How racism discourse can mobilize right-wing populism: The construction of identity and alliance in reactions to UKIP's Brexit “Breaking Point” campaign

Conversational Silencing of Racism in Psychological Science: Toward Decolonization in Practice

This article addresses a paradox between self-perceptions of psychology as a liberal, progressive, antiracist discipline and profession and the persistent criticisms of racism and calls for decolonization. It builds on the criticisms of epistemic exclusion and White centering, arguing that White supremacy is maintained by "conversational silencing" in which the focus on doing good psychology systematically draws attention away from the realities of racism and the operation of power. The process is illustrated by investigations of disciplinary discourse around non-Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic psychology and on stereotyping, racism, and prejudice reduction, which constitute the vanguard of liberal scholarship in the discipline. This progressive scholarship nurtures "White ignorance," an absence of belief about systemic racism that psychology plays a part in upholding.

Equality data as immoral race politics: A case study of liberal, colour-blind, and antiracialist opposition to equality data in Sweden

This study concerns discursive mobilisations of race and racism in the Swedish debate on equality data, in the case of a controversial statement made by a Swedish Green Party MP. In March 2019, female Muslim MP Leila Ali Elmi argued publicly for introducing equality data in Sweden, in opposition to prevailing colour-blind and antiracialist norms. Her statement was controversially formulated in terms of 'registering' people 'by race', leading to forceful criticism in the mainstream press and on social media, particularly on Twitter. In a material representing this criticism, we analyse discourse participants' argumentative strategies, focusing on mobilisations of race and racism as acts of subject positioning, performative of a moral identity. Participants positioned themselves as morally righteous, liberal antiracists by virtue of their own antiracialism (Goldberg, 2009, The threat of race. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ) and colour-blindness (Bonilla-Silva, 2010, Racism without racists. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MA), while constructing equality data as a racist practice, and as a threat to a liberal order. They also constructed advocates of equality data, and specifically Ali Elmi herself, as being irrational race ideologues, to be morally condemned for espousing a return to racial thinking comparable to that of German Nazism or scientific racism. The findings point to the exceptional status and character of what we call a colour-blind antiracialism in Sweden, and further show how far 'liberal arguments for illiberal ends' can go in reinforcing a moral status quo and counteracting antiracist reform.

Implicit racism, colour blindness, and narrow definitions of discrimination: Why some White people prefer 'All Lives Matter' to 'Black Lives Matter'

The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has been called the 'civil rights issue of our time' (Holt & Sweitzer, 2020, Self and Identity, 19(, p. 16) but the All Lives Matter (ALM) movement swiftly emerged as an oppositional response to BLM. Prior research has investigated some predictors of support for ALM over BLM, but these predictors have thus far not included levels of racial bias or potentially relevant constructions of racism. This pre-registered, cross-sectional study (N = 287) tested the degree to which White participants' support for ALM could be predicted using measures of racism (implicit and explicit) and ideological stances around the construction of 'racism' (that discourage the recognition of contemporary inequalities and discrimination). Using multiple regression analyses, we found that implicit racism, colour-blind ideology, and narrow definitional boundaries of discrimination positively predicted support for ALM over BLM. Explicit racism, collective narcissism, and right-wing political orientation did not predict ALM support, nor did any (2-way) interaction of these predictors. Implications for our understanding of the All Lives Matter movement are discussed.

The rhetorical use of the threat of the far-right in the UK Brexit debate

While attention has been given to understanding support for the far‐right, there is a lack of focus on the way in which a threat of the far‐right can be used for political ends. This paper addresses this using the UK Brexit debate as an illustration. The question therefore is: What is talk about the far‐right used to do in discussions about Brexit? A discursive psychological approach addresses a sample of newspaper reports containing both ‘Far‐Right’ and ‘Brexit’, from the first quarter of 2019 (n = 45). The analysis identifies a range of uses of talk about the far‐right: (1) An opponent of Brexit is called a Nazi by pro‐Brexit protesters, who are labelled far‐right; (2) A lack of Brexit is presented as fuel for the far‐right; (3) Remain supporters reject the idea that a lack of Brexit fuels the far‐right; (4) A link with the far‐right is rejected by a prominent Brexit supporter; and (5) Support for Brexit is again linked with the far‐right. The far‐right can be used as a strategic tool by opposing sides of the Brexit debate and – significantly – the supposed threat of the far‐right can be used to placate far‐right ideas, rather than to genuinely challenge them.

Mobilizing collective hatred through humour: Affective-discursive production and reception of populist rhetoric

This research examines the mobilization of populist rhetoric of the 2019 Finns Party election video. By focusing on both the FP’s election video (production) and Youtube users’ comments (reception), we examine the constructions and uses of social categories and humour as well as responses to their rhetorical deployment among like‐minded supporters and opponents. The multimodal analysis of the production of a populist campaign video demonstrates the construction of social categories and humour through the five steps of collective hate. These humorous messages are differently received by like‐minded and opposing YouTube users. Two supportive affective–discursive practices – glorification and schadenfreude – both express shared joy and laughter, but while glorification emphasizes the positive self‐understanding of the in‐group, schadenfreude belittles the ‘political Other’. Two opposing affective–discursive practices – irritation and scorn – place FP voters in subject positions of morally and intellectually inferior fascists, racists, and idiots. The populist message fosters expressions of social anger and polarization between FP supporters and opponents. Humour entangled with hatred encourages a sense of moral superiority in both groups. This study contributes to the current knowledge of mobilizing populist rhetoric and polarization, and responds to the call to broaden analysis of political communication in the field of multimodality.

Brexit: The influence of motivation to respond without prejudice, willingness to disagree, and attitudes to immigration

Britain's unexpected vote to leave the European Union (Brexit) in June 2016 has proved divisive and damaging both within the United Kingdom and internationally. Across two correlational studies, the current research proposed a model to explain the Brexit vote, with attitudes to immigration and willingness to disagree (WD) as direct predictors of the referendum result, and internal (IMS) and external (EMS) motivation to respond without prejudice as indirect predictors. Study 1 (N = 353) and Study 2 (N = 363) both showed good fit with the model and, respectively, explained 48% and 46% of the referendum result. More positive attitudes to immigration predicted a vote to remain. Higher IMS and lower EMS predicted a vote to remain, fully mediated by attitudes to immigration. In Study 1, lower WD also predicted a vote to remain, both directly and indirectly via attitudes to immigration, although this was not replicated in Study 2. These results are discussed both in relation to the Brexit result, and the implications for motivation to respond without prejudice, WD, and political correctness more generally.

The role of identity transformations in comparative victim beliefs? Evidence from South Sudanese diaspora

There has been a growing interest in the study on collective victimhood and this research has increased our knowledge on how victim groups construe their victimization relative to other groups. However, most of this research has assumed that the groups involved in these construals were pre-existing prior to the conflict and remained fixed during and after the conflict. This study aimed to examine how conflict facilitates the transformation of social identities (i.e., how ingroups and outgroups are construed) and how these transformed social identities are used by group members in their construals of comparative victim beliefs. Eighteen South Sudanese immigrants were interviewed about their experiences during the Sudan civil wars. Thematic analysis revealed two broader themes: “1) “who is ‘us’ versus ‘them’?” (i.e., identity transformation in light of collective victimization and privilege; 2) “what happened to us?” (i.e., construal of ingroup victimization relative to other groups). These findings demonstrate the complexity in how immigrant groups construe social identities constructed in the context of intergroup conflicts, and how these transformed identities are then used in their construals of collective victimhood.

Shaping the modern world with a stone-age brain: Brexit and the Moral Foundations Theory

Decision making is not always a reasoned process. It is often subject to reflexive heuristics. The Moral Foundations Theory is a popular theoretical framework that characterises political decisions by adherence to an evolutionary criterion. Based on recurrent ancestral pressures, this model anticipates our species’ tribal history has resulted in a set of intuitive ethics: Care/ Harm, Fairness/ Cheating, Loyalty/ Betrayal, Authority/ Subversion, and Sanctity/ Degradation. Focusing on the winning side, this paper analyses official communications, polling data and media coverage to explore how the Leave campaigners intentionally or unintentionally appealed to the public’s moral intuitions. In doing so, it aims to show why evolutionary psychology potentially offers a useful layer of analysis with which to understand contemporary politics.