix It, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008.
  7. Hofstadter, Richard. The Age of Reform: From Bryan to FDR, vol. 95, New York: Vintage, 1955.
  8. Kazin, Michael. The Populist Persuasion: American History, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995.
  9. Laclau, Ernesto. On Populist Reason, London: Verso, 2007.
  10. Lipset, Martin & Stein Rokkan. Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives, New York: Free Press, 1967.
  11. Mudde, Cas. Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
  12. Norris, Pippa. Radical Right: Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
  13. Norris, Pippa ve Ronald Inglehart, Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism, Cambridge University Press, 2019.
  14. Postel, Charles. The Populist Vision, New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
  15. Taggart, Paul. Populism, Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press, 2000. de la Torre, Carlos. “Global Populism: Histories, Trajectories, Problems, and Challenges.” İçinde Routledge Handbook of Global Populism, ed. Carlos de la Torre, 1-28. New York: Routledge, 2019.
  16. Marsh, David. “Populism and Brexit.” İçinde Authoritarian Populism and Liberal Democracy, ed. Ivor Crewe ve David Sanders, 73-86. Palgrave Macmillan, 2020.
  17. Mudde, Cas. “An Ideational Approach.” İçinde The Oxford Handbook of Populism, ed. Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, Paul Taggart, Paulina Ochoa Espejo ve Pierre Ostiguy, 27-47, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
  18. Panizza, Francisco. “Introduction: Populism and Mirror of Democracy.” İçinde Populism and Mirror of Democracy, ed. Francisco Panizza, 1-31. London: Verso, 2005,
  19. Peruzzotti, Enrique. “Laclau’s Theory of Populism: A Critical Review,” İçinde Routledge Handbook of Global Populism, ed. Carlos de la Torre, 31-43, New York: Routledge, 2019.
  20. Rovira Kaltwasser, Cristóbal, Paul Taggart, Paulina Ochoa Espejo ve Pierre Ostiguy. “Populism: An Overview of the Concept and the State of the Art.” İçinde The