M + R Text B

Analyse how Text B uses language to create meanings and representations

(AO1 + AO3)

This article is an opinion piece written by Stephen Glover. It seems to be somewhat formal through out but there are times when Stephen may be expressing his views and opinions a bit to harshly. This article appears to be aimed at people in their late 20’s and older due to the nature of the topic, it may even be directed towards anyone who’s eligible to vote in the UK as this is a matter everyone is affected by and should be taking action on depending on what they think.

First off, the title gives a strong impression as to what Stephen Glover’s views are and exactly what he’s trying to get across. The first technique I am able to identify is the mitigating device “Sorry, but” which can also be interpreted as a cloaked imperative. When interpreted as a mitigating device, on it’s own, it makes the text seem a lot softer and doesn’t make it sound as harsh with the message it is really trying to put across. However, when interpreted as a cloaked imperative, with the rest of the text, it is looked to be commanding people into not letting new migrants into the country, showing a strong support for the right wing politics. Continuing on with the title, it is said that “the Left can’t browbeat…”. The auxiliary verb “browbeat” is the act of manipulating/ intimidating someone into doing something by using either stern or abusive language, it also shows us the nature of this article a lot more than the rest of the title. By saying that “the Left” party do this, the author is making the opposing party look as if they’re bullying people into having the same views as them. By saying this, “the Left” party is seen to be an aggressive party that force people into having those certain beliefs instead of letting people think for themselves.

Furthermore, there is a long rhetorical question to start of the entire article; “Have most British people suddenly set aside their reservations about immigration, and are they now strongly in favour of accepting tens of thousands of Syrian and other refugees?”. By using this long rhetorical question, the audience is left to themselves to think of their own answer referring to the rest of the article to help them. By doing this, Glover is putting the readers into a position were they will end up having to read the article to be able to get a full answer to the question. This can make the reader have a lot more trust in what Glover is saying and they may be a lot more willing to accept the ‘right wing’ opinion if they weren’t already.

Continuing on, there are a lot statistics and “surveys” that are being used in Glover’s article despite them possibly not being 100% accurate. When Glover states, “according to recent surveys”, he suggest that the point he is making about other people, “eager to admit tens of thousands of migrants”, is not his own opinion. By doing this, he is showing how he is of the ‘right wing’ side of politics. He also proceeds to say “Some 57%”, the quantifier “some” suggests that this isn’t a known fact and he himself is unsure. By using these statistics he’s trying to get more people to agree with his point of view, they may not be entirely accurate but the reader may still interpret them in a way that makes them support Glover’s ideals more so.

In different parts of the article, Glover’s also seen to be criticizing politicians that are in support of “the left”.This is shown when he refers to David Cameron as “Mr. Cameron”. By doing this it is showing how he’s undermining the Prime Minister’s authorities. Glover also refers to labor party as “the left” on several occasions. Doing this can be seen as a criticism as that’s how the people are being generalized instead of naming people within that party and giving it it’s more sophisticated name; the labor party. Glover is also seen to be under mining David Cameron when he states, “Govern-meant in general, and David Cameron” When he says the two things separately Glover makes David Cameron seem like an unneeded, almost unwanted person within the government, he also makes him seem useless. By doing this, readers may under mine David Cameron as well as they are seeing first hand how other people view him.

Also, in the 17th paragraph Stephen Glover highlights just how much moving migrants are affecting Europe as a whole and not just England. This is mostly shown in the last sentence of the paragraph, “If they are let in, still more will follow, until even Germany, with its falling and ageing population and consequent keen appetite for cheap labor, will be forced to bolt the gate.”. The adjective “keen” shows juat how eager Germany is for more people to enter it’s country due to a decline in the economical side of things, but because of the sheer amount of people pouring into the country, they can’t handle it. Germany will eventually not have enough food to feed its original citizens as well as the new migrants and on top of this, they won’t have enough housing, schools or jobs to provide which would put them into a disaster. Germany is eventually going to have to “bolt the gate” despite their need for more people because of the amount that are trying to migrate. By using Germany as an example, it also shows how much England is going to be struggling. England didn’t have the issues of an “ageing population” or a need for people to be working in “cheap labor” but people are still pouring in and affecting what was already good,  which is going to make things worse instead of better.

In conclusion, Stephen Glover is clearly supporting the right wing of politics and is sharing his views as of why we shouldn’t be letting other people in. He uses several different types of language techniques to support his views and to get other people to support the right wing politics.