VEMS SÄKERHET? VILKA RÄTTIGHETER? : Om diskursförändringen i svensk migrationspolitisk riksdagsdebatt 1975-2002
Tolkning och reflektion
Peace and development research
Freds- och utvecklingsforskning
Full recordShow full item record
AbstractHuman rights and solidarity, as well as moral and legal responsibilities to protect people in need of refuge, seem to be principles of secondary importance within international migratory policies today. Instead, the predominant view seems to focus more and more on the protection of territorial borders, the welfare state and national identity. This international change in discourse can also be seen in the political trends of individual states. There are reasons to believe that this is a development that is also perceptible in the political rhetoric that is used in parliamentary debates, which constitute the main focus of this thesis. The aim of this study has therefore been to increase the understanding of this change in migratory policies by analyzing Swedish parliamentary debates between 1975 and 2002, using a theoretical framework focused on two different perspectives on security: First, the Copenhagen School and securitization of migration, and second, human security and human rights. The method consists of an interpretative and reflective method, together with a critical discourse analysis approach. The main results of the thesis show a possibility to distinguish four sets of discourses with close ties to the contemporary societal context during this period of almost three decades. However, the main arguments for such a change in discourse are first, that although the migration policies have developed in a more restrictive way since the 1980’s, the arguments and rhetoric in parliamentary debates have not changed much even though the tendencies are harder tones simultaneously with such restrictions. Second, in spite of this similarity, there have been people in parliament who have raised their voices and protested during this period when, in their view, the politics has moved outside of the ordinary framework. Finally, this thesis argues that it is possible to place the two debating sides in what could be named the security/rights- nexus, depending on each side’s point of departure according to the security framework of this thesis.