Unveiling the Ideological Construction of the 2004 Irish Citizenship Referendum: A Critical Dis-course Analytical Approach

Translocations:
The Irish Migration, Race and Social Transformation Review
http://www.translocations.ie

Unveiling the Ideological Construction of the 2004
Irish Citizenship Referendum: A Critical Dis-
course Analytical Approach
Silvia Brandi

Department of Applied Social Studies, University College Cork
(e-mail: silbrandi@eircom.net)

Abstract
This article offers a critical analysis of the 2004 Irish Citizenship Referendum,
which took place in Ireland in June 2004. Specifically, it presents a Critical
Discourse Analytical approach to a small number of texts issued by the
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell throughout
2004 in support of the referendum and the subsequent new legislation. On the
basis of the analysis of these pronouncements it focuses on the ideological
construction of the referendum by the Irish government. Furthermore, it
shows evidence of a strategic ideological manipulation and reframing of
events taking place throughout the texts, by resorting to the recurrent use of
specific discursive strategies. The demonisation of ‘non-national’ pregnant
mothers and the polarisation of immigrants into two distinct categories of
good deserving and bad undeserving ones emerge with clear evidence from
the analysed texts. Hence, the impact of McDowell's pronouncements in the
reproduction and reinforcement of popular racism is stressed. Moreover, the
referendum is further contextualised within a broader scenario, in which it is
seen to add another step towards the completion of ‘Fortress Europe’ and the
selective exclusion of migrants from the walls of our rich world.

Keywords: critical discourse analysis, citizenship, ideology, racism, immigra-
tion, 'Fortress Europe'.

Introduction

This article attempts to attract readers' attention to the often underestimated
power of discourses. Indeed, it argues that discourses are not only words, but
they hugely impact on society and, particularly, on people's lives both
symbolically and materially. It does so by considering the 2004 Irish Citizen-

© 2007 Brandi                      Translocations | Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 26-47

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

ship Referendum1 and the overwhelming victory of the ‘yes vote’ (79.8 per
cent). It explores the reasons behind such a generalised consensus on restrict-
ing citizenship rights for children of foreigners in Ireland by considering what
sorts of arguments may have contributed to the victory of the ‘yes’ vote.
Indeed, by looking into the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform’s
pronouncements on the issue, it asks whether this is a case of institutional
racism combined with neo-liberal principles. Specifically, it suggests that this
event was constructed ideologically by the Fianna Fail/Progressive Democ-
rats government with the tacit complicity of the main opposition party, Fine
Gael.

This paper is organised into five sections. Firstly, it outlines the theoretical
framework according to which the research was conducted. It introduces the
approach of Critical Discourse Analysis, its main tenets, concepts and meth-
ods. In particular, it stresses the importance of the notion of ideology and its
strong interconnections with power and discourses. Secondly, it presents the
data on which this study is based and highlights the method followed
throughout the analysis (a dual focus on specific social constructions and
discursive strategies). A table is included, which eases the identification of the
texts in the following discussion of the research findings. The third section
gives a summary of the key arguments that emerged from the study. The
fourth conclusive section offers some answers to the questions formulated at
the outset of the article. Moreover, the referendum is further contextualised
within the broader scenario of ‘Fortress Europe’ and the selective exclusion of
migrants from the walls of our rich world. Finally, the fifth section contains
some recommendations regarding both a reopening of the debate on citizen-
ship legislation and the importance of the methodological perspective
embraced in this study.

This study is complementary to and in line with a recent academic article
(Crowley et al. 2006), which highlights the paradoxes lying at the core of the
concept of ‘common sense citizenship’ promoted through the FF/PD gov-
ernment’s propaganda for the ‘Yes vote’. The aforementioned paper argued
that the concept of common sense citizenship was ‘employed in such a way as
to fix and essentialise Irishness, thus highlighting the threatening other, and
to construct immigrants as suspect, untrustworthy and deserving of Ireland’s
hospitality only in limited, prescribed ways or not at all’ (Crowley et al. 2006:
2). This conclusion was reached by considering six paradoxes2 created by the
political narrative of common sense citizenship.

1 According to a research conducted by Harris (2004) on turnout trends, the Citizenship
Referendum constituted one of the main factors for an increase in electoral participation at the
2004 Irish elections. In this occasion, it seems that there was an incredible rise in turnout
levels even in those working class areas where the Sinn Fein factor was not relevant at all.
2 The first paradox is between the representation of Ireland as homogenous and monocutural

against its more complex multicultural history and the diversity and fluidity inherent to the
essence of Irishness. The second paradox consists in the striking contradiction between
current restrictive Irish immigration policies and its past –and present- experience of

Translocations                                27               Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

A valuable contribution on the role played by the Irish ‘reputable’ press in
constructing an inadequate debate on the issue of Irish citizenship has been
made by Breen et al. (2006). In an article titled ‘Citizens, Loopholes and
Maternity Tourists’: Media Frames in the Citizenship Referendum’ these
authors analyse the media frames resorted to by two ‘respectable’ Irish
broadsheets –the Irish Times and the Sunday Tribune- in relation to the afore-
mentioned referendum. In this regard they suggest that these two newspapers
inadvertently contributed to the dissemination and perpetuation of an
inadequate debate on the issues at stake. In fact, despite their stated editorial
positions in favour of the ‘no’ vote and of a more profound debate on Irish
citizenship, they failed to challenge the specific terms and concepts broadly
used and dictated by government politicians and TDs (Breen et al. 2006: 65-
70).

The Irish Citizenship Referendum has also been considered by Lentin and
McVeigh in a broader study regarding recent developments in the dynamics
of racism and anti-racism in highly globalised twenty-first century Ireland. In
After Optimism? Ireland, Racism and Globalisation (2006) these authors consider
the referendum as a landmark event in the ongoing transformation of Ireland
from a racial state to a racist state, in which citizens are differentiated from
non-citizens (Lentin/McVeigh 2006: 55). This study also offers an insight into
the gendered dimension of McDowell’s demonisation of ‘non-national’
pregnant women.

Adherence to the Critical Discourse Analytical paradigm

This study is based on documentary material and adheres to a discursive
analytical approach. As pointed out by Kroger and Wood (2000: x), discourse
analysis is not just a method but also a perspective on the nature of language
and its relationship to the central issues of social science. Discourse is consid-
ered as text and talk in their social dimensions, hence as a social practice, in
contrast to the study of language as an abstract entity; secondly, it is held as a
central and constitutive feature of social life and not just a medium of com-
munication (Kroger and Wood 2000: 4). CDA is a relatively young discipline,

emigration (e.g. consider, for example, the Irish government’s current support for the
thousands of Irish ‘illegal’ immigrants in the US). The third paradox highlights the contrast
between advantages and disadvantages for immigrants into Ireland, showing that this
country has benefited considerably from foreign labour, contrarily to a hostile rhetoric. The
forth one shows how the Irish people have been historically victims of racism, while being
contemporarily perpetrators of discriminatory practices against Others within and outside
Ireland. The fifth paradox considers the contradiction between the overwhelming majority of
‘white’ immigration into Ireland and the construction of immigrants as prevalently ‘black’
(with all the racist black stereotyping) in political discourses. Finally, the sixth paradox
highlights the contradictory coexistence of both institutional racism and anti-racism in Irish
public policies.

Translocations                               28               Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

founded in Britain and Australia in the 1980s (Slembrouck 2001: 34). It takes a
multidisciplinary approach, as its sources lie within linguistics, philosophy,
psychology and social science (Stenvoll 2002: 145). It has roots in Critical
Linguistics, a branch of Discourse Analysis. On the one hand, it reveals the
analyst's commitment to uncover ideological naturalisation that occurs in
discourses, and is often concealed by common sense; the task is to reveal how
apparently universal beliefs represent and serve specific groups' interests and
power. On the other hand, this attribute signifies the departure from purely
descriptive modes of discourse analysis, in favour of discursive interpretation,
explanation, socio-political contextualisation and, thus, the recognition of the
crucial role played by deeper social forces. Moreover, in accordance with the
goals of the critical perspective and CDA's roots in the political left, this
analytical approach is characterised by an emancipatory programme of
empowerment and elimination of social inequality (Slembrouck 2001: 35).
Central notions in CDA are power, dominance, hegemony, ideology, class,
gender, 'race', discrimination, interests, reproduction, social structures,
institutions and social order (Van Dijk 2001: 354).

Ideology is a crucial notion both within the CDA approach and in this study.
As this concept has been at the centre of an ongoing academic debate since its
introduction in the sociological and political vocabulary, a brief explanation of
its use in this article will follow. Ideology is considered as a key interpretative
concept, which sheds light on the affirmation of cultural and political hegem-
ony in society, and thus not only on phenomena of domination and oppres-
sion, but also on the possibility of resistance and liberation. Hence, I opt for a
critical but not exclusively pejorative and negative interpretation of ideology.
Thompson's general definition of ‘meaning in the service of power’ (Thomp-
son, 1990) is broadened, in order to cover any form of power, of an oppressive
nature as well as of resistance and liberation, in line with Van Dijk's position
(Van Dijk 1998: 11). According to the interpretation embraced here, ideologies
are general belief systems functional to power, which exist at individual
cognitive level as much as at societal level and underpin social practices. They
are carried into the public domain primarily by means of discourses. Among
the strategies of legitimisation discussed by Eagleton (1991: 5), this study is
focused on ideological naturalisation,3 which transforms ideologies into
common sense. The very fact that in a particular context an ideology ceases to
be perceived as such (i.e. a belief system among other competing ones), and
become legitimated and naturalised as self-evident, is the result for a battle for
power won by a particular group over the others (for further details see
Fairclough1989: 91-91). Since discourses (language use, text, talk and commu-
nication) function as the primary vehicle of ideologies in the public domain,
this research will focus on their analysis. In fact, in the specific context of the
Irish citizenship referendum we can unveil the ideologies underpinning the

3 A very clear account of the process of ideological naturalisation can be found in Fairclough
(1989), chapter four.

Translocations                               29               Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

government's statements, speeches, parliamentary debates and in general
political discourses by means of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).

Racism as an ideology

The Self and the Process of Othering

The term Other is commonly used to refer to all the people the 'Self' perceives
as mildly or radically different. Even though it has existed as a category of
speculative thought for more than two thousand years, it became part of the
common sociological terminology only recently (Riggins 1997: 3). The Other is
always conceived in relation to the Self. Both Self and Other may be used to
indicate individualities (I and You) and collectivities (We and They). Even
though the nature of the opposition Self/Other is illusory, discourses of
Otherness are articulated by both the dominant majority and the subordinate
minorities.

The 1980s and the Culturalisation of Racism

Since the first academic and political formulation of the notion of racism
(between the 1930s and 1940s), a conceptual link between scientific theories of
race and racism was established. Therefore, the presence of a pseudo-scientific
discourse of race was considered as the precondition for the identification of
racism. However, this association tends to obscure the nature of discrimina-
tory discourses of the Other which are not overtly based on biological race
theorisation. Indeed, while explicit claims about the existence of biologically
inferior and superior 'races' have largely disappeared and are generally
discredited, exclusionary discourses of the Other seem to have persisted,
although with new contents (Miles 1989: 66). In particular the post World War
Two optimism about the progressive retreat of the evil of racism has been
counteracted by its strong resurgence in the last quarter of the twentieth
century (Mac Master 2001: 190). Indeed, many authors (Dal Lago 2004: 159;
Mc Guigan, 1998: 138; Van Djik, 1998: 278; Mac Master, 2001: 192) identify the
emergence in the 1980s of a new, more subtle, form of racism, focused on
cultural characteristics and therefore apparently more acceptable. The object
of this racism in disguise is constituted by the heterogeneous category of a
certain group of foreigners, those coming from 'developing' countries. Their
objective inferiorisation is transferred from the biological-racial field, nowa-
days clearly unacceptable, to the cultural-educative aspect (Dal Lago 2004:
159). Mac Master (2001: 204) notes how after 1973 and the generalisation of
immigration controls in Europe, the terms ‘immigrant’ and ‘refugee’ (I would
also add ‘asylum seeker’, and, in the specific Irish case, ‘non-national’)
progressively assumed negative connotations by absorbing the meanings
generally associated with the Other, and became nearly synonymous with
non-European.

Translocations                           30             Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

Data and method of analysis

The bulk of the material on which this study is based consists of six texts
(statements and addresses) issued by the Minister for Justice, Equality and
Law Reform, Michael McDowell, and published on the website of this
department throughout 2004. The selected statements and addresses chrono-
logically marked significant phases from the announcement of the referen-
dum itself, to the publication of the new Nationality and Citizenship Bill and
its implementation, after the overwhelming victory of the ‘yes’ vote on 11
June 2004. This material was found in the Media Centre of the Department of
Justice's website, which was set up for use by the broader media. It must be
acknowledged that it represents a precious source of information since
prepared explanations provided by government departments and official
agencies are ‘often uncritically included in newspapers’,4 as we are reminded
by Miliband (1973 in Harvey and MacDonald 1993: 44). Overall just three of
the selected texts had the referendum as a main theme. In the remaining
others, the referendum represented just a sub-theme, while the main topic
was directly or indirectly related (new nationality and citizenship act, immi-
gration, anti-racism, etc.).

Some key issues were considered during this study. These themes concerned
official constructions of citizenship/nationality, immigration and immigrants,
racism and the relationship 'in-group' / 'out-group'. Each text was described
(how the issues are explicitly presented between the texts), interpreted and,
finally, an explanation based on a combined consideration of the broader
context was developed. From this research, it emerged how these issues were
constructed by the government in general, but in particular by the Minister of
Justice, Equality and Law Reform, since the main data derived from his
speeches and statements. Meanwhile, certain discursive strategies displayed
in these texts, which concurred to a particular construction of the referendum,
were individuated. The idea was to uncover the ideological assumptions
which underpinned these texts, and reveal them to the academic and wider
public. A table of the texts under scrutiny in this study follows beneath.

4 Indeed, Breen et al. (2006) offer an insightful account of the uncritical reproduction of
politicians’ terms and concepts surrounding Irish citizenship by the Irish Times and the
Sunday Tribune between January and June 2004. Hence, ‘media uncritical reproduction and
tacit acceptance of politicians’ often-xenophobic comments surrounding citizenship’ favoured
the perpetuation of a ‘set of negative frames in which immigration was to be viewed’ (Breen
et al. 2006: 70).

Translocations                              31              Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

Table 1- Primary texts that were analysed:

TITLE                                 DATE        TYPE           MAIN THEME             ITEMS'
                                                                                        CODIFICATI-
                                                                                        ON
Proposed Citizenship Referendum:      14/03/20    Newspa-        Citizenship            text 1
Article by Minister for Justice,      04          per article    Referendum
Equality and Law Reform
Statement by Minister for Justice,    19/05/20    statement      Chen case              text 2
Equality and Law Reform (in           04                         +Citizenship
relation to the Chen case and                                    Referendum
forthcoming Citizenship Referen-
dum
McDowell welcomes statement by        04/06/04    statement      Citizenship            text 3
Catholic Bishops                                                 Referendum
Address by Minister McDowell at 09/06/20          speech         Anti-racism            text 4
the EU Presidency Seminar 04
entitled    ‘Combating    Racism
through Building a More Inclusive,
Intercultural Europe’
CITIZENSHIP REFERENDUM(11/06/2004)
Minister McDowell publishes Bill      29/09/20    statement      Irish    Nationality   text 5
to give effect to Referendum result   04                         and
                                                                 Citizenship Bill
Address by Minister at launch of      01/11/20    speech         Anti-Racism       in   text 6
Anti-Racist Workplace Week            04                         relation          to
                                                                 workplace

Source: Media Centre (www.justice.ie)

Key Findings

A number of key arguments were drawn from the textual analysis by consid-
ering the data comparatively. Here a summary is provided. What was
discovered is a highly successful process of ideological naturalisation at play,
during which McDowell's and the government's discourses regarding the
referendum came to assume evident, natural and commonsensical meanings.
The struggle between the ideological discourses promoted by McDowell and
the government and the opposing ones was concluded with the victory of the
former discourses. This ideological struggle circulated around the charge of
racism. Indeed, we can detect a discursive ideological shift before and after
the referendum. Before the referendum the Minister and the government had
been accused of playing the race card in different instances by various TDs
and politicians from the opposition. Hence, prior to this event, McDowell was
intent on rebuffing real and/or potential allegations of racist motives behind
the referendum; afterwards, there is no longer a trace of the use of this
discursive strategy. The overwhelming victory of the ‘yes’ vote functioned for
McDowell as indication of the decency, soundness and fairness of the change
to the Constitution.

Translocations                               32                 Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

But what are these key ideological constructions which were naturalised? The
first is the representation of the referendum as a ‘simple’ and urgent technical
issue, which did not warrant much public thinking and consultation. A very
good example of this construction is found in text 1. At the very start of the
article the Minister argues that the purpose of his article is ‘to ensure that the
debate proceeds on the basis of a true understanding of the facts and clear
public awareness of what is proposed -and, especially, of what is not being
proposed’ [emphasis in the original]. Thus, he also makes sure he is guiding
readers' minds through a true understanding of the facts. The use of the
attribution ‘true’ indirectly suggests that all the opponents are providing a
false understanding of the facts. In addition, throughout the article the
government's way of proceeding is generally characterised as ‘reasonable’
and ‘rational’, ‘clear and transparent’, ‘calm and rational’. Moreover, a clue to
the ideological presence in McDowell's discourses is contained in the second
part of text 2, titled ‘Simple issue’. In the heading and the following para-
graph's first sentence –‘I want to take this opportunity to re-state in simple
terms the simple reasons why the referendum is necessary, reasonable and
timely’- there is clear insistence on the adjective ‘simple’, which suggests
something obvious and straightforward. But that suggestion obscures the fact
that it is a rather controversial issue, to affect substantially the future compo-
sition of the Irish population. The highly legalistic discourse of the neutral
technical loophole5 and of the necessity to step into line with the other EU
member states will probably be remembered as the legitimate natural and
commonsensical reason behind the referendum. McDowell's consistent
construction of the referendum as the solution for a ‘simple issue’ which is in
line with the government's poster ‘vote 'yes' to common sense citizenship’,
won against the complexity and seriousness of the issue at stake.

Secondly, this process of naturalisation confirmed the construction of immi-
gration into Ireland as a 'problem' to be addressed and controlled. The textual
analysis provided evidence of McDowell unfairly blaming immigrants for
national problems. For example, in text 1 we consider the case of ‘non-
national pregnant mothers’ being blamed for the crisis in the Irish maternity
system,. Although the terms 'illegal' immigration/immigrants are not used in
this article, the minister's long and detailed discussion of the legal aspects of
the case has to do with the deportation of non-nationals. The target is, there-
fore, the so-called 'illegal' immigrants. In this specific Irish case emphasis is
put on their ‘numbers’. In fact, at the start there is a reference to ‘the number
of applications to remain in the State made by non-national parents of
children born in the State’, while two paragraphs later, McDowell says that
‘there has been no significant diminution in the numbers of non-nationals

5 For an analysis of the uncritical reproduction of this and other highly questionable argu-
ments (e.g. discourses on abuses, exploitation, asylum, ‘maternity tourists’, ‘maternity hospitals
crisis’ and ‘Irish born children’) by ‘reputable’ Irish daily press see Breen et al. (2006: 65-70).

Translocations                                  33               Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

arriving heavily pregnant’. Two considerations come to my mind: although
'number(s)' seem to suggest in both contexts large numbers, throughout the
article these numbers are never quantified – statistics or percentages (apart
from saying that ‘in about half of the cases of first arrival [of pregnant non-
nationals entering maternity hospitals] they are already at or near labour’).
The readers are therefore left with a vague notion of the extent of the pre-
sented 'problem'. While they are made to assume that there are large numbers
involved, they are not allowed to know if it is in the order of hundreds,
thousands, etc. The vagueness of the numbers is coupled with a generalisation
of the reason for non-national parents giving birth in Ireland. However,
towards the end of the article, there is a statement which brings readers to
quite divergent conclusions about the 'numbers' involved in this 'problem'. In
fact, McDowell in the last paragraph of the article acknowledges that ‘most
non-nationals [emphasis added] living in Ireland have come here properly
documented and are sharing in and contributing to Ireland's economic
success’. ‘Most’ here implies that the aforementioned ‘numbers’ are indeed
scarce. By virtue of this consideration, careful readers could quantify, though
just in a comparative way, the low numbers of non-national mothers respon-
sible for the ‘suddenly-presenting crisis pregnancies’ in Dublin maternity
services, to deal with which ‘all the resources in the world would be of little use’
[emphasis added].

Moreover, a mention must be made to the exaggerated forecast of a forthcom-
ing invasion of 'non-nationals' into Ireland in text 2 (which never in fact
happened), prior to the final judgement of the European Court of Justice on
the Chen case.6 The release of the preliminary Opinion on this case by the
Advocate General Tizzano, which anticipated the final judgement by the
European Court of Justice (ECJ), favoured the Chinese mother of the Irish
born daughter.7 However, this family was allowed residence only under
‘certain circumstances’ (i.e. paying for sickness insurance and having suffi-
cient resources), which, indeed, limited the numbers of Third Country
Nationals in the position to satisfy these financial criteria. In this case,
McDowell ignored the ‘certain circumstances’, while warning the Irish public
that ‘The legal advice given to Mrs Chen and on which she relied will be
given to many, many throughout the world [emphasis added]. This will happen

6 The context of the second text is constituted by the development of a crucial legal case
between the UK government and the Chen family to be adjudicated by the European Court of
Justice. The case arose from the British government’s refusal to grant residency to the Chen
family, whose daughter had Irish citizenship. It was quite controversial because apparently
Mrs Chen moved from England to Belfast expressly in order to give birth to her daugther,
following her lawyer’s suggestion, in order to gain Irish citizenship for the newborn baby.
7 The advocate General found that a young child who was a national of an EU member state

was entitled to reside in another member state, provided that s/he was covered by sickness
insurance and has sufficient resources to ensure not to become a burden on the public
finances of the host member state. Furthermore, the mother was entitled to invoke a right of
residence deriving from that of her young child.

Translocations                              34              Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

on the basis of the preliminary Opinion and will not await the final judge-
ment’. In addition, there are sufficient elements to say that McDowell's
references to the necessity to protect the Irish social and economic fabric
contain the indirect implication that immigrants constitute a 'threat' to it (for
example, in text 6 he argues that the government has to ensure the protection
of the social and economic fabric of its country).

Thirdly, a polarisation between two antithetical categories of ‘non-nationals’,
the good deserving ones and the bad undeserving ones (those to be deported)
was extrapolated from the textual analysis. Apart from text 2, where it does
not serve McDowell's purposes to acknowledge the existence of good ‘non-
nationals’, the other texts are characterised by a clear-cut polarised division
between ‘non-nationals’: the alleged or potential abusers of the Irish legal
system and the hard workers, who have come properly documented, contrib-
ute to the Irish economic success and therefore are welcome to settle perma-
nently in Ireland with their families. The construction of two categories of
non-nationals is clear from the aforementioned examples in text 1. The very
positive remark8 directed at those non-nationals ‘who have come properly
documented and are sharing in and contributing to Ireland's economic
success’, by contrast, indirectly increases the negative other-presentation of
those who are to be deported (i.e. the non-national pregnant mothers and
their families) in name of ‘the common good’. However, this polarisation
between good and bad, deserving and undeserving, legitimate and illegiti-
mate migrants is built on highly dubious assumptions. Yet, the authority of
the minister's and government's position, as well as the knowledge of experts
and journalists who make the news, have the power to crystallise into truths
the polarisation between two categories of migrants and the subsequent
problematisation and demonisation of those constructed as abusers, illegiti-
mate, unlawful and not properly documented.

Fourthly, particular definitions of what it is to be racist and who is to be
considered as a racist were naturalised. To be racist, according to the analysed
texts is to favour discrimination against people based on skin colour and other
ethnic characteristics. The referendum and subsequent new legislation,
instead, allegedly applies even-handedly to all non-nationals' children; hence,
it is not racist. This is basically what the minister argued in text 1: ‘it will most
certainly not be racist: it will apply even-handedly to the children of all non-
nationals irrespective of colour, ethnicity or any other criterion on which
racism is based’ [emphases added]. The two adverbs ‘most certainly’ and
‘even-handedly’ strengthen his claim and seek to eliminate any possibility of

8 Indeed, in text 1 last paragraph McDowell says: ‘I take this opportunity to reiterate most
strongly that most non-nationals living in Ireland have come properly documented and are
sharing in and contributing to Ireland’s economic success. We’re delighted to have them here;
to welcome them; and to help them establishing themselves permanently here if that’s what
they want’.

Translocations                               35              Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

doubt among the readers: racism is based on discrimination according to race
classification; this measure instead applies to all children of non-national
parents in the same way and depends on the neutral criterion of residence.
But the argument is pushed even further: not only were McDowell, the
government and the vast majority of supporters decent people, but they were
also anti-racist. Indeed, opponents of the referendum were rather constructed
as the real racists, since they offered the ‘would-be racist the opportunity to
exploit public perceptions that our law is being exploited’. Instead, the
government and the vast majority of people who supported the referendum
did it ‘on a basis which is decent and free from improper motives’. This
emerged, for example, from text 3, where the minister concluded ‘I would
reiterate my advice to any person with racist inclinations to reject the Gov-
ernment's proposal so that it can be clearly stated that the great majority of
people who support the Government's approach to this issue are doing so on
a basis which is decent and free from any improper motives’.

Fifthly, political and intellectual opponents were dismissed and portrayed as
unreasonable and extremist, and, thus, as referents who do not deserve a
hearing in the democratic process of political consultation. For example,
consider McDowell's declaration in text 1:

   I simply won't allow the proposal to be hijacked by those who wish to
   further a racist agenda; but equally I will be harsh in my criticism of
   those on the other end of the political spectrum who claim to detect ra-
   cism in any action, however rational, fair-minded or soundly-based, that
   affects immigration or citizenship policy [emphases added].

Here the minister constructed his portrayal of 'fair-but-firm' at the expenses of
anti-racists, human right activists and opponents on the political left, who
were somehow equated with far-right extremists, though in an oppositional
way. Those ‘on the other end of the political spectrum (...)’ were not really
worth engaging with, since they were just obsessed with racism. Between
these two extremes lies the firm-but-fair position of this government, which
addresses ‘real issues’ by providing democratic responses. Accordingly, in
text 2, ‘opponents of the referendum’, also called ‘that quarter’, were again
harshly downplayed because of their ‘wishful thinking’ and ‘wilful blindness
to the realities of the situation’. Similarly, in text 3, ‘Lawyers and Doctors
Against the Amendment’ were dismissed as an annoying ‘rash’, which the
Irish government and people had to put up with.

Sixthly, in McDowell's construction of the referendum the recurrent deploy-
ment of a number of discursive strategies can be detected. These strategies
served his persuasive goals. Firstly, there were shifting lexical choices and
definitions of the 'problem'. For instance, the consistent usage of the term
‘non-national’ in texts written for the broader Irish audience, as opposed to
the primary use of the term ‘migrant’ in the two anti-racism speeches is not to

Translocations                         36            Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

be considered as coincidental. This different lexical choice reflected the
different audience and goals of his speeches. Indeed, although ‘non-national’
is inclusive of all foreigners, in everyday language it is often used synony-
mously with asylum seeker, refugee and/or 'illegal' immigrant.9 This peculiar
lexical choice was therefore underlined as part of an overall strategy of
political persuasion and ideological construction of immigrants as abusers in
front of the broader Irish electorate. Regarding the shifting definition of the
'problem', it is sufficient to consider how McDowell framed the referendum in
different ways depending on the context. For example, in text 1, at the
opening of the public debate on the referendum, he claimed that the most
important issue was the numbers of non-national pregnant mothers who were
paralysing Dublin maternity hospitals. However, in text 2 (Chen case), two
months after, this 'problem' was relegated to a final short note, and was to be
forgotten in the remaining texts. Furthermore, in the texts issued after the
referendum the public was not informed of the situation of the maternity
system, if it had improved after this measure or if there were still ‘numbers’ of
mothers getting off the planes at or near labour.

Secondly, the discursive strategy of the ‘ideological square’ (a term coined by
Van Dijk, 1998: 267) was resorted to quite consistently. This entails a combina-
tion of positive self-presentation and negative other-presentation, by virtue of
which the minister and his government are presented to the public under a
benign light, while the Others from within and outside are presented nega-
tively and in a derogative manner. Just reconsider, for instance, the examples
provided above, regarding McDowell's dismissal of political opponents,
coupled with the portrayal of himself and the government as firm-but-fair
(text 1). In the same text there is more 'proof' of the 'fairness' of the govern-
ment's policy actions, as listed by the minister: it will protect the health of
non-national mothers and their unborn children, ‘it will most certainly not be
racist: it will apply even-handedly (...)’; ‘it will be based on reasonable period of
lawful residence (...)’; ‘it will be at least as generous as the citizenship laws of
most of our European Union colleagues (...)’; it will be clear and transparent in
its operation’, etc [emphases added]. Note the profusion of evaluative adjec-
tives and adverbs associated with a vagueness of concrete details about the
proposal. In the power struggle between the in-group and out-group on the
exclusion/inclusion of immigrants' children from automatic entitlement to
citizenship, it was a crucial move for McDowell to legitimate his actions and
decisions while derogating the others.

Thirdly, the consistent strategic usage of ‘quotation patterns’ was detected.
This strategy consists in claiming legitimacy through the authority of pur-
posely-selected experts. These experts are the Masters of the maternity

9Peter O’Mahoney (2005) reaches a similar conclusion in an article for the Irish Refugee
Council.

Translocations                            37              Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

hospitals in text 1, the Attorney General in text 2, the Catholic Bishops in text
3, and 'interested bodies' in text 5. Nonetheless, the partial quotation of these
expert sources by means of the omission of awkward information emerged
too in the analysis (the strategy of incompleteness). In fact, the Masters of the
maternity hospitals were deemed to be reliable sources when referring to the
'problem' constituted by the non-national pregnant mothers, but they were
not listened to in their reiterated request for more public funding for health
care. But ideological obscuration of reality is most exemplarily evident in the
comparative analysis of text 3 and the original press release of the Catholic
Bishops. Here there is a systematic usage of discursive strategies in order to
convince the public that the Catholic Church was not critical of the referen-
dum. Therefore, it is important to refer to the Bishops' document10 to discover
how manipulative the Minister's text was. It seems that political manipulation
was reached in two ways in text 3: one is through ignoring the Bishops'
criticism, where it occurred, while stressing shared positions; the other is by
slightly modifying the meaning of their sentences, thus, obscuring the real
focus of the Bishops. Firstly, the title ‘McDowell welcomes statement by
Catholic Bishops’ indicates that the Catholic Bishops' press release was in line
with McDowell's position. Usually we welcome something that is favourable
to our approach, not against it. However, in the Bishops' document there was
no appraisal of the government proposal. Nonetheless, we must acknowledge
that there was not overt criticism either. On the contrary, the document could
be considered as a masterpiece of diplomacy, where a mild criticism emerges,
though just in some instances. My view of it, extrapolated from an analysis of
the text, is that the Bishops did not manage to reach a full agreement on the
matter, although most of them were somehow against the referendum. If we
now go back to the minister's statement, no response is given to the Bishops'
remark about the lack of a wider process of public consultation, nor to the
view that ‘many [Bishops?] think that we should be offering greater hospital-
ity and security to people of different national and racial background’.
Meanwhile, the Bishops' consideration that ‘it is important to ensure that all
people (...) enjoy full protection of their fundamental human rights’ was
turned by McDowell into a warmly welcomed, ‘clear acknowledgement that the
protection of people's rights applies regardless of whether they are non-
citizens (...)’. I would argue that the Catholic Bishops' expression ‘it is impor-
tant to ensure’ sounds more like a reminder than a ‘clear acknowledgement’.
However, the minister promptly and strategically obscured their preoccupa-
tion in the pursuit of his own political advantage. In addition, the attribute
‘racist’ never appears in the Bishops' statement: they indeed avoided – I
would suggest strategically – entering the controversy about racism, stating
instead that ‘any vote cast with the intention of weakening or denying this
principle [the protection of their fundamental human rights, without dis-
crimination on the basis of race or origin] would be morally wrong’. McDow-
ell, on the contrary, insisted for a third of this statement in denying any racist
inclination behind it. Indeed, the ultimate guarantee of McDowell's electoral

10   A detailed analysis of the Bishops’ press release can be found in Brandi (2006: 83-85).

Translocations                                   38               Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

success lay in his capacity to keep away any allegation of racism, especially
from the Catholic Church. In conclusion, in text 3 the Minister did not enter
into the matters raised by the Bishops' press release, but made functional use
of some passages changing the general sense of their text. By his overall
welcome to the Bishops' press release he gave the impression that the two
positions were similar, and, thus, that the Church somehow legitimated a
choice in favour of the ‘yes’ vote.

Finally, another crucial discursive strategy resorted to in the analysed texts is
the denial of racism and attribution of the charge to others. McDowell
repeatedly insisted that the referendum was not racist in intention, the
political campaign would not be racist and support for the referendum would
not be drawn from racist sentiments, rather it would reflect a reasonable
approach. After all, racism is regarded as morally reprehensible in a liberal
Western democratic society, and therefore confined to its margins; hence it
cannot affect the vast majority of the population. In Western democracies
racism is always considered to be elsewhere geographically, chronologically
and socially: in the past, in other countries, in the political opposition and
among the poor (Van Dijk, 1993, 182). This situation corresponds to what
Lentin and McVeigh (2006) call ‘racism without racism’, a new historical
phase in which old racial hierarchies have been substituted by new globalised
codes, although there is a systematic denial of racism across society. Accord-
ing to the same authors the Citizenship Referendum has contributed to the
development of “constitutional racism” in Irish society. This expression
signifies the government’s proactive role in using the constitution “to re-
define, racialise and exclude ‘non-national’ (but also indigenous) populations
through state mechanisms such as immigration control and citizenship
legislation”, thus making certain categories of foreigners ‘illegal’, ‘criminal’
and ‘abusers’ (Lentin and McVeigh 2006: 79).

Other considerations which emerged from my analysis concern the theme of
citizenship. Seeing as it was a 'citizenship' referendum, I expected that
something more would have emerged on the essence of this notion, on its
inherent contradictions and on the new perspectives envisaged at a scholarly
level. On the contrary, the discussion rarely engaged with any of the theoreti-
cal issues and contradictions which lie at the core of the modern and liberal
notion of citizenship.11 However, the absence of in depth discussions on this
theme of citizenship tells us a lot. The referendum on Irish citizenship did not
come after serious public considerations of the meaning of national citizen-
ship in the context of dramatic societal developments in the era of neo-liberal
globalisation and fast and massive displacement of people and things.
Instead, changes in citizenship laws in the Irish case, as in many other
countries in the world (in the 1980s the UK and Australia made a similar
move to limit entitlement to citizenship), were rather conceived primarily as a

11For an account of the problematisation of the modern and liberal notion of citizenship see
Fauks, 2000; Castles and Davidson, 2000; Heater, 1999; Roche, 1992.

Translocations                              39              Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

means of immigration control and exclusion of migrants from this country.
The new requirement of three years lawful residence, celebrated by McDowell
as progressive legislation, the most generous and open in the EU, and as a
common sense, pragmatic and fair change, established the government's
discretion in the selection of migrants who can or cannot settle permanently in
Ireland, apart from the fortunate category of EU and EEA citizens.

Conclusions

This article enquired into whether the 2004 Citizenship referendum had been
ideologically constructed by the Irish government. The findings prompted an
affirmative answer to this question. Indeed, the concepts and terms ideol-
ogy/ideological have been crucial throughout this research, both in their
neutral and negative meanings. In fact, the analysis highlights a highly
successful process of ideological naturalisation at play. On the basis of the
analysis of the selected texts, what kinds of ideologies can be said to have
underpinned McDowell's pronouncements on the referendum?

Racism is certainly an ideology we had to come to terms with in this analysis.
In fact, on the one hand, McDowell's insistence in denying any racist intention
behind the referendum obliged a consideration of the question of whether the
referendum was a racist measure and an example of institutional racism. On
the other hand, this was already a matter of concern at the outset of this
research, given citizenship's conceptual location in-between identity and
'race', and its huge potential for both inclusion and exclusion. Indeed, another
question formulated at the beginning of this paper was whether this was a
case of institutional racism combined with neo-liberal principles. However,
the situation is further complicated by current circulation of various defini-
tions of racism. According to Miles (1989: 50) this process of conceptual
inflation is due to the fact that different formulations reflect changing histori-
cal circumstances and contexts in which various groups have been the object
of racism. But if there are many racisms, on what basis can we individuate
them? What constitutes racism? Miles (1989) offers a solution to this theoreti-
cal impasse by formulating certain specific representational characteristics
which constitute a constant within the different historical forms of racism. In
short, various racisms can be considered as underpinned by a unique ideol-
ogy of racism (Miles 1989: 82; Mac Master 2001: 27; Rath 1993: 219). Thus,
racism displays certain historical continuities (constant specific representa-
tional characteristics), while presenting also a number of historical variables:
groups identified as object, natural features signified characteristics attributed
to the group and negatively evaluated (Miles, 1989: 83). Miles (1989: 79-84)
further enumerates the various elements that constitute racism as an ideologi-
cal and thus representational phenomenon. Firstly, it is based on a preceding
process of racialisation, i.e. categorisation of Others (usually but not exclu-
sively) somatically (Miles 1989: 75). Secondly, the so identified group is

Translocations                         40             Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

attributed some additional negatively evaluated characteristics (biological
and/or cultural) as a source of equally negative consequences. This kind of
representation of the Other is dialectical and relational in the sense that it is
conceived of in relation to an opposite representation of the 'Self'. Thus, the
group so defined as 'Other' is constructed as a problematic presence that
constitutes a threat for the 'Self' - group. Racism is therefore simultaneously
an ideology of inclusion (of the ascribed members of the group 'Self') and
exclusion (of the ascribed members of the group 'Other'). Taking Miles's
criteria spelled above, we do not have enough evidence to consider racism as
an ideology overtly underpinning McDowell's discourses. This is primarily
due to the extent and the content of the data, which do not offer any clear
example of racialisation of a specific group, either in biological or cultural
terms.

Nonetheless, McDowell's discourses contain clear evidence of a process of
Othering, problematisation and negativisation of the so called ‘non-nationals’,
which in the end played a crucial role in reproducing and reinforcing the
public construction of migrants as abusers and criminals. McDowell and his
government played, although in a rather subtle way, on the widespread fears
and popular resentment against immigrants in Ireland, which emerged as a
result of the recent sudden changes in migration patterns from substantial
emigration to net inward immigration. Indeed, the Minister substantiated
people's fears by supplying 'facts'. The textual analysis provided evidence of
McDowell unfairly blaming immigrants for national problems. Thus, in line
with Van Dijk's view (1998), the dialectical dimension of racism is exemplified
in this case. Van Dijk (1998: 176) argues that racism is both a top-down and
bottom-up phenomenon that signifies the complexity of the relations between
elite ideas and popular resentment. Indeed, prejudice and discrimination are
widespread throughout white society as a whole. But, while popular racism is
more oriented towards socio-economic issues (i.e. competitive threat to jobs,
housing and welfare), elite racism is rather oriented towards cultural aspects
(habits, religion, language, education and values). Van Djik also contends
(1998: 176-177) that elites play a greater role in the reproduction of racism,
because they make crucial decisions about inclusion and exclusion wherever
it really counts (media, immigration, residence, housing, jobs, education,
health care, welfare, etc.). Hence, the usefulness of the concept of institutional
racism, which refers to circumstances where racism is systematically embod-
ied in state institutions' exclusionary and discriminatory practices or in a
formally non-racialised discourse (Miles 1989: 87). Consequently, public
institutions and organisations play a contradictory role towards racism: on the
one hand, they actively concur in sustaining and reproducing it; on the other
hand, less energetically, they try to fight it (Mac Master, 2001: 8-9).

However, what emerged very clearly is a neo-liberal dimension to McDow-
ell's approach to immigration. In particular, the examples provided in the
analysis of text 4 and 6, showed how, in McDowell's view, immigrants are

Translocations                         41             Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

conceived of primarily in terms of the labour force and the economy. Unlike
parties such as the Immigrant Control Platform who advocate a form of 'racial
purity' (consider for example their slogan, “Ireland for the Irish’), McDowell
sees an important role for a particular category of immigrants in Ireland. In
order to maintain Ireland as a thriving, competitive, prosperous and dynamic
society, where Irish people are valued on the basis of the expression of their
‘individual consumer behaviour’, ‘we must adapt our thinking’. Hence, the
only category of migrants really welcome is constituted by the migrant
workers, who have come properly documented and contribute to the Irish
economic success.

With regards to the traditionally negative Marxian meaning of ideol-
ogy/ideological, this usage also made sense in this research. Indeed, in
McDowell's texts a constant and hardly coincidental reframing of the 'prob-
lem' depending on the context can be detected in a way, which often obscured
reality in order to persuasively, manipulate people. Ideological obscuration of
reality is most exemplarily evident in the comparative analysis of text 3 and
the original press release of the Catholic Bishops, as it was stressed in the
previous section.

But a proper evaluation of the referendum cannot be done without considera-
tion of the bigger picture. Thus, the referendum is part of the Irish govern-
ment's response to immigration and settlement of particular categories of
foreigners. To use Cubie's and Ryan's words (2004, viii), ‘In recent years
several decisions and measures, both judicial and legislative, have served, or
at least attempted to restrain the tide of inward migration’. Citizenship law is,
in fact, intrinsically related to two other different legal concepts, i.e. immigra-
tion and refugee law (Cubie and Ryan, 2004: ix). Hence, recent developments
in citizenship, immigration and asylum law are complementary in displaying
an escalation in restrictive measures aimed at containing and deterring
asylum seeking as much as 'illegal' immigration into Ireland.

Moreover, as Ireland is a member state of the European Union, there are also
strong interconnections between Irish and EU developments concerning
exclusionary approaches to immigration and asylum policy (Costello 2003).
However, there is no evidence that this was a factor in the 2004 citizenship
referendum itself (contrary to McDowell's argument of the necessity to step
into line with the other EU countries). Furthermore, this exclusionary ap-
proach is in contrast within a generally accepted globalising logic, which
implies, instead, the diminution of frontiers (Sassen in Geddes 2000: 21). In
this regard, the notion of ‘Fortress Europe’ is an appropriate metaphor to
describe EU approaches to immigration. The referendum constitutes part of a
broader move towards a 'Fortress Europe', driven by economic imperatives
and by disregard for human rights. In contrast with McDowell's rhetorical
claims of openness and generosity, the Citizenship referendum can be
considered as another piece put into this big jigsaw of migrants' exclusion

Translocations                          42            Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1

Brandi: Unveiling the Ideological Construction

from the walls of our rich Western world. Certainly, a discretionary and
temporary admission of ‘labour force’, on the basis of national economic
needs, cannot be considered as openness to migrants. McDowell's construc-
tion of the citizenship referendum concurred in the symbolic and material
exclusion of some categories of migrants from Irish society.

Recommendations

With specific reference to the 2004 Irish Citizenship Referendum, this article
makes an argument for a reconsideration of this case, with the view of
bringing about a more considered and appropriate debate on it. This is not an
isolated view, as a similar call for a rethinking of other, less restrictive under-
standings of Irish citizenship and belonging has recently been made by
Crowley et al. (2006). With reference to methodological approaches to social
research, the importance of Critical Discourse Analysis as a methodology and
method emerges from this article. Against the arguments of those who
downplay discourses as only words, this paper shows how words, instead,
contribute in constituting social reality, affecting people's lives symbolically
and materially and society at large. Indeed, this case study has amply demon-
strated the centrality of the relationship between discourse and power. The
access to and control over political, media and scientific discourse constitute a
symbolic resource, and hence a major source of power, which grants elites
relative control over people's minds and actions (Van Dijk 2001: 354-358).
News reporting, political interviews, counselling, job interviews and institu-
tional texts and talks generally embody manipulative strategies and therefore
are under scrutiny in CDA (Teo, 2000: 12). Therefore, CDA is recommended
to be made a topic in the academic formation of politicians, policy-makers,
public administrators, bureaucrats, professionals such as journalists, formal
and informal educators and those generally involved in the social and
communication field. In addition, it would be important that young people in
the schooling system would be taught to develop a critical approach to
discourses. In a society dominated by mass communication, they need to be
encouraged to think critically about authoritative sources of information such
as media, experts, professionals, scientists, teachers and politicians.

References

Brandi, S. (2006) The 2004 Irish Citizenship Referendum: A Matter of Common
Sense? (University College Cork: unpublished dissertation).

Breen, M., Haynes, A. and Devereux, E. (2006) ‘Citizens, Loopholes and
Maternity Tourists’: Media Frames in the Citizenship Referendum in Cor-
coran M.P. and Peillon M. (eds) Uncertain Ireland (Dublin: IPA).

Translocations                          43            Summer 2007 | Volume 2 | Issue 1