This article/assignment/project is an analysis of the political debate discourse in Denmark focusing on immigration. More specifically it is an analysis of a TV debate wherein a proposed ban on wearing burka or niqab in public is discussed. We ask the question “how has the political debate about immigration in Denmark evolved, what level of quality can you ascribe it today, and what does this tell us?”. Our purpose is to illuminate what we hypothesized to be bad debate culture. To do that we first had to define good debate culture, which we did based on the two theorists Niels Møller Nielsen and Christian Kock. On the basis of especially Christian Kock we critically examined the participating debaters’ argumentation, specifically with the question in mind “does this educate the public on the discussed subject?”. Our results are as we hypothesized; the quality of the debate is not up to the standards we set. We use our analysis results to take our article/assignment/project three directions; a postcolonial feminist analysis, a discussion about the direction of Danish politics on the subject of immigration and a discussion on the role of the media. Our conclusion is that the discourse is problematic in many ways, and that the way to combat ignorance and prejudice is more and better information and political argumentation.
|Uddannelser||Basis - Humanistisk Bacheloruddannelse, (Bachelor uddannelse) Basis|
|Udgivelsesdato||18 dec. 2017|
|Vejledere||Malene Skov Petersen|