Solidaritet för vem? : en argumentationsanalys över migrationsdebatterna i Europaparlamentet

Detta är en Kandidat-uppsats från Lunds universitet/Mänskliga rättigheter

Sammanfattning: This study examines the migration debates in the European Parliament in view of the refugee crisis that occurred in the fall of 2015 and the effect of xenophobia that grew thereafter. Over one million refugees sought Europe for a better life in 2015 and no one could predict the increased volume of refugees who came. On the other hand, the acute situation showed flaws in the asylum system that the European Union (EU) has sought to reform and improve. The arguments in the European Parliament are analysed by an inductive argumentation analysis that examines sustainability, relevance and evidence from the speeches made the European members of parliament. The result of the argumentation analysis is analysed further from a postcolonial perspective from Professor Mekonnen Tesfahuney's theory on Fortress Europe. The theory is based on how Europe and predominantly western culture chooses to maintain hegemonic structures for discursive practices that favours white supremacy and the inclusion/exclusion of individuals in society. In view of growing xenophobia in Europe, the cultural and political views by members of parliament on refugees and asylum rights have a huge impact on migration discourse. The analysis shows that a human rights perspective is absent in the debates with nationalist and right-wing parties dominating the debates.

  HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)