A Discourse-Historical Analysis of David Cameron's
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RSCAS 2016/36 Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Global Governance Programme-224 “We have the character of an island nation” A discourse-historical analysis of David Cameron’s “Bloomberg Speech” on the European Union Ruth Wodak European University Institute Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Global Governance Programme “We have the character of an island nation”. A discourse- historical analysis of David Cameron’s “Bloomberg Speech” on the European Union Ruth Wodak EUI Working Paper RSCAS 2016/36 This text may be downloaded only for personal research purposes. Additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copies or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper, or other series, the year and the publisher. ISSN 1028-3625 © Ruth Wodak, 2016 Printed in Italy, July 2016 European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy www.eui.eu/RSCAS/Publications/ www.eui.eu cadmus.eui.eu Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies The Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies (RSCAS), created in 1992 and directed by Professor Brigid Laffan, aims to develop inter-disciplinary and comparative research on the major issues facing the process of European integration, European societies and Europe’s place in 21st century global politics. The Centre is home to a large post-doctoral programme and hosts major research programmes, projects and data sets, in addition to a range of working groups and ad hoc initiatives. The research agenda is organised around a set of core themes and is continuously evolving, reflecting the changing agenda of European integration, the expanding membership of the European Union, developments in Europe’s neighbourhood and the wider world. Details of the research of the Centre can be found on: http://www.eui.eu/RSCAS/Research/ Research publications take the form of Working Papers, Policy Papers, and e-books. Most of these are also available on the RSCAS website: http://www.eui.eu/RSCAS/Publications/ The EUI and the RSCAS are not responsible for the opinions expressed by the author(s). The Global Governance Programme at the EUI The Global Governance Programme is one of the flagship programmes of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute (EUI). It aims to: build a community of outstanding professors and scholars, produce high quality research and, engage with the world of practice through policy dialogue. At the Global Governance Programme, established and early career scholars research, write on and discuss, within and beyond academia, issues of global governance, focussing on four broad and interdisciplinary areas: European, Transnational and Global Governance; Global Economics; Europe in the World; and Cultural Pluralism. The Programme also aims to contribute to the fostering of present and future generations of policy and decision makers through its unique executive training programme, the Academy of Global Governance, where theory and “real world” experience meet. At the Academy, executives, policy makers, diplomats, officials, private sector professionals and academics, have the opportunity to meet, share views and debate with leading academics, top-level officials, heads of international organisations and senior executives, on topical issues relating to governance. For more information: http://globalgovernanceprogramme.eui.eu Abstract More than three years have passed since former British Prime Minister David Cameron delivered a much acknowledged and controversial speech on 23rd January 2013, in respect to the British relationship with the European Union. Europe and the European Union (EU) are now, of course, facing different challenges than three years ago. The contrasting national and transnational identities which emerge in the so-called Bloomberg Speech (BS) imply a nationalistic body politics which constructs the United Kingdom and England as separate entities contrasted to “the continent”, i.e. Europe. Hence, BS oscillates between two extremes, in its attempt to alternatively observe maximum distance to the EU and some proximity to its economic policies. Moreover, both the topoi of urgency and threat/danger are appealed to – warning the EU that it would suffer under the loss of the United Kingdom; but also warning British voters that Brexit would damage their future and prosperity. This speech can be perceived as the starting point for the referendum on June 23rd, 2016 – which resulted in a tiny majority wanting to leave the EU (‘Brexit’). Of course, there is no clear causal connection between BS and Brexit; but many arguments of the “remain and leave campaigns” can be traced to the BS; as well as the huge ambivalence framing Cameron’s position towards the EU. Keywords British EU-Referendum, rhetoric, Bloomberg Speech; Brexit; argumentation analysis; discourse- historical analysis; body politics; identity politics “[A] national culture is a discourse – a way of constructing meanings which influences and organises both our actions and our conception of ourselves [...]. National cultures construct identities by producing meanings about ‘the nation’ with which we can identify; these are contained in the stories which are told about it, memories which connect its present with its past, and images which are constructed of it.” (Stuart Hall 1996, 613) 1. Introduction* At the time of writing this chapter, more than three years have passed since David Cameron’s so- called “Bloomberg Speech” (BS) delivered on 23rd January 2013; Europe and the European Union (EU) are now, of course, facing different challenges than three years ago1. Indeed, it seems as if the EU is currently being overwhelmed by a range of crises it is widely perceived as being unable to cope with: the financial crisis since 2008, the Eurozone crisis since 2010, the crisis in the Ukraine since 2014, the “Greek crisis” and the “refugee crisis” both since 2015. Although the EU has always been struck by unpredictable new events which have led to huge upheavals (e.g., Triandafyllidou et al. 2009), the years 2015 and 2016 may mark a culmination of global insecurities and uncertainties. The rise of right-wing and left-wing populist as well as extremist parties indicates that European citizens across the EU are searching for the new answers promised by these parties and movements (e.g., Grabbe 2014; Wehling et al. 2015; Wodak 2015, 2016). Nevertheless, Cameron’s proposals in his speech of 2013 remained unchanged in respect to the referendum in the United Kingdom, held on 23 June 2016. Thus, in the speech, as will be outlined below, British citizens are called to vote either to remain in an unstable and fragile EU, under the new agreements negotiated by the British Prime Minister in the early spring of 2016; or to opt out of the EU, thus choosing “Brexit”, which would imply a difficult transition lasting at least two years, with unpredictable economic and social outcomes (Mayer 2016; Müller 2016; Smith 2016; Weale 2016). Cameron’s case is based on the premise that since the EU has succeeded in securing peace in the post WWII era (one of the constitutive reasons for founding the EU in the eyes of the “founding fathers”; e.g. Boukala 2013; Krzyżanowski 2010; Weiss 2002; Wodak & Weiss 2007), it now has to secure prosperity. Hence, the foremost priority – as defined by Cameron – would be to establish the economic competitiveness of the EU in the “global race to the top” (Charteris-Black 2014). A neo- liberal agenda is thus promoted, in an EU composed of powerful nation states. Social and legal integration of the 28 member states, usually framed by the slogan “an ever closer Union” is perceived – by Cameron – as less important than their economic relationships and ties. This juxtaposition is, of course, not new but has overshadowed European and Eurosceptic debates for a long time (Alexandre- Collier 2016; Daddow 2015; Milizia 2014; Sol & Gifford 2015; Todd 2014; Wodak & Boukala 2014, 2015). In the following, I will focus primarily on the argumentation for an economic union as laid out in Cameron’s Bloomberg Speech and will have to neglect the developments since 2013 (e.g., Dommett 2015; Lynch 2015; Schreiweis 2013; Ungureanu 2013) as well as a detailed discussion of the British political and party contexts since the 1950s (e.g., d’Ancona 2016; Peet 2016; Todd 2014). Indeed, d’Ancona summarises his narrative of the rise of the “Brexit” idea and campaign as follows while tracing the arguments to post-Thatcher governments, and especially to a rejection of former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s pro-European stance: * I would like to thank the Robert Schuman Center, European University (Florence), for inviting me as a Distinguished Schuman Fellow in the spring of 2016. This inspiring period supported me during the writing of this chapter in many important ways. 1 See Charteris-Black 2014 and Wodak & Boukala 2015 for a detailed analysis of the BS along a range of rhetorical, pragmatic, functional, stylistic and argumentative dimensions; these analyses, however, relate to other research questions. I am very grateful to Salomi Boukala, John Heywood, Brigid Laffan, Sabine Lehner, and Markus Rheindorf for important comments and suggestions. Of course, I am solely responsible for the final version of this chapter. 1 Ruth Wodak “In the history of ideas, context is all. In the last days of this contest [before the referendum on June 23, 2016; RW], the leave campaign is concentrating remorselessly upon immigration – its prime doorstep issue. But there is a broader setting, too: the embrace of Brexit by a significant tranche of the political class reflects despair with the EU, matched, more interestingly, by a faith in Britain’s ability to go it alone and a conviction that the 21st century will favour nimble states over cumbersome bureaucratic blocs. Those who seek such a role for this country no longer define Britain’s place in the world by its presence at all its top tables, from the UN Security Council to the G8 to the EU itself.