Restricting Contestations: Exclusionary Narratives and the Dominance of Restriction

Abstract

The last chapter examined how the extension of restrictive controls over asylum-seeking-cum-illegal-immigration is effectively naturalised and normalised across both UK and EU political discourse through various exclusionary operations. These operations, along with their effective naturalisations and normalisations are central to understanding the dominance of the exclusionary politics of asylum. This chapter further examines the process by which exclusionary asylum discourse has become dominant in the domestic context. Specifically, it considers how contestations of restrictive controls have been limited or marginalised, how the limitation of contestation is reflected in the increased dominance of restriction across the political spectrum and how the dominance of restriction reflects the dominance of exclusionary narratives of asylum. This entails a wider examination of public, political and popular discourse so that the limited scope of contestation can be further explored. Specifically, the chapter examines public, party political and press discourse in order to explore how the ‘central ground’ of domestic political debate has been occupied by an exclusionary discourse of asylum ‘problem’ or ‘threat’ over recent years. This enables us to explore the ways in which restrictive controls are naturalised through of a range of exclusionary narratives in which asylum is constructed as a ‘problem’ or ‘threat’ to political community.