Advanced

Har de högerradikala rörelserna rätt till yttrandefrihet? En studie av den offentliga debatten.

Jönsson, Göran LU and Wikberg, Sofie LU (2018) RÄSK02 20181
Department of Sociology of Law
Abstract
In this study an argument analysis was used to examine the public discussions concerning the right-wing radical movements’ freedom of expression. The main purpose is to contribute with academic research to the on-going policy discussions. The study was conducted by analyzing how different debaters in media and the Nordic Resistance Movement (NMR) discuss freedom of expression and its legal limitations for the right-wing radical movements. The argumentation was further examined to understand whether the arguments had legal basis. The empirical material consisted of 15 media articles selected from the news archive Retriever Research, seven articles acquired from Nordfront.se and NMR’s political manifesto. The material was analyzed using... (More)
In this study an argument analysis was used to examine the public discussions concerning the right-wing radical movements’ freedom of expression. The main purpose is to contribute with academic research to the on-going policy discussions. The study was conducted by analyzing how different debaters in media and the Nordic Resistance Movement (NMR) discuss freedom of expression and its legal limitations for the right-wing radical movements. The argumentation was further examined to understand whether the arguments had legal basis. The empirical material consisted of 15 media articles selected from the news archive Retriever Research, seven articles acquired from Nordfront.se and NMR’s political manifesto. The material was analyzed using Habermas’ theory of communicative action to understand the rationality of the argumentation and its legal basis.

The results show that some of the debaters argue that democracy presuppose an extensive freedom of expression while others valued the individuals’ right to protection from harmful speech higher. NMR on the other hand argued that freedom of expression need to be further extended and claimed that their intention was to abolish the law prohibiting hate speech. NMR’s arguments had an absence of legal basis. The analysis indicated that the debaters in mass media upheld the terms for communicative action, but NMR failed to do so. This study further manifests that too extensive regulations of freedom of expression could mean that lifeworlds become colonized by the system’s steering media law. Consequently, “law as a medium” substitutes communication in the lifeworld, resulting in exclusion and distorted communication. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Jönsson, Göran LU and Wikberg, Sofie LU
supervisor
organization
course
RÄSK02 20181
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Argument analysis, communicative action, Freedom of expression, right-wing radicalism, Nordic resistance movement, Argumentationsanalys, högerradikalism, kommunikativt handlande, Nordiska motståndsrörelsen, yttrandefrihet
language
Swedish
id
8948890
date added to LUP
2018-06-25 12:18:19
date last changed
2018-06-25 12:18:19
@misc{8948890,
  abstract     = {In this study an argument analysis was used to examine the public discussions concerning the right-wing radical movements’ freedom of expression. The main purpose is to contribute with academic research to the on-going policy discussions. The study was conducted by analyzing how different debaters in media and the Nordic Resistance Movement (NMR) discuss freedom of expression and its legal limitations for the right-wing radical movements. The argumentation was further examined to understand whether the arguments had legal basis. The empirical material consisted of 15 media articles selected from the news archive Retriever Research, seven articles acquired from Nordfront.se and NMR’s political manifesto. The material was analyzed using Habermas’ theory of communicative action to understand the rationality of the argumentation and its legal basis.

The results show that some of the debaters argue that democracy presuppose an extensive freedom of expression while others valued the individuals’ right to protection from harmful speech higher. NMR on the other hand argued that freedom of expression need to be further extended and claimed that their intention was to abolish the law prohibiting hate speech. NMR’s arguments had an absence of legal basis. The analysis indicated that the debaters in mass media upheld the terms for communicative action, but NMR failed to do so. This study further manifests that too extensive regulations of freedom of expression could mean that lifeworlds become colonized by the system’s steering media law. Consequently, “law as a medium” substitutes communication in the lifeworld, resulting in exclusion and distorted communication.},
  author       = {Jönsson, Göran and Wikberg, Sofie},
  keyword      = {Argument analysis,communicative action,Freedom of expression,right-wing radicalism,Nordic resistance movement,Argumentationsanalys,högerradikalism,kommunikativt handlande,Nordiska motståndsrörelsen,yttrandefrihet},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Har de högerradikala rörelserna rätt till yttrandefrihet? En studie av den offentliga debatten.},
  year         = {2018},
}