The refugee crisis, the euro crisis, the banking crisis. A crisis is not a neutral concept. It’s an emotional term, and dubbing a phenomenon a crisis has consequences.

During the past few years, the western world has gone from one crisis to the next. The increased talk of crises is partially linked to the rise of populism, says Mikko Salmela, university researcher of social and moral philosophy at the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki.

Populist rhetoric generates and maintains crises by dubbing a systemic disturbance a crisis.  Such disturbances can occur when border control fails, the economy takes an unexpected turn, or structural changes in industry or society in general result in a rise in unemployment.

Calling a disturbance a crisis justifies radical action, which is what populist parties often propose in such situations, explains Salmela.

When individual disturbances and crises are placed in a larger context and linked to other crises, an even greater threat seems to emerge. For example, if terrorist attacks in New York, London and Madrid are linked to each other, they could be discussed as a major security crisis.

 “Donald Trump, the President of the United States, employs similar rhetoric. In his speeches, globalisation, problems at the border with Mexico, crime, the cost of healthcare and taxation form a unified threat to the nation. This is essentially emotional manipulation. By frightening the public, he makes the situation feel like a crisis,” says Salmela.

During unexpected events – crises – such as natural disasters or nuclear accidents, several institutions will react and try to resolve the situation. In this way, crises can bring groups of people together.

Meanwhile, populist crisis rhetoric aims to make the crisis seem permanent and generate an us-and-them dynamic. A defining element of populist crisis rhetoric is that it construes a setting of “the people”, who are threatened by the crisis, and the ones who are responsible for it.

 “By ascribing blame, populist parties create adversarial positions.”

In populist speeches, the guilty party is often the elite, which may include politicians, journalists or researchers.

The setting is not always identical. In Spain and Greece, left-wing populists blamed the 2010 debt crisis on national and international officials who were demanding strict austerity policies and severe cuts to public services.

 “Anyone harmed by the austerity measures was considered a member of the people, no matter what their ethnic or linguistic background,” Salmela explains. In this case, “the people” was defined in more heterogeneous terms than in populist movements in general.

Salmela is an emotion researcher, who investigates which human emotions can make populist rhetoric particularly effective. Such emotions include fear and shame.

 “Populists try to appeal to people’s anxieties. Populists can easily seize upon any uncertainty surrounding the economy or national security.”

According to Salmela, individualistic westerners find it difficult to handle shame when it targets us personally. We do not want to be personally responsible for failures, which makes it easier to blame others. An external scapegoat promotes unity in the group.

A crisis is an emergency which can be used to justify legislative or political changes.

Östen Wahlbeck, university lecturer in sociology at the Swedish School of Social Science, points to the so-called refugee crisis, a term that emerged in 2015. The situation was, and still is, discussed as a “refugee crisis”, as if the systemic disturbance had been that a large number of refugees arrived in Europe in a short amount of time.

 “The real systemic disturbance was that the politics of the European Union fell short. Previously agreed rules of conduct failed,” says Wahlbeck.

The system of receiving and registering refugees in southern Europe failed, and while the countries of southern Europe struggled with their debt problems, other EU countries failed to support them.

Through a major European research project, Wahlbeck is investigating the political solutions that were reached in Finland just before the so-called refugee crisis.

 “Instead of talking about the original crisis, meaning the problems with intra-EU cooperation, the conversation has been at the national level. This is to say that the refugee situation has been tackled as a national problem, with national solutions to stop and control the entry of refugees into the country.”

The transfer of the discussion from a European problem to a series of national ones may be specifically due to political agendas which stand to benefit from a fear-mongering crisis rhetoric.

Mikko Salmela cites the presidential campaign of Laura Huhtasaari (of the Finns party) in the 2018 elections as an example. Huhtasaari’s campaign hinged on a “close the borders” crisis rhetoric, even though the number of refugees entering Finland plummeted after 2015.

 “Finnish politicians proposed typically simple solutions, such as closing the borders or deporting everyone. Huhtasaari and her compatriots are trying to maintain this rhetoric, even though the crisis is over,” says Salmela.

In addition to the rise of populism, crisis rhetoric and awareness have been boosted by the increased impact of the media in politics and society.

Systemic disturbances have happened before, but lately it has become more common to talk about such situations as crises. According to Salmela, the timespan and dynamics of the crises may also have changed with the increased media attention.

 “The duration of individual crises is shorter, and the media’s logic enhances the need to present new problems as crises,” he says.

In addition to social media, traditional news outlets play a major role in spreading crisis rhetoric and perpetuating the vicious circle of right-wing populism, as Austrian populism researcher Ruth Wodak has said. By making outrageous claims or statements that flout generally accepted values or norms, populists try to be newsworthy, and the media reports on them, as scandals are interesting and increase sales.

According to Salmela, the proliferation of crisis narratives requires resistance to temper them.

Over the past few years, several media companies have established fact-checking units, tasked with scrutinising the factual basis of claims made by politicians before they are published. Politicians may themselves also take steps to alleviate the sense of crisis.

 “This is what German Chancellor Angela Merkel did when she said ‘Wir schaffen das’, or ‘we will survive this’, during the refugee situation of 2015,” says Salmela.

It may be impossible to fully avoid crisis rhetoric, but Salmela would prefer to address the systemic disturbances that underlie various crises.
-

•  “The resistance to populism must be able to establish that the situation is a systemic disturbance which is being addressed, as difficult as this may be.”

• "La resistencia al populismo debe poder establecer que la situación es una perturbación sistémica que se está abordando, 

  por más difícil que sea".

https://www.helsinki.fi/en/news/society-economy/a-crisis-begins-when-we-call-it-a-crisis?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=kv_tiedeuutiset_rahoittajat_kriisi 

Crisis rhet­oric is ad­versarial

Durante eventos inesperados - crisis - como desastres naturales o accidentes nucleares, varias instituciones reaccionarán y tratarán de resolver la situación. De esta manera, las crisis pueden unir a grupos de personas.

Mientras tanto, la retórica de crisis populista busca hacer que la crisis parezca permanente y generar una dinámica de "nosotros y ellos". Un elemento definitorio de la retórica de la crisis populista es que interpreta un escenario de "la gente", que está amenazada por la crisis, y los que son responsables de ella.

 "Al atribuir la culpa, los partidos populistas crean posiciones adversas".

En los discursos populistas, el culpable suele ser la élite, que puede incluir políticos, periodistas o investigadores.

La configuración no siempre es idéntica. En España y Grecia, los populistas de izquierda culparon la crisis de la deuda de 2010 a los funcionarios nacionales e internacionales que exigían políticas estrictas de austeridad y severos recortes a los servicios públicos.

 "Cualquier persona perjudicada por las medidas de austeridad era considerada un miembro de la gente, sin importar su origen étnico o lingüístico", explica Salmela. En este caso, "la gente" se definió en términos más heterogéneos que en los movimientos populistas en general.

Salmela es una investigadora de las emociones, que investiga qué emociones humanas pueden hacer que la retórica populista sea particularmente efectiva. Tales emociones incluyen miedo y vergüenza.

 "Los populistas intentan apelar a las ansiedades de las personas. Los populistas pueden aprovechar fácilmente cualquier incertidumbre que rodee a la economía o la seguridad nacional ".

Según Salmela, los occidentales individualistas encuentran difícil manejar la vergüenza cuando nos ataca personalmente. No queremos ser personalmente responsables de los fracasos, lo que hace que sea más fácil culpar a los demás. Un chivo expiatorio externo promueve la unidad en el grupo.

A European crisis be­comes a na­tional one

Una crisis es una emergencia que puede usarse para justificar cambios legislativos o políticos.

Östen Wahlbeck, profesor universitario de sociología en la Escuela Sueca de Ciencias Sociales, señala la llamada crisis de refugiados, un término que surgió en 2015. La situación se discutió, y todavía se debate, como una "crisis de refugiados",

 como si el la perturbación sistémica había sido que un gran número de refugiados llegó a Europa en un corto período de tiempo.

 

Crisis rhet­oric must not go un­op­posed

Además del aumento del populismo, la retórica de la crisis y la toma de conciencia se han visto impulsadas por el mayor impacto de los medios en la política y la sociedad.Las alteraciones sistémicas han sucedido antes, pero últimamente se ha vuelto más común hablar de situaciones como las crisis. Según Salmela, el período de tiempo y la dinámica de las crisis también pueden haber cambiado con la creciente atención de los medios.

 "La duración de las crisis individuales es más corta, y la lógica de los medios mejora la necesidad de presentar nuevos problemas como crisis", dice.Además de las redes sociales, los medios de comunicación tradicionales desempeñan un papel importante en la difusión de la retórica de crisis y en la perpetuación del círculo vicioso del populismo de derecha, como ha dicho la investigadora del populismo austríaco Ruth Wodak. Al hacer afirmaciones extravagantes o declaraciones que burlan valores o normas generalmente aceptados, los populistas intentan ser noticiosos, y los medios informan sobre ellos, ya que los escándalos son interesantes y aumentan las ventas.Según Salmela, la proliferación de narrativas de crisis requiere resistencia para atemperarlas.En los últimos años, varias empresas de medios de comunicación han establecido unidades de verificación de hechos, encargadas de analizar la base fáctica de las declaraciones formuladas por los políticos antes de su publicación. Los políticos también pueden tomar medidas para aliviar la sensación de crisis.

 "Esto es lo que hizo la canciller alemana Angela Merkel cuando dijo 'Wir schaffen das', o 'sobreviviremos a esto', durante la situación de los refugiados de 2015", dice Salmela.Puede ser imposible evitar completamente la retórica de crisis, pero Salmela preferiría abordar las perturbaciones sistémicas que subyacen a varias crisis.