Analysis of Brenton Tarrant's Manifesto through Fairclough's Three-Dimensional Model The focus of this article, and which will be described in the following section, is the critical analysis of Norman Fairclough's speech. It keeps discourse distinct from other social dimensions and concentrates textual, spoken and semiological systems (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 18). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essay There are five commonalities described by Phillips and Jørgensen about how different approaches to CDA work and relate to interpretation of discourse as something that functions ideologically, how language is examined in social contexts, linked to sociocultural processes and as well as critical features of CDA systems (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, pp. 60-64). The research of this article revolves around the interpretation of discourse as that which is both constituted and constitutive. In other words, discourse is a social practice that both constitutes the social world while being constituted by social practices; it contributes to (re)shaping social structures within social worlds, while being a reflection of them. In the context of this bachelor's thesis, the discourse then benefits the elaborations of social structures in the digital and "real life" sense, while also being a reflection of them. This article interprets discourse as a form of action, where people are able to mobilize change in the digital world as well as in “real life”. Below follows a step-by-step presentation of the five common characteristics of critical discourse analysis: The practices by which texts are produced and consumed, discursive practice, are considered a constitutive element of social practice. This has an effect on the formation of social identities, relationships and social world systems (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 61). At the same time, some parts of the social world are not automatically discursive and therefore function differently from discourse, and then require the analysis of other methodological instruments (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 61).Cultural reproduction and social change is partially made possible by the discursive practices of everyday life, which makes cultural and social processes structuralized as linguistic-discursive (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 61). What the different approaches to CDA have in common is the intention to “highlight the linguistic and discursive dimension of social and cultural phenomena and processes of change in late modernity” (Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011, p 61). In this article, discourse is understood and used as an idea that includes written language as well as images. Where applicable, emphasis will be placed on visual semiotics in the same way as on the analysis of the connection between language and images, discussing images as if they were texts. Images, whether visual or metaphorical, will be processed, “read” and analyzed like texts (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). As described previously, this article aligns with Phillips and Jørgensen's understanding of discourse as being in a dialectical relationship with other social dimensions, in that discourse constitutes and is constituted by social practices and is in constant interaction with historically situated social structures;Alongside social dimensions, discursive dimensions constitute understandings of the world (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 62). Phillips and Jørgensen indicate that the third common characteristic is that CDA participates in a specific linguistic textual analysis of language use in social communication (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 62). & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 62), detaching it from other theories on discourse as discursive psychology, where the approaches are not put forward (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). The fourth common point asserts that discursive practices contribute to creating and reproducing (unequal) power relations between social groups, for example on the basis of gender, sexuality, race, nationality, religion , age, physical and psychological abilities. The fifth commonality highlights the critical importance given to critical discourse analysis as a method dedicated to social change: “In the name of emancipation, critical discourse analytic approaches take the side of oppressed social groups. Critique aims to uncover the role of discursive practice in maintaining unequal power relations, with the overall goal of harnessing the findings of critical discourse analysis in the struggle for radical social change. (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 64) Power, ideology and hegemony It has already been written how this article understands discourse in a dialectical relationship with social aspects, (re)models, is shaped and reflects social structures. Discourse therefore contributes to the maintenance and reproduction of current social structures, contributes to their development, because it establishes society and culture, with discursive practices constructing identities, relationships and representations. This leads to discursive practices of representation having ideological effects, which has the consequence of contributing to the production and reproduction of unequal power dynamics between social groups. (Fairclough and Wodak, 1997; Wodak and Meyer, 2009). Power indicates the relations of difference and the effects of these differences in the communities and social networks that constitute societies. Thus, discourse, to the extent that it is linked to power, provides the tools necessary to constitute differences in societal power, which may be grounded by ideology. Ideologies are regularly disguised through discourse as “conceptual analogies and metaphors” (Wodak and Meyer, 2009). Discourse therefore functions ideologically and, as such, CDA deals with ideology, revealing power relations by exposing ideologies, because ideologies are often inaccurate. constructions of society (Meyer and Wodak, 2009; Fairclough and Wodak, 1997). Thus, as CDA is concerned with ideology, this article also emphasizes ideology and aligns with Norman Fairclough's understanding of the concept. It asserts that ideologies are specific constructions of meanings and practices, which both represent and construct power relations of domination in societies, and thus contribute to producing and reproducing power relations within dynamics and social structures of society. This process is implemented through interactions, which are communicated through identities that are (ideologically) established in power dynamics (Fairclough and Wodak, 1997; Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011: Wodak and Meyer, 2009). Fairclough sees this as linked to discursive practice. , emphasizing hegemony in its approach to critical discourse analysis. While hegemony is seen as a negotiated process, Fairclough sees discursive practices as something that can be understood as makingpart of a hegemonic struggle, since hegemony allows us to analyze and understand how discursive practice is interconnected to more global social practices, which involve power relations. Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011) Critical discourse analysis emphasizes how discursive practices construct identities, relationships and representation in relation to power relations, and how these dynamics maintain inequalities between social groups. In this context, this article builds on Fairclough's emphasis on CDA as a method of investigating the connections between power struggles between "discursive practices, events and texts and social structures, relationships and processes and broader cultural" (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 63). Fairclough's three-dimensional model As this article draws on Fairclough's work on critical discourse analysis, this section of the chapter describes the interdisciplinary approach of Fairclough in discourse analysis and how textual analysis is combined with an analysis of discursive and social practices in the data analyzed. Fairclough is critical of analytical tools that employ only a linguistic approach in discourse analysis, as they risk focusing solely on textual content, without including a full-scale discussion of how discourses are related to social relations, identities and power structures. This article builds on Fairclough's understanding of the importance of focusing on the relationship between the text, social and cultural practices and structures, throughout the analysis (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). The CDA approach provided by Fairclough allows for an analytical framework, with interconnected concepts within a three-dimensional model, focusing on the following traditions; “detailed textual analysis in the field of linguistics” (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 65); “macro-sociological analysis of social practices” (ibid); and “microsociological interpretive traditions within society” (ibid.). This approach uses detailed textual analysis to linguistically understand the functions of discursive processes in texts. It uses a macro-sociological analysis of social practices and recognizes how social practices are shaped by power relations and social structures. The microsociological interpretive tradition provides insight into how people construct worlds through everyday performances. These traditions and ideas throughout this article are realized through Fairclough's analytical framework for social communication research, via the three-dimensional model of an analysis of textual content, discursive practice and social practice. (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). Fairclough explains how communicative events, as a content element of language, include these three dimensions, requiring the researcher to include them when conducting discourse analysis. Discourse analysis must then 1) at the textual level, emphasize the linguistic features of the text, such as vocabulary and metaphors, etc., to illustrate where its discourses operate linguistically. 2) When focusing on discursive practice, the analysis must emphasize the processes of production and consumption in relation to the text, and the way in which the discourses of the text rely on other existing discourses. This can be done by classifying the specific language used in the text, to help identify, for example, the presence of specific political speeches. 3) When analyzing social practice, the analysis discusses relationshipsmore global at the macro level between the text and social practices in society. This level of analysis must be accompanied by reference to culture or cultural theory, because a discourse analysis in the data is not adequate enough to understand broader social practice (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). This three-dimensional analytical model is presented separately, which is also how it will be used throughout the analysis, even though the dimensions intersect and are interdependent. Fairclough's three-dimensional model will serve as a framework to illustrate the relationships between language and society. It should be noted that the analysis uses the analytical structure as a suggestive guideline and that the model is not prescriptive. The analysis is representative of the interpretations of the author of this article (Fairclough, 1992). Research material and analysis strategy The original manifesto file, formally titled “The Great Replacement – Towards a New Society We March Always Forward” (Tarrant, 2019) was posted online on 8chan (8ch.net ) on March 15, 2019, consisting of 74 pages and approximately 15,430 words. », The manifesto is not clearly structured and begins with a poem by Dylan Thomas, and an introduction asserting that the white race is threatened with extermination (p. 1-3). The first third of The Manifesto is constructed in the form of three simulated "question and answer sessions" (p. 4-22) during which The Manifesto asks questions about the motives for the terrorist attack and the terrorist's ideals. The first question-and-answer session is designed to answer general questions, with the second aimed at his supporters and the third at those who oppose his action. This is followed by an edited version of a poem by Rudyard Kipling and a few pages containing messages aimed at "conservatives", "Christians", "Antifa/Marxists/Communists" and "Turks" (p. 23 -28). The remainder of the manifesto until the end discusses "General Thoughts and Potential Strategies" (pp. 29-72), such as what are seen as natural links between the environment and nationalism, the reasons why men in the West are becoming radicalized and “leading enemies” made up of individual politicians. This is followed by a conclusion (p. 72-74) and a final page with a montage of eight images of women, men and children, represented through idealized narratives about gender and nature, which will be developed in more detail in the analysis chapter. The data analyzed consists of extracts from the manifesto which discusses the constructions of “European” and “non-European” identities as well as the constructions of its author Brenton Tarrant. The content of the manifesto is repetitive, different identities and perceived "races" are described with different terms used synonymously, such as "non-Europeans", "invaders", "immigrants" and "Europeans", "white people". » and “Ethnic Europeans”. The excerpts analyzed were chosen through passages that discuss these terms, in an attempt to reflect on how the content of the manifesto draws on the discourses of contemporary digital, physical, intellectual and parliamentary far-right movements, and on idealized white constructions. imagined community. The analytical strategy in this article consists of an analysis of extracts from the Great Replacement manifesto; they are studied through a textual analysis followed by an analysis of the discursive practice of the manifesto. The social practice chapter will build on the writings of the analysis chapter and build on Sara Ahmed's writings on the cultural politics of emotions, expanding on Benedict Anderson's concept of nations as "imagined communities ". Analysistextual The aim of textual analysis is to search for linguistic characteristics of the text, to illustrate how its discourses are activated textually. The emphasis is on how the text contributes to the construction of specific representations of identities and social relations as well as representations of the world. The analysis uses different linguistic tools; such as wording, metaphors, ethos to mention certain characteristics. These linguistic tools reveal the way in which the discourses function in the manifesto. Rhetorical or metaphorical elements can reveal “hidden” ideologies or specific elements in the text. The textual analysis therefore discusses how the use of metaphors shapes understanding of the world and further illustrates what factors may have influenced the use of metaphor. By interpreting the meaning of words and specific words, the analysis reflects on how theoretical, ideological, and cultural perspectives relate to the choice of wording. The analysis focuses on significant keywords and aims to identify the specific underlying meaning of these (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). The analysis looks for nominalization with choices in terms of voice, active or passive, to identify processes of responsibility. and agency in the manifesto. The chapter analyzes the ethos of the text, analyzing the aspects that contribute to the construction of identities, through the use of grammar. Furthermore, the analysis examines identity constructions and action processes by analyzing how the text collectivizes, individualizes and personalizes its content (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). Textual analysis uses a multimodal analytical approach to be able to interpret visual features of the text, such as the images on the last page of the manifesto. This is to better understand how images contribute to specific representations of social identities and the world as well as to personalization and individualization in the text (Machin & Mayr, 2012). Discursive practice The analysis of the discursive practice of the text focuses on identifying how and which discourses are exploited. The emphasis is on the interdiscursivity of the text, to better understand what types of discourse are used in the text. In this chapter, the focus is on whether discursive practice is creative or conventional, in order to better discuss how discursive practice might employ change, both discursively and culturally, in relationships with social order. The extent of interdiscursivity in the text can indicate how the text is influenced by or draws on other texts to construct representations of society (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011; Machin & Mayr 2011). Social Practice The chapter on social practice aims to identify the social systems and structures to which discursive practice is connected. This is to discuss why the discursive practice is constructed as it is and what its potential consequences may be. The chapter on social practice focuses on the order of discursive practice, on the way in which different discourses are exploited and distributed in the manifesto. Social practice connects textual analysis and discursive practice to non-discursive social relationships and structures. The objective is to reflect on the political, cultural and digital conditions on which discursive practice is based. The discussion of social practice aims to evaluate the hegemonic consequences suggested by discursive practice (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011). This is done by integrating theoriescultural, such as the writings on the cultural politics of emotions, produced by Sara Ahmed. This article subscribes to Anderson's ideas that a "nation" is an imagined community. A nation is limited, because even the greatest nation has borders, and it is socially constructed by the members of the community who "will never know, meet or even hear of most of their fellow human beings." 'them, but in the minds of each lives the image of their communion' (Andersson, 2006, p. 6). This argument is developed by Sara Ahmed, who considers the imagined community as a collective body. The imagined community can therefore employ feelings of hatred and fear exploited by the proximity of “others”. Others, like “non-Europeans,” are assigned characteristics, “sticky images” like culture or “natural” abilities that can make them “foreign” and “contrary” to the “European” community. When a discourse constructs the nation as “invaded,” Ahmed asserts that the nation becomes a gendered and feminized body, a “soft nation” that is “too emotional to be easily moved by the demands of others”… “Such attributes are of course gendered: the soft national body is a feminized body, which is “penetrated” or invaded by others” (Ahmed, 2004, p. 2). Ethical Considerations There are several ethical dilemmas to be resolved regarding the production and distribution of this paper, and this short chapter attempts to address some of them. As noted at the start of this article, there has been no news regarding the inquest into Brenton Tarrant's mental health, released by High Court Justice Cameron Mander. It is first at the end of these investigations that the High Court will decide whether Tarrant is fit to stand trial and receive his sentence. Since Brenton Tarrant has not yet been sentenced, this document does not purport to find Tarrant guilty of the judicially formulated charges of murder and attempted murder, which will be decided no earlier than June 2019. Although it does not Although he has not been found guilty of the charges, Brenton Tarrant is named throughout the newspaper, as he has been in globally recognized and respected newspapers and media outlets such as the New York Times, The Guardian, Al-Jazeera and the BBC. It should be noted that considerations have been made regarding the use of categories such as "European peoples" and "non-European immigrants" and "descendants of non-European immigrants", in relation to the formulation of the research question and, subsequently, the entire document. This could be seen as a risk of reproducing the far-right discourses that predominate in Brenton Tarrant's manifesto. The choice to construct the research questions with these terms is based on the conceptualization of "identities" in Great Replacement theory, as well as why the manifesto excludes certain "Europeans" from the white community because it considers them by example as “traitors”, which will be developed. Using these broad, non-specific definitions makes possible a nuanced analysis that reveals what lies beyond the loaded and coded terms, which encapsulates the goal of this article. This article will not reference a link to download the Great Replacement Manifesto. Firstly, this is because the manifest is constantly deleted by file sharing sites, where it is uploaded. Secondly, it is because several of the web pages on which the manifesto is accessible contain far-right and offensive content, which there is no reason to share in a newspaper like this which attempts to criticize such contents. The .pdf file containing the manifest that was used during the production process of this article has beenretrieved from webpage www.mediafire.com via original post from Christchurch, March 15, 2019 on 8chan. The page on Mediafire, where the file uploaded by the alleged author no longer exists. Therefore, the full manifesto will be attached as an annex (see annex B). The manifesto is not uploaded in its entirely original version but has been edited with the addition of page numbers, for easier navigation.AnalysisThe analysis of this article is divided into two parts, the first being a textual analysis and the second, an analysis of the discursive practice, of the manifesto. It should be noted that textual analysis is divided into two subchapters; the first analyzes how the manifesto constructs the concepts and identities of "Europe" and the "European people" in relation to "non-European" peoples ("Our lands will never be their lands"), and the second analyzes how the manifesto constructs its author. Brenton Tarrant (“Just a Regular White Guy”). Textual Analysis “Our Lands Will Never Be Their Lands” “If there is one thing I want you to take away from these writings, it is that birth rates need to change. Even if we were to expel all non-Europeans from our lands tomorrow, European peoples would continue to slide into decadence and, ultimately, death” (Tarrant, 2019, p. 3). Obsessed with the birth rate in Europe (the word is written 12 times throughout the manifesto, as well as “fertility”, which is written 24 times), the text begins by collectivizing “Europeans” as a collective that transcends borders. “The Great Replacement”, asserts the manifesto, is an existential threat to the survival of Europe, constituted by the proximity of the migrated Other, who by “nature” is much more reproductive than the European population. The categorization of “Europeans” and “Non-Europeans” produces a binary narrative, a rhetoric of “us” and “them” in which the Other is seen as an existential threat and an inferior subject within “the Europe”. “To maintain a population, the people must achieve a birth rate that reaches replacement fertility levels. In the Western world, this represents approximately 2.06 births per woman” (Tarrant, 2019, p. 3). The manifesto states very early on that the role of European women is to (re)produce European children, for the survival of the “race”. “Millions of people cross our borders legally. Asked by the state and corporations to replace the whites who failed to reproduce, to create the cheap labor, new consumers and tax base that corporations and states need to prosper » (Tarrant, 2019, p. 3). The text makes it clear that the concept of “Europeans” is synonymous with “Whites” and that the threat is constituted by a collectivized and homogeneous unit of Other immigrants. They are constructed as a force of opposition to white Europeans. The “millions of people who cross “our” borders” are immediately conceived as actively entering and penetrating borders that are not “theirs,” but white. The Others, both metaphorically and literally, “flow” across European borders, constructed as a natural disaster. Thus, they are incompatible with the environment of white European nations, imported by political and economic elites, who wish to substitute the environment and the “natural” order. The manifesto asks why Tarrant committed the attack, responding that it was "to show the invaders that our lands will never be their lands" (Tarrant, 2019, p. 5), where the text goes on to state that he s This is an act of revenge for “the young, innocent and dead Ebba” (Tarrant, 2019, 7). Here the text refers to Ebba Åkerlund, the 11-year-old girl who was murdered during.

Essay / Analysis of Brenton Tarrant's Manifesto through Fairclough's Three-Dimensional Model The focus of this article, and which will be described in the following section, is the critical analysis of Norman Fairclough's speech. It keeps discourse distinct from other social dimensions and concentrates textual, spoken and semiological systems (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 18). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essay There are five commonalities described by Phillips and Jørgensen about how different approaches to CDA work and relate to interpretation of discourse as something that functions ideologically, how language is examined in social contexts, linked to sociocultural processes and as well as critical features of CDA systems (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, pp. 60-64). The research of this article revolves around the interpretation of discourse as that which is both constituted and constitutive. In other words, discourse is a social practice that both constitutes the social world while being constituted by social practices; it contributes to (re)shaping social structures within social worlds, while being a reflection of them. In the context of this bachelor's thesis, the discourse then benefits the elaborations of social structures in the digital and "real life" sense, while also being a reflection of them. This article interprets discourse as a form of action, where people are able to mobilize change in the digital world as well as in “real life”. Below follows a step-by-step presentation of the five common characteristics of critical discourse analysis: The practices by which texts are produced and consumed, discursive practice, are considered a constitutive element of social practice. This has an effect on the formation of social identities, relationships and social world systems (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 61). At the same time, some parts of the social world are not automatically discursive and therefore function differently from discourse, and then require the analysis of other methodological instruments (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 61).Cultural reproduction and social change is partially made possible by the discursive practices of everyday life, which makes cultural and social processes structuralized as linguistic-discursive (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 61). What the different approaches to CDA have in common is the intention to “highlight the linguistic and discursive dimension of social and cultural phenomena and processes of change in late modernity” (Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011, p 61). In this article, discourse is understood and used as an idea that includes written language as well as images. Where applicable, emphasis will be placed on visual semiotics in the same way as on the analysis of the connection between language and images, discussing images as if they were texts. Images, whether visual or metaphorical, will be processed, “read” and analyzed like texts (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). As described previously, this article aligns with Phillips and Jørgensen's understanding of discourse as being in a dialectical relationship with other social dimensions, in that discourse constitutes and is constituted by social practices and is in constant interaction with historically situated social structures;Alongside social dimensions, discursive dimensions constitute understandings of the world (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 62). Phillips and Jørgensen indicate that the third common characteristic is that CDA participates in a specific linguistic textual analysis of language use in social communication (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 62). & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 62), detaching it from other theories on discourse as discursive psychology, where the approaches are not put forward (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). The fourth common point asserts that discursive practices contribute to creating and reproducing (unequal) power relations between social groups, for example on the basis of gender, sexuality, race, nationality, religion , age, physical and psychological abilities. The fifth commonality highlights the critical importance given to critical discourse analysis as a method dedicated to social change: “In the name of emancipation, critical discourse analytic approaches take the side of oppressed social groups. Critique aims to uncover the role of discursive practice in maintaining unequal power relations, with the overall goal of harnessing the findings of critical discourse analysis in the struggle for radical social change. (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 64) Power, ideology and hegemony It has already been written how this article understands discourse in a dialectical relationship with social aspects, (re)models, is shaped and reflects social structures. Discourse therefore contributes to the maintenance and reproduction of current social structures, contributes to their development, because it establishes society and culture, with discursive practices constructing identities, relationships and representations. This leads to discursive practices of representation having ideological effects, which has the consequence of contributing to the production and reproduction of unequal power dynamics between social groups. (Fairclough and Wodak, 1997; Wodak and Meyer, 2009). Power indicates the relations of difference and the effects of these differences in the communities and social networks that constitute societies. Thus, discourse, to the extent that it is linked to power, provides the tools necessary to constitute differences in societal power, which may be grounded by ideology. Ideologies are regularly disguised through discourse as “conceptual analogies and metaphors” (Wodak and Meyer, 2009). Discourse therefore functions ideologically and, as such, CDA deals with ideology, revealing power relations by exposing ideologies, because ideologies are often inaccurate. constructions of society (Meyer and Wodak, 2009; Fairclough and Wodak, 1997). Thus, as CDA is concerned with ideology, this article also emphasizes ideology and aligns with Norman Fairclough's understanding of the concept. It asserts that ideologies are specific constructions of meanings and practices, which both represent and construct power relations of domination in societies, and thus contribute to producing and reproducing power relations within dynamics and social structures of society. This process is implemented through interactions, which are communicated through identities that are (ideologically) established in power dynamics (Fairclough and Wodak, 1997; Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011: Wodak and Meyer, 2009). Fairclough sees this as linked to discursive practice. , emphasizing hegemony in its approach to critical discourse analysis. While hegemony is seen as a negotiated process, Fairclough sees discursive practices as something that can be understood as makingpart of a hegemonic struggle, since hegemony allows us to analyze and understand how discursive practice is interconnected to more global social practices, which involve power relations. Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011) Critical discourse analysis emphasizes how discursive practices construct identities, relationships and representation in relation to power relations, and how these dynamics maintain inequalities between social groups. In this context, this article builds on Fairclough's emphasis on CDA as a method of investigating the connections between power struggles between "discursive practices, events and texts and social structures, relationships and processes and broader cultural" (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 63). Fairclough's three-dimensional model As this article draws on Fairclough's work on critical discourse analysis, this section of the chapter describes the interdisciplinary approach of Fairclough in discourse analysis and how textual analysis is combined with an analysis of discursive and social practices in the data analyzed. Fairclough is critical of analytical tools that employ only a linguistic approach in discourse analysis, as they risk focusing solely on textual content, without including a full-scale discussion of how discourses are related to social relations, identities and power structures. This article builds on Fairclough's understanding of the importance of focusing on the relationship between the text, social and cultural practices and structures, throughout the analysis (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). The CDA approach provided by Fairclough allows for an analytical framework, with interconnected concepts within a three-dimensional model, focusing on the following traditions; “detailed textual analysis in the field of linguistics” (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011, p. 65); “macro-sociological analysis of social practices” (ibid); and “microsociological interpretive traditions within society” (ibid.). This approach uses detailed textual analysis to linguistically understand the functions of discursive processes in texts. It uses a macro-sociological analysis of social practices and recognizes how social practices are shaped by power relations and social structures. The microsociological interpretive tradition provides insight into how people construct worlds through everyday performances. These traditions and ideas throughout this article are realized through Fairclough's analytical framework for social communication research, via the three-dimensional model of an analysis of textual content, discursive practice and social practice. (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). Fairclough explains how communicative events, as a content element of language, include these three dimensions, requiring the researcher to include them when conducting discourse analysis. Discourse analysis must then 1) at the textual level, emphasize the linguistic features of the text, such as vocabulary and metaphors, etc., to illustrate where its discourses operate linguistically. 2) When focusing on discursive practice, the analysis must emphasize the processes of production and consumption in relation to the text, and the way in which the discourses of the text rely on other existing discourses. This can be done by classifying the specific language used in the text, to help identify, for example, the presence of specific political speeches. 3) When analyzing social practice, the analysis discusses relationshipsmore global at the macro level between the text and social practices in society. This level of analysis must be accompanied by reference to culture or cultural theory, because a discourse analysis in the data is not adequate enough to understand broader social practice (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). This three-dimensional analytical model is presented separately, which is also how it will be used throughout the analysis, even though the dimensions intersect and are interdependent. Fairclough's three-dimensional model will serve as a framework to illustrate the relationships between language and society. It should be noted that the analysis uses the analytical structure as a suggestive guideline and that the model is not prescriptive. The analysis is representative of the interpretations of the author of this article (Fairclough, 1992). Research material and analysis strategy The original manifesto file, formally titled “The Great Replacement – Towards a New Society We March Always Forward” (Tarrant, 2019) was posted online on 8chan (8ch.net ) on March 15, 2019, consisting of 74 pages and approximately 15,430 words. », The manifesto is not clearly structured and begins with a poem by Dylan Thomas, and an introduction asserting that the white race is threatened with extermination (p. 1-3). The first third of The Manifesto is constructed in the form of three simulated "question and answer sessions" (p. 4-22) during which The Manifesto asks questions about the motives for the terrorist attack and the terrorist's ideals. The first question-and-answer session is designed to answer general questions, with the second aimed at his supporters and the third at those who oppose his action. This is followed by an edited version of a poem by Rudyard Kipling and a few pages containing messages aimed at "conservatives", "Christians", "Antifa/Marxists/Communists" and "Turks" (p. 23 -28). The remainder of the manifesto until the end discusses "General Thoughts and Potential Strategies" (pp. 29-72), such as what are seen as natural links between the environment and nationalism, the reasons why men in the West are becoming radicalized and “leading enemies” made up of individual politicians. This is followed by a conclusion (p. 72-74) and a final page with a montage of eight images of women, men and children, represented through idealized narratives about gender and nature, which will be developed in more detail in the analysis chapter. The data analyzed consists of extracts from the manifesto which discusses the constructions of “European” and “non-European” identities as well as the constructions of its author Brenton Tarrant. The content of the manifesto is repetitive, different identities and perceived "races" are described with different terms used synonymously, such as "non-Europeans", "invaders", "immigrants" and "Europeans", "white people". » and “Ethnic Europeans”. The excerpts analyzed were chosen through passages that discuss these terms, in an attempt to reflect on how the content of the manifesto draws on the discourses of contemporary digital, physical, intellectual and parliamentary far-right movements, and on idealized white constructions. imagined community. The analytical strategy in this article consists of an analysis of extracts from the Great Replacement manifesto; they are studied through a textual analysis followed by an analysis of the discursive practice of the manifesto. The social practice chapter will build on the writings of the analysis chapter and build on Sara Ahmed's writings on the cultural politics of emotions, expanding on Benedict Anderson's concept of nations as "imagined communities ". Analysistextual The aim of textual analysis is to search for linguistic characteristics of the text, to illustrate how its discourses are activated textually. The emphasis is on how the text contributes to the construction of specific representations of identities and social relations as well as representations of the world. The analysis uses different linguistic tools; such as wording, metaphors, ethos to mention certain characteristics. These linguistic tools reveal the way in which the discourses function in the manifesto. Rhetorical or metaphorical elements can reveal “hidden” ideologies or specific elements in the text. The textual analysis therefore discusses how the use of metaphors shapes understanding of the world and further illustrates what factors may have influenced the use of metaphor. By interpreting the meaning of words and specific words, the analysis reflects on how theoretical, ideological, and cultural perspectives relate to the choice of wording. The analysis focuses on significant keywords and aims to identify the specific underlying meaning of these (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). The analysis looks for nominalization with choices in terms of voice, active or passive, to identify processes of responsibility. and agency in the manifesto. The chapter analyzes the ethos of the text, analyzing the aspects that contribute to the construction of identities, through the use of grammar. Furthermore, the analysis examines identity constructions and action processes by analyzing how the text collectivizes, individualizes and personalizes its content (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips & Jørgensen, 2011). Textual analysis uses a multimodal analytical approach to be able to interpret visual features of the text, such as the images on the last page of the manifesto. This is to better understand how images contribute to specific representations of social identities and the world as well as to personalization and individualization in the text (Machin & Mayr, 2012). Discursive practice The analysis of the discursive practice of the text focuses on identifying how and which discourses are exploited. The emphasis is on the interdiscursivity of the text, to better understand what types of discourse are used in the text. In this chapter, the focus is on whether discursive practice is creative or conventional, in order to better discuss how discursive practice might employ change, both discursively and culturally, in relationships with social order. The extent of interdiscursivity in the text can indicate how the text is influenced by or draws on other texts to construct representations of society (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011; Machin & Mayr 2011). Social Practice The chapter on social practice aims to identify the social systems and structures to which discursive practice is connected. This is to discuss why the discursive practice is constructed as it is and what its potential consequences may be. The chapter on social practice focuses on the order of discursive practice, on the way in which different discourses are exploited and distributed in the manifesto. Social practice connects textual analysis and discursive practice to non-discursive social relationships and structures. The objective is to reflect on the political, cultural and digital conditions on which discursive practice is based. The discussion of social practice aims to evaluate the hegemonic consequences suggested by discursive practice (Fairclough, 1992; Phillips and Jørgensen, 2011). This is done by integrating theoriescultural, such as the writings on the cultural politics of emotions, produced by Sara Ahmed. This article subscribes to Anderson's ideas that a "nation" is an imagined community. A nation is limited, because even the greatest nation has borders, and it is socially constructed by the members of the community who "will never know, meet or even hear of most of their fellow human beings." 'them, but in the minds of each lives the image of their communion' (Andersson, 2006, p. 6). This argument is developed by Sara Ahmed, who considers the imagined community as a collective body. The imagined community can therefore employ feelings of hatred and fear exploited by the proximity of “others”. Others, like “non-Europeans,” are assigned characteristics, “sticky images” like culture or “natural” abilities that can make them “foreign” and “contrary” to the “European” community. When a discourse constructs the nation as “invaded,” Ahmed asserts that the nation becomes a gendered and feminized body, a “soft nation” that is “too emotional to be easily moved by the demands of others”… “Such attributes are of course gendered: the soft national body is a feminized body, which is “penetrated” or invaded by others” (Ahmed, 2004, p. 2). Ethical Considerations There are several ethical dilemmas to be resolved regarding the production and distribution of this paper, and this short chapter attempts to address some of them. As noted at the start of this article, there has been no news regarding the inquest into Brenton Tarrant's mental health, released by High Court Justice Cameron Mander. It is first at the end of these investigations that the High Court will decide whether Tarrant is fit to stand trial and receive his sentence. Since Brenton Tarrant has not yet been sentenced, this document does not purport to find Tarrant guilty of the judicially formulated charges of murder and attempted murder, which will be decided no earlier than June 2019. Although it does not Although he has not been found guilty of the charges, Brenton Tarrant is named throughout the newspaper, as he has been in globally recognized and respected newspapers and media outlets such as the New York Times, The Guardian, Al-Jazeera and the BBC. It should be noted that considerations have been made regarding the use of categories such as "European peoples" and "non-European immigrants" and "descendants of non-European immigrants", in relation to the formulation of the research question and, subsequently, the entire document. This could be seen as a risk of reproducing the far-right discourses that predominate in Brenton Tarrant's manifesto. The choice to construct the research questions with these terms is based on the conceptualization of "identities" in Great Replacement theory, as well as why the manifesto excludes certain "Europeans" from the white community because it considers them by example as “traitors”, which will be developed. Using these broad, non-specific definitions makes possible a nuanced analysis that reveals what lies beyond the loaded and coded terms, which encapsulates the goal of this article. This article will not reference a link to download the Great Replacement Manifesto. Firstly, this is because the manifest is constantly deleted by file sharing sites, where it is uploaded. Secondly, it is because several of the web pages on which the manifesto is accessible contain far-right and offensive content, which there is no reason to share in a newspaper like this which attempts to criticize such contents. The .pdf file containing the manifest that was used during the production process of this article has beenretrieved from webpage www.mediafire.com via original post from Christchurch, March 15, 2019 on 8chan. The page on Mediafire, where the file uploaded by the alleged author no longer exists. Therefore, the full manifesto will be attached as an annex (see annex B). The manifesto is not uploaded in its entirely original version but has been edited with the addition of page numbers, for easier navigation.AnalysisThe analysis of this article is divided into two parts, the first being a textual analysis and the second, an analysis of the discursive practice, of the manifesto. It should be noted that textual analysis is divided into two subchapters; the first analyzes how the manifesto constructs the concepts and identities of "Europe" and the "European people" in relation to "non-European" peoples ("Our lands will never be their lands"), and the second analyzes how the manifesto constructs its author. Brenton Tarrant (“Just a Regular White Guy”). Textual Analysis “Our Lands Will Never Be Their Lands” “If there is one thing I want you to take away from these writings, it is that birth rates need to change. Even if we were to expel all non-Europeans from our lands tomorrow, European peoples would continue to slide into decadence and, ultimately, death” (Tarrant, 2019, p. 3). Obsessed with the birth rate in Europe (the word is written 12 times throughout the manifesto, as well as “fertility”, which is written 24 times), the text begins by collectivizing “Europeans” as a collective that transcends borders. “The Great Replacement”, asserts the manifesto, is an existential threat to the survival of Europe, constituted by the proximity of the migrated Other, who by “nature” is much more reproductive than the European population. The categorization of “Europeans” and “Non-Europeans” produces a binary narrative, a rhetoric of “us” and “them” in which the Other is seen as an existential threat and an inferior subject within “the Europe”. “To maintain a population, the people must achieve a birth rate that reaches replacement fertility levels. In the Western world, this represents approximately 2.06 births per woman” (Tarrant, 2019, p. 3). The manifesto states very early on that the role of European women is to (re)produce European children, for the survival of the “race”. “Millions of people cross our borders legally. Asked by the state and corporations to replace the whites who failed to reproduce, to create the cheap labor, new consumers and tax base that corporations and states need to prosper » (Tarrant, 2019, p. 3). The text makes it clear that the concept of “Europeans” is synonymous with “Whites” and that the threat is constituted by a collectivized and homogeneous unit of Other immigrants. They are constructed as a force of opposition to white Europeans. The “millions of people who cross “our” borders” are immediately conceived as actively entering and penetrating borders that are not “theirs,” but white. The Others, both metaphorically and literally, “flow” across European borders, constructed as a natural disaster. Thus, they are incompatible with the environment of white European nations, imported by political and economic elites, who wish to substitute the environment and the “natural” order. The manifesto asks why Tarrant committed the attack, responding that it was "to show the invaders that our lands will never be their lands" (Tarrant, 2019, p. 5), where the text goes on to state that he s This is an act of revenge for “the young, innocent and dead Ebba” (Tarrant, 2019, 7). Here the text refers to Ebba Åkerlund, the 11-year-old girl who was murdered during.

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch