Neoliberalism, alternatives and (de)politicisation: Analysis of political discourse during the coronavirus crisis

Abstract

This study denaturalises the prevailing belief that crises bolster neoliberalism. It contends that context matters deeply – particularly in the lead-up to elections – and that not all politicians advocate a neoliberal agenda. Furthermore, it uncovers the cyclical relationship between (de)politicisation and coronavirus crisis in Czechia. The research employs discursive historical approach and critical discourse analysis to answer following research questions: 1) During the coronavirus crisis, did elite and expert discourse reinforce neoliberal hegemony or promote alternatives? 2) How did this manifest in their discourse? and 3) Was the crisis (de)politicised? The results show that the discourse of elites did not deepen neoliberalisation, since other discursive themes appeared. Politicians mostly used strategy of argumentation and intensification to legitimise measures, which the study describes in detail. Regarding (de)politicisation, a cycle occurred where the crisis was not politicised initially, but when vaccines were addressed, the crisis became a source of political conflict. With a new government coming in, the data suggest depoliticisation again.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.