Intersectional identity negotiations and images of threat to national integrity: Applying a critical discursive psychological perspective

We are currently living in distressing times, where a sense of community, security and identity are under threat and being re-negotiated. Ongoing wars and terrorism strongly influence the ways in which intersectional distinctions and identities are formed in efforts to achieve a sense of community and security. This doctoral thesis examines the role played by the intersectional construction of identities in the general public’s sense-making of perceived current threats to national integrity in online contexts and how Othered groups themselves respond to them in offline contexts. The thesis comprises four sub-studies, each focusing on a specific threat context (i.e. integration of Muslims in Europe, religious radicalisation and terrorism, the Russo-Ukrainian war and segregation among immigrant youth), all of which have received extensive media coverage. In it, I analyse how the general public forms opinions about and negotiates exclusion and belonging within these discursive contexts. Particular attention is paid to how the processes are shaped by intersectional and dialogical constructions of masculinities and femininities, as well as age and generation. This exploration is particularly pertinent at a time when the role of social media in disseminating opinions and shaping attitudes has significantly increased, thus creating the need to respond and share opinions both in the online environment and in more mundane contexts.

Theoretically and methodologically, the thesis draws from social constructionism and, specifically, from critical discursive psychology (CDP), enhanced by an intersectional lens. The theoretical and methodological framework allows for an examination of the complexities and situated nature of identity processes. They shed light on how the meanings attached to different social categorisations are functionally employed in everyday discourse, on the one hand, and how they serve to reproduce societal power relations on the other.

The analyses demonstrate how people discursively make sense of threats by drawing on intersectional categorisations imbedded into the constructs of Otherness and belonging, which are themselves influenced by broader sociocultural narratives and myths of national communities. The research illuminates how such narratives can be renegotiated, contested and/or affirmed and supported in various ways. Furthermore, the results illustrate how intersectional categorisations are mobilised in everyday discourse to negotiate proper citizenship, protectability and saveability, and moral and legitimate agency, as well as accountability. The insights reveal how the public strives to construct coherent, secure and unambiguous identities in the face of ambiguous threats. The research also illuminates how people achieve this aim by employing the mechanisms of exclusion in everyday talk.

The study makes several significant contributions. First, it contributes to social psychological research on nationhood and gendered identities by elucidating how politicised issues — such as the varied and often ambiguous constructions of threats to the national community — are made sense of in everyday interactions. Furthermore, it reveals how political opinions are formed in online discussions and highlights the solutions proposed by people for issues currently of great political importance in terms of national security and welfare. Second, it underscores the importance of understanding the complex negotiations of belonging, which rely on intersectional distinctions that shape contemporary perceptions of ‘us’ versus the Other. Along with the more established links between nation, race and gender, this study also puts special emphasis on the meaning of age and generation in such constructions. Lastly, the thesis aids in bringing together social psychological and feminist and post-colonial research on intergroup threats, gender, Otherness and national identities.