The purpose of this essay is to describe the difference between institutional discourse and the public discourse of Media and the opinion of operators about the phenomenon of refugees and asylum seekers in the "Regimes of Mobility" (Glick Schiller, Salazar, 2013).First, it analyzes the evolution of the institutional discourse on security in recent years through a reflection on some aspects of the Schengen Treaty and the Dublin Convention of 1985 (Dublion I, II and III) .Secondly, it argumentes how the Media elaborate narratives of a public speech that are not always congruent with the institutional one of the Conventions and Regulations. Thirdly, it describes the content analysis of 12 interviews conducted with the linguistic and cultural mediators who are working at the hotspot of Trapani.Crisis points (hotspots) confirms the preventive attempted exclusion of some refugees and asylum seekers. An exclusion from the system of international protection that prevents to asylum seekers to cooperate for the security and control of organizations that are legitimately operating in the EU.For the local Mass Media, refugees and asylum seekers are often assimilated to migrants without work and homeless. This association does not favor a correct and coherent perception of this phenomenon by the local population.In global perception, migrants, without any difference among them, are part of a suffering humanity that it would ideally to help in some cases but, at the same time, they are athreat to public order and tranquility of any citizen who goes in crowded places where it is easier to ask help policemen and usually doesn't stop in dangerous places such as the railway and little lit streets.Finally, are the operators of the hotspot of Trapani who describe the absolute state of harmlessly, need and despair of this suffering humanity: "They are coming” - said one of the interviewed - "like a flock scared, but all together neatly".The paper shows that the institutional discourse, the public discourse of the Media and, finally, the interviews of significant witnesses describe three aspects of phenomenon of refugees/asylum seekers cannot be reconciled in a coherent analysis of «doing Europe» and a unique interpretation.The «Westernization of critical thinking» (Latouche, 1995) is therefore likely to become a real “Western nationalism”, if the speeches from the bottom of cultural operators and linguistic mediators will not massively intervene.
|Titolo della pubblicazione ospite||MIGRATIONS: A GLOBAL WELFARE CHALLENGE. POLICIES, PRACTICES AND CONTEMPORARY VULNERABILITIES|
|Numero di pagine||25|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Published - 2017|