{"id":2186,"date":"2021-03-04T17:14:58","date_gmt":"2021-03-04T17:14:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/?p=2186"},"modified":"2021-03-04T17:15:01","modified_gmt":"2021-03-04T17:15:01","slug":"the-politics-of-language","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/2021\/03\/04\/the-politics-of-language\/","title":{"rendered":"The Politics of Language"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>I don&#8217;t think I&#8217;d have to put forward that hard a case to get people to agree that language is intrinsically political. The awareness of this over the past few years has grown exponentially: people are now wary of things being PC (politically correct), and trying to find the right terminology, especially when discussing topics that are not so known to us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And so, before my ideas about this project really were written down, I knew I&#8217;d have to address the issue of language; its political nature, and the imbued power that language (and its holders) can have.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the case of my project, it comes down to this: <strong>&#8220;What is a refugee?&#8221;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><em>What is the difference between a refugee and a migrant?<\/em><\/li><li><em>Where do migrants and exiles fit into the conversation?<\/em><\/li><li><em>What about &#8220;asylum seekers&#8221;?<\/em><\/li><li><em>If someone is a displaced person, does this make them a refugee?<\/em><\/li><li><em>What are the political connotations of each of these words? And what kind of atmosphere do they conjure?<\/em><\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><span class=\"has-inline-color has-white-color\">.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention declare that a &#8220;refugee&#8221; is as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>&#8220;any person who, owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his\/her nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself\/herself of the protection of that country.&#8221;<\/p><cite>United nations, 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees, p.16, at www.unhcr.ch<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p>The convention itself, given its historicity, has issues. It was initially only applicable for those people displaced due to events that occurred pre-1951, and only to Europeans. While these have been widened and shifted as the twentieth-century progressed, there are still short-comings in this definition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>An individual <strong>cannot<\/strong> choose this designation or identity for themselves; at least not legally. They can only be designated as a &#8220;legal refugee&#8221; when that status has been granted, via application, as a result of meeting certain requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><span class=\"has-inline-color has-white-color\">.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">So &#8211; if there is an issue over who or what is a refugee, then what alternatives are there?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>There are some news outlets, such as Al Jazeera, who chose to no longer use the term &#8220;migrant&#8221; because they believed it &#8216;dehumanises and distances the individual in need from the reader&#8217; &#8211; and so they&#8217;ve chosen &#8216;refugee&#8217; instead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>On the other hand, Alexander Betts, director of the Refugee Studies Centre at Oxford University<em>, <\/em>believes that &#8220;migrant&#8221; used to be neutral, but now means &#8220;not a refugee.&#8221; He says that the term &#8220;economic migrant&#8221; &#8216;is used to imply choice rather than coercion.&#8217;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>One article I read, written by Loren Voss for the YJIA, chose to use &#8220;asylum seeker&#8221;; even though they recognised it was not neutral, she used it &#8216;because it does not prejudge whether the person has a valid refugee claim under the law, but still invokes the dire situation from which they came and the larger social policy issues that are implicated.&#8217;<sup>1<\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In all of this, there may not be a <strong>neutral term. <\/strong>That may not be possible. But &#8211; it is worth asking, <em>how does the language we use impact our assumptions, and consequently our historical analysis?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><span class=\"has-inline-color has-white-color\">.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>My current thinking is that for my short essay, with a more theoretical approach, I should look at the history of &#8220;refugee\/migrant&#8221;. This, I believe, is tied in with the ideas of &#8220;Refugee-ness&#8221; and &#8220;Refugee-dom&#8221;, which have begun to emerge alongside the popularity of &#8220;Life Stories&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The labels placed on these displaced people have been used to inform policy and shape people&#8217;s opinions; we don&#8217;t have to look far to find examples. In Israel, their conventions claim that asylum seekers are &#8220;infiltrators&#8221; &#8211; regardless of why they&#8217;re coming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If my project progresses as I hope &#8211; then this is crucial for me to understand as I seek to look at narratives. Because; whether I like it or not, even the stories from the refugees themselves are not neutral accounts. My methodological essay may also need to look at oral history; and its advantages and disadvantages. I can&#8217;t seem to escape the question of agency &#8211; something which I think is at the heart of subaltern studies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Psychology has helped &#8216;us with the &#8220;why&#8221; and &#8220;how&#8221; of government and media campaigns: (1) vocabulary affects how people think about asylum-seekers and state responses to them, and (2) that framing bias allows a national security framing to narrow the solution set avoiding those that might address social issues.&#8217;<sup>2<\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><span class=\"has-inline-color has-white-color\">.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I&#8217;m trying hard not to get stuck in an ethical trap with all this research, but I&#8217;m afraid I may need help at some point soon. As I said in my presentation on Tuesday &#8211; I want to avoid discrediting the agency of the refugee, either through taking the wrong approach, or by giving too much, or not enough importance to institution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But then again &#8211; all of this is hypothetical &#8211; I don&#8217;t have access to first-hand stories, or get to ask the questions myself. And so I&#8217;m having to put on my &#8220;glasses of critical thinking&#8221; in order to challenge what I read, and hopefully, not fall into the trap I can see looming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><span class=\"has-inline-color has-white-color\">.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>(On a side note however, any ideas about how to put these questions into something practical; I&#8217;d love to hear them and chat them through. Sometimes too much theory just baffles my brain!)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><span class=\"has-inline-color has-white-color\">.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><span class=\"has-inline-color has-white-color\">.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><sup>1<\/sup> Loren Voss, &#8216;Choosing Words with Purpose: Framing Immigration and Refugee Issues as National Security Threats to Avoid Issues of Social Policy&#8217;, <em>Yale Journal of International Affairs, <\/em>13:1, (Spring 2018), pp.40-41.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><sup>2<\/sup> Voss, &#8216;Choosing Words with Purpose&#8217;, pp.46-7.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I don&#8217;t think I&#8217;d have to put forward that hard a case to get people to agree that language is intrinsically political. The awareness of this over the past few years has grown exponentially: people are now wary of things<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[203,201,89,202],"class_list":["post-2186","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-methodology","tag-politics-of-language","tag-project","tag-short-essay"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5wNtZ-zg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2186","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2186"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2186\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2187,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2186\/revisions\/2187"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2186"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2186"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/transnationalhistory.net\/doing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2186"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}