A Discourse Analysis of UK Black Rights Activism in the Post-war Era

2020年，大西洋两岸爆发了大规模的“黑人的命也是命”抗议活动，批评制度性种族主义和警察暴行。作为回应，学者们一直在思考，西方各州历史上的白人至上是否会影响现代政治。与此同时，颇具影响力的后殖民学者保罗·吉尔罗伊（Paul Gilroy）称自己暂时对土地管理委员会感到“悲观”，黑人女权主义者斯特拉·达齐（Stella Dadzie）表示，该运动让她对20世纪60年代的黑人权利运动有了“似曾似有”的感觉。虽然吉尔罗伊和达齐支持BLM的精神，但他们认为BLM可以从评估以前的黑人权利运动中吸取教训。考虑到战后时期是黑人权利运动的重要时期，我们可以分析他们的言论和策略，以综合有效的方法进行黑人权利运动。基于后殖民理论的理论贡献（以及话语分析，作为理论和方法），该项目将实证地检查档案材料，为战后时期英国黑人权利运动的学术知识做出贡献，青年组织（教育与庆祝，不要安顿，疣和所有剧院）表示有兴趣使用这些发现来教育未来的活动家。尽管课程去殖民化的呼声重新引起了人们对黑人积极分子的兴趣，但教授黑人政治很少成为主流政治教育的必要内容。查尔斯·米尔斯因其对种族自由主义的批判而声名鹊起，他批判了存在于西方平等主义宣言中的隐秘的种族等级制度。为了检验米尔斯的理论，这个项目将研究不同的社会群体如何解释英国制度在再现种族主义中的作用，他们的要求是什么，以及对他们进行的少量研究。确定这些不同的组织如何将黑人和棕色人种的困境带入公共话语，将使我们对他们经历的理解多元化。同样，该项目旨在颂扬那些反抗压迫的知识分子和活动家，他们否认黑人被动地回应殖民当局的叙述，并将黑人抵抗白人统治的悠久历史中的现代黑人权利运动置于背景中。本项目将运用话语分析的方法，探讨战后英国黑人权利运动的对话建构。使用Wetherell和Potter的分析工具，即解释性曲目，该项目将对比概念的构建和解释的差异，以理解为什么黑人权利运动在关键问题上存在差异。研究对象将是黑人身份/社区的建构和对白人种族主义的批判。群体身份是新兴的，通常是通过“起源故事”和存在理由的修辞来定义的。正如他们对“他者”的建构一样，“他者”对“我们”的冒犯以及应该对“他者”做些什么意味着通过否定我们（Chantal, 2005）。在区分论证之后，这种方法提供了一个分析机会，利用上下文和理论资源来分析导致差异的因素，并评估哪些战略选择对现代活动家最有用。

In 2020, large scale Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests were mounted across the transatlantic, criticising institutional racism and police brutality. In response, scholars have been considering whether the historic white supremacy of western states haunts modern politics . At the same time, the influential post-colonial scholar Paul Gilroy described himself as tentatively 'pessimistic' about BLM and the black feminist Stella Dadzie stated the movement gave her 'dejà vu' of the black rights movements in the 1960s . While Gilroy and Dadzie are in support of BLM's ethos, they argue BLM can learn from evaluating previous black rights movements. Considering the post-war period as a significant era for black rights movements, we can analyse their rhetoric and strategies to synthesize effective methods for BLM. Building on the theoretical contributions of post-colonial theories (and discourse analysis, as theory and method , this project will empirically examine archival material to contribute to academic knowledge of British black rights movements in the post-war period youth organisations (Educate & Celebrate, Don't Settle, Warts and All Theatre) have expressed interest in using the findings to educate future activists.Although calls for decolonising the curriculum has seen a renewed interest in black activists, teaching black politics has rarely been essential to mainstream political education. Charles Mills has grown to prominence in his critique of racial liberalism, a critique of the furtive racial hierarchies which have existed in Western egalitarian declarations. To examine Mills' theory, this project will examine how different social groups interpreted the role of British institutions in reproducing racism and what their demands were, and the little research undertaken on them. Determining how these differing organisations brought the plights of black and brown peoples into public discourse will pluralise our understanding of their experiences. Equally, this project seeks to celebrate intellectuals and activists who resisted against oppression to deny narratives of black passivity in response to colonial authority and to contextualise modern black rights movements in the long history of black resistance to white dominance . Using the discourse analytic approach, this project will explore the dialogic construction of black rights movements in the post-war era UK . Using Wetherell and Potter's analytic tool, the interpretive repertoire, this project will contrast differences in the construction and interpretation of concepts to understand why black rights movements differed on key issues. The object of study will both be the construction of black identity/community and critique of white racism. Groups identities are emergent, often defined post-hoc, through the rhetoric of 'origin stories' and raison d'etres. Just as their construction of the 'other', the 'other's' offenses toward the 'us' and what should be done about the 'other' imply we-ness through negation (Chantal, 2005). After differentiating the argumentation, this method provides an analytic opportunity to draw on contextual and theoretical resources to the factors which cause the differences and evaluate which strategic choices are most useful for modern activists.