Reactionary Rhetoric in Action: An analysis of pReactionary Rhetoric in Action: An analysis of persuasion formulations deployed byersuasion formulations deployed by critics of multiculturalism

Abstract

The article aims at identifying, from a political theory perspective, which are the main rhetorical techniques displayed by the critics of multicultural policies for immigrant population. Some of the most prominent critical texts are examined, using as a framework for analysis the categories developed by Hirschman (1991), who identified three great thesis that encompass, almost exhaustively, the discourse of reactionary sectors in its persuasive dimension: the perversity thesis, the futility thesis and the jeopardy thesis. The analysis shows that the thesis most commonly used by contemporary critics of multiculturalism are the perversity thesis (according to which multicultural policies have a damaging impact on the very situations they intended to solve: they work against immigrants, and produce intercultural conflict), and the jeopardy thesis (according to which these policies pose a mortal threat on some fundamental achievements of democratic societies: the state of law, citizenship, the Welfare State, and, ultimately, Modernity and Western Civilization themselves). Additionally, they are both used together, therefore enhancing their persuasive potential. From the point of view of rhetoric, then, the critics of multiculturalism behave similarly to exponents of reactionary thought who, over the last three centuries, have tried to resist, in their own day, reforms such as the introduction of the universal suffrage or of social protection systems.