This project paper looks at the rhetoric used in a recent public debate related to Muslims observing Ramadan in Denmark, as it exemplifies an ongoing broader debate regarding the integration of Muslims into the Danish society. Our problem statement is: How is the rhetoric in the Ramadan debate characterized and what consequences might this type of rhetoric have for the integration of Muslims in Denmark. In order to answer the first part of the above question, we have completed a rhetorical analysis of a blog post published by the minister of Immigration and Integration, Inger Støjberg, as well as the televised debate program, which transpired as a result of the blog post. For this part of the analysis we have used theories on text analysis and dynamic practical argumentation. To answer the second part of our problem statement, we have included Erwing Goffman’s stigma theory and Richard Jenkins theory on categorisation and social identity.
Our analysis showed that the rhetoric used in the public debate gave a simplified picture of a complex matter and that the argumentation used on both sides was based on the persons ethos rather than empirical evidence. We found that both categorisation and stigmatisation were occurring in the public debate which could be regarded as a barrier for integration.
|Uddannelser||Basis - Humanistisk Bacheloruddannelse, (Bachelor uddannelse) Basis|
|Udgivelsesdato||18 dec. 2018|