History as an argument for the future : A study of Nick Clegg’s and Nigel Farage’s use of history during the United Kingdom’s 2016 EU referendum
(2020) EUHR18 20191European Studies
- Abstract
- This thesis is concerned with history within Nick Clegg’s and Nigel Farage’s political discourse during the six months leading up to the 2016 referendum on the United Kingdom’s membership in the European Union. Using Thematic Analysis combined with Klas-Göran Karlsson’s typology of the use of history, Jörn Rüsen’s typology of historical narrative and drawing on the theoretical framework of historical consciousness, this research paper aims to provide a further understanding of history’s role in political discourse as a legitimisation of arguments for specific expectations of the future.
Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage position themselves as complete opposites on the UK’s membership in the EU – Clegg as a Europhile and Farage as a Eurosceptic.... (More) - This thesis is concerned with history within Nick Clegg’s and Nigel Farage’s political discourse during the six months leading up to the 2016 referendum on the United Kingdom’s membership in the European Union. Using Thematic Analysis combined with Klas-Göran Karlsson’s typology of the use of history, Jörn Rüsen’s typology of historical narrative and drawing on the theoretical framework of historical consciousness, this research paper aims to provide a further understanding of history’s role in political discourse as a legitimisation of arguments for specific expectations of the future.
Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage position themselves as complete opposites on the UK’s membership in the EU – Clegg as a Europhile and Farage as a Eurosceptic. Clegg builds his historical consciousness on a liberalist belief in international institutions and integration as the future. Nigel Farage builds his historical consciousness on a nationalistic pride of British history
and populistic disdain of the political class since the creation of the European Union. Clegg’s historical narratives focus on processes that that span the three temporal forms, such as globalisation and climate change. His arguments build on his generation’s responsibility to give future generations the best prospects of facing these challenges which can only be done through
increased international integration. Farage uses history more extensively and instead focuses on the responsibility of his generation to previous generations – mainly those who fought in the two world wars of the 20th century – to pass on the legacy of democracy and peacekeeping in Europe to future generations which can only be achieved by leaving the undemocratic European Union, as he sees it.
In both politicians’ discourse, history serves the purpose of legitimising their view of present situations and their expectations on the future. History is selectively chosen and aligned to their ideological beliefs in order to create a meaningful connection between the past, the present and
the future in order to convince voters of the legitimacy of their arguments. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9006976
- author
- Bertilsson, Joel LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- EUHR18 20191
- year
- 2020
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Nigel Farage, Nick Clegg, Euroscepticism, UK, Brexit, use of history, European Studies, political discourse, historical consciousness, Thematic Analysis
- language
- English
- id
- 9006976
- date added to LUP
- 2022-01-11 13:28:13
- date last changed
- 2022-01-11 13:28:13
@misc{9006976,
abstract = {{This thesis is concerned with history within Nick Clegg’s and Nigel Farage’s political discourse during the six months leading up to the 2016 referendum on the United Kingdom’s membership in the European Union. Using Thematic Analysis combined with Klas-Göran Karlsson’s typology of the use of history, Jörn Rüsen’s typology of historical narrative and drawing on the theoretical framework of historical consciousness, this research paper aims to provide a further understanding of history’s role in political discourse as a legitimisation of arguments for specific expectations of the future.
Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage position themselves as complete opposites on the UK’s membership in the EU – Clegg as a Europhile and Farage as a Eurosceptic. Clegg builds his historical consciousness on a liberalist belief in international institutions and integration as the future. Nigel Farage builds his historical consciousness on a nationalistic pride of British history
and populistic disdain of the political class since the creation of the European Union. Clegg’s historical narratives focus on processes that that span the three temporal forms, such as globalisation and climate change. His arguments build on his generation’s responsibility to give future generations the best prospects of facing these challenges which can only be done through
increased international integration. Farage uses history more extensively and instead focuses on the responsibility of his generation to previous generations – mainly those who fought in the two world wars of the 20th century – to pass on the legacy of democracy and peacekeeping in Europe to future generations which can only be achieved by leaving the undemocratic European Union, as he sees it.
In both politicians’ discourse, history serves the purpose of legitimising their view of present situations and their expectations on the future. History is selectively chosen and aligned to their ideological beliefs in order to create a meaningful connection between the past, the present and
the future in order to convince voters of the legitimacy of their arguments.}},
author = {{Bertilsson, Joel}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{History as an argument for the future : A study of Nick Clegg’s and Nigel Farage’s use of history during the United Kingdom’s 2016 EU referendum}},
year = {{2020}},
}