This is a qualitative text-analytic study of the discursive representations of anti-immigration positions in Scandinavian press 1970–2016. Our study shows how immigration critics textually are estranged and constituted as an other throughout the period. We examine how three main categories of immigration critics are estranged: extremists, populist politicians, and critical citizens. Within these categories, we find manifest estrangement through demonizing and ridiculing. We call this category of rhetorical work for conspicuous estrangement. However, we also find more subtle hints of illegitimacy or alienation in the portrayals. We call this category of rhetorical work of marginalization for inconspicuous estrangement. While other studies have argued that such forms of soft oppression may prepare the ground for forms of hard oppression and increased marginalizing, our study demonstrates that representations instead move toward legitimation, indicating a normalization of populist politics and anti-immigration attitudes in Scandinavia. Our findings thus support research arguing that a mainstreaming of the radical right has occurred.

这是对1970-2016年斯堪的纳维亚媒体中反移民立场的论断表示的定性文本分析研究。我们的研究显示了如何移民的批评文字上的疏远，构成为一个其他整个期间。我们研究了如何区分三类主要的移民批评家：极端主义者，民粹主义政治家和重要公民。在这些类别中，我们通过妖魔化和嘲笑发现明显的疏远。我们称这类修辞作品为明显的疏远。但是，在刻画中，我们还发现了一些非法或疏远的微妙暗示。我们称这类边缘化的修辞学为不显眼的疏离。尽管其他研究认为，这种形式的软压迫可能会为硬压迫和边缘化的加剧打下基础，但我们的研究表明，代议制正朝着合法化方向发展，这表明斯堪的那维亚的民粹主义政治和反移民态度已经正常化。因此，我们的发现支持了关于将基本权利纳入主流的研究。