INVESTIGATING RACISM• THE ‘OUTSIDE’ PERSPECTIVE• Politics (speeches, petitions, proposals of legal acts, pres-releases, parliamentary debates ..etc.)• Media (texts from press, TV, radio, web)• Legal acts (official and regional acts, etc.)• Institutions (internal regulations, practical ‘gate-keeping’guidelines, etc.)• THE ‘INSIDE’ PERSPECTIVE• Investigating discursive ‘accounts’ of those experiencingdiscrimination and exclusion• Gaining relevant knowledge about the many facets of racialdiscrimination from the perspective of the marginalized andvulnerable
TWO LEVELS OF RACISM• the level of ideology and beliefs (aboutgroups, minorities, ‘Others’) – very often ‘imaginary racism’without actual ‘races’ (stereotypes, prejudices) - ‘race’ is aconstruct!• the level of social practices (who is included? Who isexcluded?) – active practices of inclusion/exclusion; practicesof limited access to resources and rights (e.g. labour andresidence rights, language rights, etc.)
Statement of the Problem• This study attempts to trace racism and ethnic prejudice inthe Sudanese and South Sudanese leaders differentspeeches considering different audiences and occasions asthe top elites in their communities. The targeted period(2005-2011) is thought to be the most suitable time, forboth partners to present their future plans towards ‘theother’ into action. The analysis will be an attempt toreveal the hidden ideologies of racism and ethnicprejudice adopted by the elites of both sides representedin the president the National Congress Party Omer ElBashir and the leader of the Sudan Peoples LiberationArmy/Movement (SPLA/M) Salva Kiir Mayardet.
Statement of the Problem• Racism and ethnic prejudice are serious problems inthe whole world that led and still leading to tensionsbetween ethnic and religious groups that resulted inconflicts, wars and even genocides. In Sudan, a recentpolitical, social and economical change has beenresulted from the separation of the South. Racial andethnic prejudice seemed to be one of the mostsignificant reasons for the separation of the South in2011. However, mistrust between the two Sudanslingers, and unresolved disputes and related securityissues still threaten to pull the two countries back towar .
Statement of the Problem• (why) Since political elites have the most control over suchpublic discourse and communication, they also mostresponsible for the cognitive or ideological reproduction ofracism. (van Dijk 1993)• These hidden ideologies of racial prejudice are thought to beresulted in political and social action: on one hand ,in theNorthern failure of offering a persuading discourse andactions about an attracting unity to the South, and on theother hand ,in the southern blatant racial presentation forthe separation as a convincing choice for the southerners .Racial and ethnic prejudice is the one of the major keys inunderstanding the nature of the North -South long history of
Statement of the Problem• This study is focusing on the discursive reproductionof racism to show that in spite of the carefully well-prepared self-image as tolerant and leaders, the elitesare fundamentally a part of the problem of racialprejudice(vanDijk 2000).• The study formulates a plea that advocates a broaderuse of discourse analysis in the political science toshow that problems in political science can inprinciple be studied more completely and sometimesmore adequately when it is realized that the issueshave an important discursive dimension. (van Dijk2001)
Questions of the research1 – What influential role does elite discourse play inthe development, reinforcement, legitimating, andhence reproduction of racial and ethnic prejudicetowards the other?• 2- What are the social, political, and culturalcontexts and functions of such discourse ?• 3- What are the structures and strategies ofdiscourse that tell us about under-lying ethnic orracial prejudices that expressed by each leader ?
Methodology• This study methodology is under the bigumbrella of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)which is one of the most popularinterdisciplinary approaches that investigatesdiscourse. CDA studies and analyses the writtenand spoken texts, to reveal the discursivesources of power, dominance, inequality andbias. It examines how these discursive sourcesare maintained and reproduced within specificsocial, political and historical contexts.”(van Dijk1998: 13 ).
Methodology (I) Discourse HistoricalApproach• DHA is a multimethodical, multitheoretical trend of analysing politicaldiscourse, it works with different approaches on the basis of a variety ofempirical data as well as background information. ( Wodak 2001)1.‘‘The approach is problem-oriented, not focused on specific linguistic items’2. The approach is interdisciplinary on several levels: in theory, in the work itself, inteams, and in practice’3. The historical context is integrated into the interpretation of discoursesand texts’4. ‘The theory as well as the methodology is eclectic; i.e., theories and methods areintegrated which are helpful in understanding and explaining the object underinvestigation’.5. ‘Multiple genres and multiple public spaces are studied, and intertextual andinterdiscursive relationships are investigated. Recontextualisation is the mostimportant process in connecting these genres as well as topics and arguments(topoi)’.
Methodology (II) Rhetoric• The second method is the rhetoric :• A- The traditional rhetorical operations:repetition, ‘irrelevant’ addition, deletion, semanticoperations.• B- Rhetorical strategies which are:• 1- Constructive strategies with subgroups( strategies ofjustification and unification and cohesivation).• 2- Strategies of transformation which address thedifference from an established status to another new one.• 3- Strategies of perpetuation which presuppose and/oremphasize positive political continuity (strategy ofavoidance is one sub-category of this category).(Recento2003, Wodak 1999, Flowerdew2002)
Method• The data which is the written or spoken texts ofthe speeches of the two leaders will be collectedfrom different possible archives , since it will bedifficult to trace each single speech by the twoleaders, those speeches will be selected withthe consideration of different occasions andaudiences (contexts). Then they will be analyzedusing the methodologies mentioned above. Theselected speeches will be in the span of timefrom 2004 when the first real initiative peaceagreement assigned until 2011 when thereferendum resulted in secession of the South.