Moralizacija, racionalizacija in naturalizacija kot diskurzivne strategije pri parlamentarni razpravi ob sprejemanju Družinskega zakonika leta 2012

Lep, Eva (author), Vezovnik, Andreja (mentor)

Osredotočala sem se na načine parlamentarnega razpravljanja o Družinskem zakoniku leta 2012, kjer se je politična debata močno polarizirala okoli treh kontroverznih tem: definicija družine, definicija zakonske zveze in pravice do posvojitve za istospolne partnerske zveze. Raziskovala sem razsežnost agonističnega pluralizma s pomočjo orodij, ki identificirajo raven (de)politiziranosti v razpravah skozi diskurzivne strategije moralizacije, racionalizacije in naturalizacije. Analizirala sem štiri transkripte parlamentarnih sej, ki so obravnavale temo Družinskega zakonika, kjer sem sprva besedilo kodirala, dodala pregled najpogostejših argumentov po Waltonovi argumentacijski shemi in slednje, ugotavljala prisotnost depolitizirane razprave v izjavah ključnih akterjev v parlamentu. Predpostavila sem tri hipoteze, in sicer 1) da je bila diskurzivna strategija depolitizacije prevladujoča, 2) da so depolitizacijsko strategijo praviloma uporabljale desne politične stranke in 3) da so politizacijsko strategijo uporabljale praviloma leve politične stranke. Praviloma so politizacijsko strategijo za obravnavo argumentov uporabljali predvsem zagovorniki zakonika, torej SD, LDS, Zares, DeSUS in Solidarnost ter depolitizacijsko nasprotniki: SDS, SNS, SLS. Raven agonističnega pluralizma se giba med parlamentarno raznolikostjo in pluralizmom. Bile so torej tako antagonistične kot agonistične razprave, s tem da je bilo več depolitizacije prisotne pri nasprotnikih zakonika, zato ne morem depolitizacije in pomanjkanja kultiviranega govora posplošit na celotno parlamentarno razpravo – zatorej sem lahko hipotezo 1 le delno potrdila, pri čemer sem hipotezo 2 in 3 potrdila.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: Družinski zakonik, depolitizacija, agonistični pluralizem, istospolna partnerstva
• Work type: Bachelor thesis/paper
• Organization: FDV - Faculty of Social Sciences
• Year: 2018
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-102646
• COBISS.SI-ID: 35791709
• Publication date in RUL: 06.09.2018

Secondary language

• Language: English
• Title: Moralization, rationalization and naturalization as discursive strategies in parliamentary debate about Family law in 2012

Abstract

I was focusing on analysing the parliamentary debate about Family law in 2012, where the debate was strongly focused on three controversial themes: definition of family, definition of marriage and the right for same-sex partnerships to adopt children. I was exploring the scope of agonistic pluralism with help of tools that identify the level of depoliticization in debates through discursive strategies of moralization, rationalization and naturalization. I have analysed four parliamentary transcripts. Firstly, I have coded the transcripts, listed the most common type of arguments based on Walton's argumentation schemes and then analysed the presence of depoliticization in the vocabulary of main actors in the parliament. I listed three hypotheses: 1) discursive strategy of depoliticization was dominant in the parliament, 2) depoliticization strategy was mostly used by right wing politicians and 3) politicization strategy was mostly used by left wing politicians. Politicization strategy was mostly used by liberals and social democrats, whereas depoliticization strategy by all politicians of the right. The level of agonistic pluralism is somewhere between parliamentary diversity and pluralism – there were antagonistic and agonistic debates, but more depoliticization was present by the opposers of the Family Law, that is the reason why I could confirm the hypotheses 1 only partly, in contrast to hypotheses 2 and 3, which I could confirm fully.

• Keywords: Family Law, depoliticization, agonistic pluralism, same-sex partnerships