Crisis and Social Exclusion: A Critical Discourse Analysis Study in Greece

S1012361 Crisis and social exclusion 1

Running head: CRISIS AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION

Crisis and social exclusion

A critical discourse analysis study

University Of Gloucestershire (Athens M.C.)


Introduction

In order understand the concept of social exclusion, a quick glance around could be just

enough. The definitions that have been found through literature are quite similar to each other. A

very interesting approach was developed by Tsakloglou and Papadopoulos (2002) which argued that

there are two ways of defining social exclusion, the academic way and in policy. In academic circles

“the denial of social, political and civil rights” (pp211) and “the inability to participate in the basic

political, economic and social functioning of the society”(pp 211-212) is the first way of defining

social exclusion when in policy it is referred as “exclusion from the labour market” (pp 212) and

“acute poverty and material deprivation” (pp 212).

For many scientists these definitions are found quite accurate and enough to describe social

exclusion (Todman, 2004). On the other hand, other scientists and intellectuals proposed something

else. Foucault (1969) gave another perspective for social exclusion using the material and historical

dialectics of Marx. His concept of bio-politics and bio-power described not only social exclusion but

human behaviour in general as a relation of power over every aspect of life. The holistic approach of

his writings enhanced the theory of alienation that was developed by Marx (1844) by stating that

inside the so called first world a third world is born and raised, a world that is dealt by the capitalist

system as “human junks”. These “human junks” is generally described, not only by Foucault, as

immigrants, drug addicted people, unemployed people etc (Deleuze and Quattari, 1972; Foucault,

1969). In 19th century the term of “pauper” was largely in use to describe a very poor person who is

unable to fulfil his basic needs as food and housing (from Merriam-Webster’s website) and it could

be a good image of describing a social excluded person. Based on these, Tsakloglou and

Papadopoulo’s definition (2002) is found being problematic as it presents social exclusion in an

impervious way. For example, it is unable to answer if a person or a whole society gets excluded

from labour market and become poor and deprived while at the same time he/she can exercise their

basic political rights as voting in the election. The conditions seem to be more complicated nowadays

and it can be argued that these definitions of Tsakloglou and Papadopoulos (2002) are unable to

describe social exclusion in its whole.

Going a little further, it would be very useful to mention the connection of social exclusion and

social construction as it is described across literature (Basaure, 2009; Bhalla and Lapeyre, 2004;

Byrne, 1997, 1999; Hallward, 2003; Jordan, 1996; Kumar Sen, 1999; Marx, 1844, 1847, 1858, 1867,

1885, 1894; Munck, 2005; Whitty, 2001; Wolff J., 2005). Capitalism is a social construct made by

bourgeois for themselves in order to protect the reproduction and the development of their economic

profit which is produced by exploiting the labour force (Marx, 1844, 1847, 1858, 1867, 1885, 1894).

The way that it works is described by Marx in a very specific way by a number of theories as the


theory of value and surplus value (Marx, 1844, 1847, 1858, 1867, 1885, 1894). Based on the process

of how the capital is produced, reproduced and accumulated the concept of human existence becomes

inextricably connected with it and policy is there to ensure the smooth continuation of reproduction

and existence of this set of relationships, using mass media, culture and even economy to bind and

manipulate humanity, mentally and physically (Deleuze and Quattari, 1972; Foucault, 1969;

Gramsci, 1975). From this point of view, keeping a number of people outside of society limits in a

large variety of forms, is considered by the radical thinkers something that is in the nature of

capitalism itself (Basaure, 2009; Bhalla and Lapeyre, 2004; Byrne, 1997, 1999; Deleuze and

Quattari, 1972; Foucault, 1969; Gramsci, 1975; Hallward, 2003; Jordan, 1996; Kumar Sen, 1999;

Marx, 1844, 1847, 1858, 1867, 1885, 1894; Munck, 2005; Whitty, 2001; Wolff J., 2005). Wolff R.

(2009) argued that capitalism is living its failure as the relations of production are not able to fit all

this population and quality of labour power anymore and therefore capitalism excludes rapidly and

violently almost the 1/3 of the global population by making them unable to reproduce their existence

(Wolff R., 2009).

In contrast to these beliefs, some other scientists who either believe in social Darwinism which

suggests that the world operates under the law of jungle, the law of the strongest forcing the weak,

either they support the idea of the eternal existence of capitalism, deals with the issue of social

exclusion as having almost no relation with the social construct. An example of this approach is the

British Government’s Social Exclusion Unit report (1998), which believed that Government’s

programme of inclusion must be based on neighbourhood renewal.

Social exclusion leads usually to a violence outbreak from below. The basic concept behind

this is that usually violence is class motivated and oriented with class goals (Basaure, 2009; Bhalla

and Lapeyre, 2004; Byrne, 1997, 1999; Deleuze and Quattari, 1972; Foucault, 1969; Gramsci, 1975;

Hallward, 2003; Jordan, 1996; Kumar Sen, 1999; Lea, 1996; Marx, 1844, 1847, 1858, 1867, 1885,

1894; Munck, 2005; Whitty, 2001; Wolff J., 2005; Wolff R., 2009). This concept declares that

violence breeds more violence. The violence can be observed as individual or/and collective act

against not only to the ruling conditions and the ruler themselves (class motivated and oriented

violence), in a vertical way, but also in a horizontal way. In other words it can be described as inter-

class violence on the one hand and intra-class violence on the other (Lea, 1996). Racist assaults for

example from native workers against immigrant workers can be considered as intra-class violence as

it is happening inside the same social class and not against the opposed social class. Furthermore,

violence and criminality in general, is something that is easy to be found in, between and across

social excluded groups like drug addicted people, prisoners and “paupers”.


These thoughts were the starting point of this present study on the topic of crisis and social

exclusion. It was found very difficult to find other studies on this topic using critical discourse

analysis across scientific literature. However, the basic concepts of social exclusion are described in

several studies basically on the topic of discourse analysis itself (Chouliaraki and Fairclough, 1999;

Fairclough, 1992, 2005). One of these studies tried to show the contribution of critical discourse

analysis on the political, social and economical transition to the free market and capitalism in the

countries of Central and Eastern Europe after the collapse of the so called “socialism” (Fairclough,

2005). This study discussed the topic of poverty and social exclusion in relation to the policy changes

of the Romanian government in its way of entering the EU. The conclusion of this study is that the

EU programs of inclusion are working quite well. However, Fairclough (2005) mentioned that the

function of these programs is of particular importance and therefore special attention in their

application is needed. For example:

“According to the principle of ‘avoiding discrimination against the less poor in favour of

the more poor’, it is ‘important that giving various social benefits to the very poor …

does not lead to bias against those who face up to their position with difficulty but have a

somewhat better economic position through their own effort. A social policy too centred

on only helping ‘the poorest of the poor’ risks accentuating their social exclusion and

going against the morality of work and contribution to collective welfare.” (pp 16)

The present study used a critical discourse analysis on the topic of crisis and social exclusion,

as it was described before. It was more opinion-formation centred as the participant was asked to

develop his thoughts, feeling and beliefs on the topic trough a semi-structured interview.

Method

Participant

For this study, a participant who is familiar with the topic and very passionate about his thoughts and

ideas on crisis and social exclusion, was chosen to be interviewed. More specifically, the participant

is a recently retired doctor and a member of a far-left wing party.

Design

This qualitative study used a semi-structured interview in order to develop a critical discourse

analysis (CAD).


Materials

A video camera was used for videotaping the interview together with a journalist tape recorder in

order to avoid any possible problems that could be happened with the video camera.

Procedure

Before the participant started being interviewed, he read and signed a consent form which informed

him of the study, its aim, and his rights. With the same consent form the participant’s anonymity was

be guaranteed. It was made clear to the participant that his participation was voluntary and that he

could withdraw from the study at any stage without having to give any reason. Also anonymity was

guaranteed as well as the confidentiality of data. The interview video would be transcribed and the

transcription would be kept separately from the participant’s details. After informing the participants

for all these, he signed the consent form and the interview procedure started normally.

Analysis and discussion

This present study used critical discourse analysis on a semi-structured interview aiming to

examine and analyze the language that was used by the participant in order to express, describe and

support his arguments and positions on the topic of social exclusion in relation with the current crisis.

The study was not in a vacuum as, because of the status of the participant, the influence from the

beliefs and theories as they were described in the introductive section of this paper, was considered

very likely on him. Therefore, the focus of this paper was on the ways of expressing specific opinions

and the ways that the participants used specific grammar and vocabulary to describe and support his

thoughts, feelings and point of views.

While reading the transcribed participant’s interview, it could firstly be divided into two parts.

The first part is referred to indirect approaches on the topic which means a more theoretical approach

and expressing positions more as an observer and not as a direct involved individual. The other parts

can be described as a more personal and direct. This part is referred to the parts of the interview in

which the individual expresses direct and personal thoughts, feelings the positions. In this section,

personal involvement is its major element.

Going a little deeper to the analysis, the interview transcription could be cut into eight

categories based on the content of his sayings (Appendix B). These categories are described as social

exclusion and exploitation, social excluded groups, permanency of social exclusion, individual’s


characteristics of exclusion, the social character of exclusion, personal effect of the crisis, personal

experiences with social excluded groups and individuality and collectivity. At this point it has to be

mentioned that in relation the previous deviation of the interview into two parts, as it was written

before, the categories of personal effects of the crisis and the personal experiences with social

excluded groups, belong to the second part and the other categories to the first part.

In turn, these categories can construct other major topics because of their interconnection and

interdependence. These categories can be described as discourses. The first discourse found in the

interview, relates capitalism and social exclusion. This discourse includes a definition of social

exclusion:

“...social exclusion, in my understanding, it is the conditions in which (.) a human

existence is really cut from the conditions of the reproduction of its own existence”

(Appendix A, pp 1)

A few lines later, the participant becomes clearer when he emphasizes to unemployment which is

presented as exclusion “from the process of social reproduction” (Appendix A, pp 1). This means for

the participant that there is an interconnection, interdependence and feedback between social

exploitation and social exclusion, where social exploitation is referred to capitalism. Social exclusion

is described as a precondition of social exploitation while social exploitation, especially during these

years of the global financial crisis, “creates (.) new strata of excluded people” (Appenix A, pp 2).

Furthermore, as social exclusion is perceived as interconnected with social exploitation, for the

participant, social exclusion acquires a single destiny with capitalism which, in other words, means a

permanency in the capitalist system, a capitalist system which is responsible not just for social

exclusion but also to its effects like depression, suicides, social despair, violence, drug addiction,

homelessness etc.

In order to make a logical continuation with the previously described discourse, crisis and its

effects has to be taken as the second discourse. This discourse connects participant’s opinion on how

individuals are affected by the crisis, on how society in general is affected by the crisis and reinforces

his arguments with using his own experience as a retired doctor who received three cuts on his

pension until now and the image which he presented about the breaking up of the Greek national

health system. It has to be mentioned that the interview was conducted one day after a retired

pharmacist committed suicide in the most central spot of Athens, at Syntagma square. This incident

was mentioned by the participant as a tragic example of where social despair, atomization or even

depression, caused by the current crisis, may lead. More specifically, he firstly invokes some

scientific researches which show that depression is on a rise at these times of crisis because of the

crisis itself. At his point, a connection can be done with the first discourse because, as it was


mentioned, having “… an ocean of existences without the (.) means of existence” (Appendix A, pp 2)

causes exclusion and exclusion means isolation, helplessness and violence (Appendix A, pp 3-4).

Specifically on violence, it was observed two related approaches by the participant. His first

approach was that because of the worsening of mean of existence at this period of crisis, together

with social exclusion etc, create easily violence with, using a definition that was given in the

introductory section of this present paper, intra-class characteristics and it has characteristics of “the

fight for survival” (Appendix A, pp4).

“They try to turn poor against poorest and poorest against the deprived and excluded”

(Appendix A, pp3)

“A kind of social Darwinism. It is supposed that (.) where the big-shark-will-eat-the

small-fish.” (Appendix A, pp 4-5)

This point derives from the belief that as a part of the exploitation of the working class by the

capitalists, the ideological perspective is quite important and it operates through any kinds of

ideological mechanisms like racism. The ideological mechanism for the participant would possibly

imply the capitalist political parties as those who is, for him responsible for the today’s conditions.

“…both rightwing governments and >after that the< PASOK government.” (Appendix

A, pp 2)

At the same time he presents and another form if violence, the counter-violence. Counter-violence is

described as “violence from below” (Appendix A, pp 4). He gives the example of the big shark who

eats the small fishes and “..the other small fish try to use cunning methods to counter-pose”

(Appendix A, pp 5). In this sense the participants tries to reinforce his argument using the December

2008 revolt in Greece, were the youth played the basic role. In short, the participant translates the

violence from below that was used by people, young mainly, during the December revolt as a form of

counter-violence. To justify his view he starts emphasizing to the position that the youth is, in

relation to the crisis. For this reason he mentioned a lot of time that the basic problem is the

unemployment among youths which is leaves half of them out of production and therefore

reproduction. Finally, he presented his personal experience and concern about the problem of drug

addiction which, according to his sayings, is related to the capitalism, its crisis and therefore the

social exclusion in the sense that was described before. For this issue he mentioned to things. The

first is that youth is more sensitive and therefore more vulnerable, a fact which produces more

possibilities for a young person to get addicted on drugs.

The third and last discourse found, has to do with the relation between individuality and

collectivity. This discourse was found more clear in the last of the interview but also in the first half

there were a lot of cues which concluded to the importance of collectivity. His indirect, as he said,


experience with social excluded group was through his wife who is in charge in a drug addiction unit

(Appendix A, pp 6). For the participant the drug addiction problem is an aspect of social exclusion

and for this reason he deals with it as a social problem (Appendix A, pp 7) and probably connected

with capitalism. He mentioned that drug addicts can be cure in the right therapeutic framework

(Appendix, pp7) but this problem cannot be distinguished without distinguishing what causes the

problem. It worths mentioning his statement.

“…in a family, for example young people (2 sec pause), turns to become drug addicted

(.) and then social excluded (2 sec pause) not because they are the worst of the ((ehhh)

etc, probably because they are the weakest link” (Appendix A, pp7)

For this reason the participant proposes that this problem can be overcome only by collectivity,

which means organizing the excluded theme selves, their families and even their neighborhoods. This

collective “drive” as it is described by him (Appendix A, pp4), arouses the interest especially the

interest of younger people, for artistic expression for example (Appendix A, pp4). Finally what the

participants tries to give is the belief that social exclusion will not be disappeared with a social

change, which is translated as the struggle for social emancipation and the reorganization of the

society on human bases, which according to his ideological positioning is communism (Appendix A,

pp 8).

These three discourses revealed by analyzing the transcribed interview, can be more specified if

they are connected with the theories and approaches that were described in the introduction of this

present paper. The things that can be added, based on the analysis is that the participant made a lot of

quick pauses. This fact could be explained firstly because of the fact that the participant was

interviewed in English and not in his native tongue, which is Greek. Another explanation would be

that these pauses were used also as tool in order to emphasize and bombast. In order to do so, he

made a lot of hand movement in order to emphasize his sayings (Appendix B). The most possible

explanation would be a combination of both.

In conclusion, this study was an attempt to identify discourse on the topic of crisis and social

exclusion using critical discourse analysis. The difficulties to locate other previous studies on the

topic, or at least on a similar, were many. Despite the belief that this present study is not strong

enough to show in the most reliable way all the requested information, it can probably be a starting

point for other studies.


References

Basaure M.; 2009; Foucault and ‘Anti-Oedipus movement’: psychoanalysis as disciplinary power; History

of Psychiatry; vol 20, issue 3, pp.340-359.

Bhalla A. S. & Lapeyre F., 2004; Poverty and exclusion in global world; Palgrave Macmillan; New York, USA

Byrne D.; 1997; Social exclusion and capitalism, the reverse army across time and space; Critical Social

Policy; vol 17, issue 50, pp.27-51

Byrne D.; 1999; Social exclusion; Open University Press.

Chouliaraki L. & Fairclough N., 1999, Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis.,

Edinburgh University Press

Deleuze G. & Guattari F., 1972 (1983), Anti-Oedipus: capitalism and schizophrenia., University of

Minnesota Press

Fairclough N., 1992, Discourse and text: Linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis.,

Discourse Society, vol 3, issue 2, pp 193-217

Fairclouhg N., 2005, Critical discourse analysis in trans-disciplinary research on social change: transition,

re-saclanig, poverty and social inclusion., Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, vol1 , issue 1, pp 37-58

Foucault M., 1969 (2002), The archaeology of knowledge., Routledge Classics

Gramsci A., 1975 (1992), Prison notebooks, Columbia University Press

Hallword P.; 2003; Badiou: a subject of truth; University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, USA.

Jordan B.; 1996; A theory of poverty and social exclusion; Wiley-Blackwell; Cambridge. UK

Koller V. & Davidson P., 2008, Social exclusion as conceptual and grammatical metaphor: a cross-genre

study of British policy-making., Discourse Society, vol 19, issue 3, pp 307-331

Kumar Sen A., 1999, Development as freedom., Oxford University Press

Lea J., 1996, Poverty, crime and politics: Frederich Engels and the crime question., The Condition of

Britain: Essays on Frederick Engels, Pluto Books

Marx K., 1844 (1988), Economic and philosophical manuscripts of 1844 and The communist manifesto,

Prometheus Books

Marx K., 1847 (2008), Wage-labour and capital, Wildside Press LLC, USA

Marx K., 1857 (2005), Grundrisse: Foundations of the critique of political economy; Penguin Adult

Marx K.; 1867, 1885, 1894 (1993), The Capital vol 1-3, Penguin Classics


Merriam-Webster, retrieved 21 April 2012, from http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/pauper

Munck R.; 2005; Globalization and social exclusion: a transformationalist perspective; Kumarian Press;

Bloomfield, USA

SEU, 1998, Bringing Britain together: a national strategy for neighbourhood renewal., Stationery Office

Todman L., 2004, Reflections on Social Exclusion: What is it? How is it different from U.S.

Conceptualizations of Disadvantage? And, why Americans might consider integrating it into U.S. social

policy discourse., retrieved in 22 April 2012, from

http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/cityfutures/papers/webpapers/cityfuturespapers/session2_3/2_3reflections.p

df

Tsakloglou P. & Papadopoulos F., 2002, Aggregate level and determining factors of social exclusion in

twelve European countries., Journal of European Social Policy, vol 12, issue 3, pp 211-225

Watt P. & Jacobs K., 2000, Discourse of social exclusion: An analysis of bringing Britain together: a national

strategy of neighborhood renewal., Housing, Theory and Society, vol 17, issue 1, pp 14-26

Whitty G.; 2001; Education, social class and social exclusion; Journal of Education Policy; vol 16, issue 4,

pp.287-295.

Wolff J.; 2005; Ambivalent consequences of social exclusion for real-existing democracy in Latin-America:

the example of Argentine crisis; Journal of International Relations and Development; vol 8, issue 1, pp.58-

87

Wolff R. D., 2009, Capitalism hits the fan., Olive Branch Press

http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/pauper

http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/cityfutures/papers/webpapers/cityfuturespapers/session2_3/2_3reflections.pdf

http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/cityfutures/papers/webpapers/cityfuturespapers/session2_3/2_3reflections.pdf

Crisis and Social Exclusion: A Critical Discourse Analysis Study in Greece

Documents

Transcript of Crisis and Social Exclusion: A Critical Discourse Analysis Study in Greece