Türkiye’de Suriyeli karşıtı imza kampanyasının analizi: Change.org örneği

Öz

Bu çalışma, Change.org internet sitesi üzerinden başlatılan çevrimiçi imza kampanyaları aracılığıyla Suriyeli göçmenlere yönelik bireysel eylemleri ve bunların Türkiye’de nefret söylemini ve buna bağlı nefreti teşvik etmekteki rolünü incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu imza metinleri dünya çapındaki en büyük göçmen karşıtı sanal imza kampanyalarını temsil ediyor. Çalışmada verileri toplamak için Change.org web sitesinde Suriyeli(ler) anahtar kelimesi kullanılarak basit bir web araması yapıldı. Bunun sonucunda 154 imza kampanyasına ulaşıldı. Kampanya metinleri, Eleştirel Söylem Analizinin Söylem Tarihsel Yaklaşımı kullanılarak tematik olarak analiz edildi. Belirlenen ana temalar, Suriyeli kimliğinin sanal ortamda damgalanması, göçmenler arasında stereotiplerin yeniden üretilmesi, misafir söylemi ve kültürel ırkçılık olarak saptandı. Bulgular, kampanyalarda Suriyelilerin ekonomik bir yük, potansiyel/hayali düşmanlar, entegre olmaya istekli olmayanlar, vatanlarına ihanet edenler, savaştan kaçanlar ve hatta teröristler olarak tasvir edildiği ayrımcı basmakalıp kategorilerin sıklıkla kullanıldığını göstermektedir. Suriyeli(ler) ifadesi, sosyal bir kimlikten ziyade damgalanmış ve etnikleştirilmiş bir grup kimliği olarak çerçeveleniyor ve esas olarak Suriyeli erkeklerin ahlaksız ve savaştan kaçan kişiler olduğu yansıtılıyor. Etnik kategorizasyon sonucu Suriyeliler damgalanmış bir kimlik algısına tabi tutuluyor. Sonuçlar aynı zamanda bu kimliğin toplumsal cinsiyet algısı üzerinde hegemonik erkeklik kurgusuyla donatıldığını da göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Suriyeli kimliği
• damgalama
• stereotipler
• kültürel ırkçılık
• Change.org

An analysis of anti-Syrian’s signature campaign in Türkiye: The cases from Change.org

Öz

This study aims to examine the individual actions taken against Syrian immigrant through online signature campaigns launched on the Change.org website and their role in inciting hate speech and related crimes in Türkiye. These campaigns represent one of the largest anti-immigrant petitions globally. To collect the data, a basic search was conducted on the Change.org website using the keyword ‘Syrian(s),’ which yielded 154 signature campaigns. Campaign texts were analyzed thematically through the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The main themes identified were the stigmatization of Syrian identity in virtual spaces, the reproduction of stereotypes within migrants, guest discourse, and cultural racism. The findings indicate that the campaigns frequently employ discriminatory stereotypical categories, portraying Syrians as an economic burden, potential/imaginary enemies, not willing to integrate, betrayers of their homeland, fleers from the war, and even terrorists. The expression of Syrian(s) is framed as a stigmatized and ethnicized group identity rather than a social identification, mainly reflecting on Syrian men as being immoral and fleeing from war. The results also show that this identity is equipped with a hegemonic masculinity construct over a gendered perception.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Syrian identity
• stigmatization
• stereotypes
• cultural racism
• Change. org

Kaynakça

1. Akçam, T. (2008). Türk ulusal kimliği üzerine tezler. Tanıl Bora & Murat Gültekin (Eds.), Modern Türkiye’de siyasi düşünce. (3th ed.). İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
2. Akçura, Y. (2015). Üç tarz-siyaset, (E. Kılınç, Trans.). Ötüken Neşriyat. google scholar
3. Anderson, B. (1991). İmagined Community. Verso. google scholar
4. Balibar, E. (1991). Racism and nationalism, (C. Turner, Trans.). Balibar, E. and Wallerstein, I. (Eds.,) Race, nation, class ambigious Identities (p. 243- 291). Verso. google scholar
5. Billig, M. (1995) Banal Nationalism. Sage. google scholar
6. Bozdağ, Ç. (2019). Bottom-up natinalism and discrimination on social media: An analysis of the citizenship debate about refugees in Turkey, European Journal of Cultural Studies, (pp. 1- 19). https://doi. org/10.1177%2F1367549419869354. google scholar
7. Burns, P., Gimpel, G., J. (2000). Economic insecurity, prejudical stereotypes, and public opinion on immigration policy, Political Science Quarterly, 115(2), 201-225. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657900. google scholar
8. Castells, M. (2015). Network of Outrage and Hope: Social Movement in the Internet Age. Polity. google scholar

9. Change.org (2020). Change.org impact report 2018. Retrieved from https://static.change.org/brand-pages/ impact/reports/2019/change.org_Impact_Report_english_FINAL.pdf. google scholar
10. Çomu, T. & Halaiqa, İ. (2015). Web içeriklerinin metin temelli çözümlemesi. M. Binark (Ed.). Yeni medya çalışmalarında araştırma yöntem ve teknikleri (pp. 15- 26). Ayrıntı Yayınları. google scholar
11. De Blasio, E, Marianne, K., Wolf J. S., & Michele S. (2020). The ongoing transformation of the digital public sphere: Basic considerations on a moving target. Media and Communication, 8(4), 1-5. google scholar
12. Datts, M. (2020). Social media, populism, and migration. Media and Communication, 8(4), 73-83. google scholar
13. Deniz, Ç., A., Ekinci, Y & Hülür, B., A. (2016). “Bizim Müstakbel Hep Harap Oldu” Suriyeli Sığınmacıların Gündelik Hayatı Antap-Kilis Çevresi. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları. google scholar
14. Danış, D. & Parla, A. (2009) Nafile soydaşlık: Irak ve Bulgaristan Türkleri örneğinde göçmen, dernek ve devlet. Toplum ve Bilim, (114). 131-158. google scholar
15. Dal, A. & Tokdemir, E. (2021). Siyasi haber alma pratiklerinin Suriyeli göçmenlerle ilgili tehdit algıları üzerindeki etkileri. Marmara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2), 417-439. DOI: 10.14782/marmarasbd.943974. google scholar
16. Erdoğan, M., M. (2020, June 11). Syrians Barometer 2019. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Retrieved from https://www.unhcr.org/tr/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2020/09/SB2019-ENG-04092020.pdf. google scholar
17. Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis. Routledge. google scholar
18. Filibeli, E., T., Ertuna, C. (2021). Sarcasm beyond hate speech: Facebook comments on Syrian refugees in Turkey. International Journal of Communication, 15(2021), 2236- 2259. google scholar Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma Notes on The Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall, Inc. google scholar
19. Güney, Ü. (2022) Syrian refugees between Turkish nationalism and citizenship, Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 20(4). 519-532. DOI: 10.1080/15562948.2021.1950256. google scholar
20. Habermas, J. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society, (T. Burger ve F. Lawrence, Trans.). The MIT Press. google scholar
21. Hagendoom, L. (2010). Ethnic categrization and outgroup exclusion: Cultural values and social stereotypes in the construction of ethnic hierarchies, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 16(1), 26-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014 19870.1993.9993771. google scholar
22. Hart, C. (2015). Critical discourse analysis and cognitive science. New perspectives on immigration discourse. Palgrave Macmillan. google scholar
23. Halpin, D., Vromen, A., Vaughan, M., Raissi, M. (2018). Online petitioning and politics: the development of change. org in Australia, Australian Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2018.1499010. google scholar
24. Huizinga, R., P. & Van Hoven, B. (2020). Hegemonic masculinities after forced migration: Exploring relational performances of Syrian refugee men in The Netherlands, Gender, Place & Culture, DOI: 10.1080/0966369X.2020.1784102. google scholar
25. İnal, K., & Nohl, A., M. (2018) The asylum issue and political mass education in Turkey: How the government imposed the acceptance of Syrian refugees on Turkish citizens?. Euras J Anthropol. 9(1): 1-17. google scholar
26. Karlıdağ, S. & Bulut, S. (2020). Political economy of anti-refugee in Turkey and cyber-racism: thematic analysis of #suriyelilerdefolsun hashtag, in Karlıdağ, Sibel., Bulut, Selda, (Eds), Handbook of Research on the political economy of communications and media. Retrieved from https://www.igi-global.com/book/handbook-research-political-economy-communications/240825. google scholar
27. Koca, B., T. (2016). Syrian refugees in Turkey: from “guests” to “enemies?”, New Perspectives on Turkey, 54, 55- 75. https://doi.org/10.1017/npt.2016.4. google scholar
28. KhosraviNik M & Zia M. (2014) Persian nationalism, identity and anti-Arab sentiments in Iranian Facebook discourses: Critical discourse analysis and social media communication. Journal of Language and Politics 13(4). 755-780. google scholar
29. Kreis, R. (2017). #refugeesnotwelcome: Anti-refugee discourse on Twitter. Discourse & Communication, 11(5), 498-514. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481317714121 google scholar
30. Krzyzanowski, M. (2017). Discursive shifts in ethno-nationalist politics: on politicization and mediatization of the “Refugee Crisis” in Poland. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 16(1-2), 76-96. google scholar
31. Krzyzanowski, M. (2018) “We are a small country that has done enormously lot”: The ‘refugee crisis’ and the hybrid discourse of politicizing immigration in Sweden, Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 16:1-2, 97-117. google scholar
32. Krzyzanowski, M., Wodak, R. (2009). Theorising and analysing social change in central and eastern Europe: The Contribution of Critical Discourse Analysis. DOI:10.1057/9780230594296_2. google scholar
33. Krzyzanowski, M., Ledin, Per. (2017). Uncivility on the web: Populism in/and the borderline discourses of exclusion. Journal of Language and Politics. google scholar Leeuven, T. (2008). Discourse and Practice. Oxford University Press. google scholar
34. Masalha, O. & Baş, Ö. (2023). An analysis of social media content shared by right-wing extremist groups in the United States, the Great Britain and Australia. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, 64, 155-182. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2023-1055875. google scholar
35. Moscovici, S. (1988), Notes towards a description of social representations. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., (18). 211-250. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420180303. google scholar
36. Nagel, J. (2015). Masculanity and nationalism: gender and sexuality in the making of nations, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21(2), 242-269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014198798330007. google scholar
37. Onay-Coker, D. (2019). The representation of Syrian refugees in Turkey: a critical discourse analysis of three newspapers. Continum, 1-17. Doi:10.1080/10304312.2019.1587740. google scholar
38. Özduzen, O., Korkut, U., & Özdüzen, C. (2020). “Refugees are not welcome”: Digital racism, online place-making and the evolving categorization of Syrians in Turkey. New Media & Society. 11(23). https://doi. org/10.1177/1461444820956341 google scholar
39. Özkırımlı, U. (2015). Türkiye’de gayriresmi milliyetçilik ve popüler milliyetçilik. Tanıl Bora & Murat Gültekin (Eds). Modern Türkiye’de siyasi düşünce. İletişim Yayınları google scholar Öztürk, N., & Ayvaz, S. (2018). Sentiment analysis on Twitter: A text mining approach to the Syrian refugee crisis. Telematics and Informatics, 35(1), 136-147. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.10.006. google scholar
40. Papacharissi, Z. (2004). Democracy online: civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New Media&Society, 6(2), 259-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804041444. google scholar
41. Polat, R. K. (2018). Religious solidarity, historical mission and moral superiority: construction of external and internal “others” in AKP’s discourses on Syrian refugees in Turkey, Critical Discourse Studies, 1-17. Doi:10.1080 /17405904.2018.1500925. google scholar
42. Rheindorf, M., & Wodak, R. (2017). Borders, fences and limits—protecting Austria from refugees: Metadiscursive negotiation of meaning in the current refugee crisis. International Journal of Immigration & Refugee Studies. google scholar
43. Reisigl & Wodak (2008). The discourse-historical approach (DHA). R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds). Methods of critical discourse analysis. (87-121). SAGE Publications. google scholar Sancar, S. (2016). Erkeklik: İmkânsız İktidar Ailede, Piyasada ve Sokakta Erkekler. Metis Yayınları. google scholar
44. Saraçoğlu, C., Belangar D. (2019). Loss and xenophobia in the city: contextualizing anti- Syrian sentiments in İzmir, Turkey, Patterns of Prejudice, 363- 383. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322X.2019.1615779. google scholar
45. Schlesinger, P. (2020). After the post-public sphere. Media, Culture & Society. Doi: 016344372094800. doi:10.1177/0163443720948003. google scholar
46. Suerbaum, M. (2018). Defining the other to masculinize oneself: Syrian men’s negotiations of masculinity during displacement in Egypt, signs: Journal of Women in Culture andSociety, 43(3), 665-686. Doi: 10.1086/695303. google scholar
47. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (2001). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Intergroup relations: Essential readings, 94-109. Psychology Press. google scholar
48. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. J. T. Jost & J. Sidanius (Eds.), Key readings in social psychology. Political psychology: Key readings (p. 276-293). Psychology Press. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16. google scholar
49. Tsuda, T. (1998). The stigma of ethnic difference: The structure of prejudice and “discrimination” toward Japan’s new immigrant minority, Journal of Japanese Studies, 24(2), 317. Doi:10.2307/133237. google scholar
50. Ülkü, G. (2022) Syrian refugees between Turkish nationalism and citizenship, Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 20(4). 519-532. DOI: 10.1080/15562948.2021.1950256 google scholar
51. Van Dijk, T. (2018). Discourse and migration. In Z. Barrero and E. Y. Yalaz, (Ed.). Qualitative Research in European Migration Studies, 227-247. Retrieved from http://www.springer.com/series/13502. google scholar
52. Van Dijk, T. A. (1987). Communicating Racism: Ethnic Prejudice in Thought and Talk. Sage Publications. google scholar
53. Valenta, F. (2009). Immigrants’ identity negotiations and coping with stigma in different relational frames, Symbolic Interaction. 32(4), 351-371. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/si.2009.32.4.351. google scholar
54. Wodak, R. (2017) “Strangers in Europe” A discourse-historical approach to the legitimation of immigration control 2015/16. Advancing multimodal and critical discourse studies. 31-49. Taylor & Francis. google scholar
55. Wodak, R. (2001) The discourse historical approach. In Wodak R. and Meyer M. (Eds.) Methods of critical discourse studies, 63-95. Sage. google scholar
56. Yeğen, M. (2004). Citizenship and ethnicity in Turkey. Middle Eastern Studies, 40(6), 51-66. Doi:10.1080/ 0026320042000282874. google scholar
57. Yılmaz, F., Elmas, T., Eröz, B. (2023). Twitter-based analysis of anti-refugee discourses in Türkiye. Discourse & Communication, 17(3), 298-318. https://doi.org/10.1177/17504813231169135. google scholar