This paper examines the ways in which the group of people now known as the Windrush generation, who moved to the UK in the period 1948–1971, have been represented in public discourse. This group has been adversely affected by the current ‘hostile environment’ policy in the UK regarding immigration. As I show, in the ensuing and highly critical debate, the government repeatedly positioned them as ‘good’ migrants and placed them in a binary opposition with ‘undesirable’ migrants, who they cite as (...) the intended target of their policy. Using diachronic corpora of parliamentary debates and national media, I compare this contemporary rhetoric with (a) Windrush representations in the 1940s and 1950s, and (b) contemporary representation of those the government constructs as unwanted migrants. Taking metaphor as a key for the comparison I show that there is very little continuity or overlap in how the Windrush migrants were discussed at the time of their arrival and in the current period. Instead, there is a much greater proximity in the past representations of the Windrush migrants and the current representations of ‘undesirable’ migrants. This mismatch in actual and perceived representation at the time of arrival indicates how nostalgia functions in migration discourses, even facilitating anti-immigration arguments. (shrink)

This paper addresses the ways in which asylum seekers in the UK manage making complaints about their host country. The authors demonstrate that asylum seekers have fled dangerous situations in their countries of origin and then can face difficulties and hostility in the UK. A discursive psychological approach is used to assess the ways in which asylum seekers made complaints regarding their treatment. Interviews were conducted in a refugee centre in the Midlands with nine asylum seekers and were transcribed for (...) a discourse analysis to be conducted. Analysis of the data showed that participants criticised the asylum system for being unfair. They also made claims about not being happy in the UK, but did so in ways that downgraded the problem so as to manage the possible dilemma of appearing ungrateful and undermining their reasons for claiming asylum. The problems associated with these strategies are discussed. (shrink)

The ‘refugee crisis’ in Europe has drawn attention to the reasons why people risk desperate journeys to seek safety. However, less research has focussed on what happens to those on the move once th...

Analysis of contemporary political discourse reveals that the topics of ‘immigration’ and ‘asylum’, historically the preserve of extreme right-wing politics, have increasingly entered more centrist conservative discourse. Meanwhile, it is also argued that elite political discourse on ethnic affairs cuts across traditional political divides. Thus, contemporary left-wing discourses also require scrutiny. The current article examines one example of elite discourse from liberal media commentary, which addresses ideological concerns regarding diversity, immigration and the welfare state in Britain. Adopting a discursive analytic (...) approach, three predominant discursive themes are identified in the text, which we term: ‘Unnatural Sharing’, ‘Diversity as Ethnic Difference’ and ‘Immigrant-Minorities Alchemy’. Through careful examination of these themes, we show how, via their engagement, the text subtly yet persuasively builds a version of ‘reality’ inimical to progressive ideals. (shrink)