.The continuous rise of socio-economic inequality over the past decades with its connected
political outcomes such as the Brexit vote in the UK, and the election of Donald Trump are
currently a matter of intense debate both in academia and in journalism. A significant sign
of the heightened interest was the surprise popularity of Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st
Century. The book reached the top of the bestseller lists and was described as a ‘media
sensation’ and Piketty himself as a ‘rock star economist’. This paper, drawing from a major
international and cross-disciplinary study, investigates the print media treatment in four
European countries of economic policy proposals presented in Capital. Applying social
semiotic and critical discourse analysis, we specifically focus on articles which are in
disagreement with these proposals and identify five categories of counterarguments used
against Piketty: authorisation, moralisation, rationalisation, portrayal of victimhood and
inevitability. Providing textual and linguistic examples we demonstrate how the use of
linguistic resources normalises and conventionalises ideology-laden discourses of economic
means (taxation) and effects, reinforcing particular views of social relations and class as
common sense and therewith upholding and perpetuating power relations and inequalities.
History
Publisher
Working Paper, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Department of Economics
Note
n/a
Please see http://hdl.handle.net/10344/7675 for the more recent version of this paper