Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:46:31.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Parea non servin: strategies of exploitation and resistance in the caporalato discourse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2018

Fabio I. M. Poppi  and
Giovanni A. Travaglino
Fabio I. M. Poppi*
Affiliation:
Institute of English and American Studies, University of Gdańsk, Poland
Giovanni A. Travaglino*
Affiliation:
School of Humanities and Social Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen; School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury
*
*Email: [email protected]
**Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, we analyse the ideological content of the discursive strategies used by a group of migrant workers subjected to ‘caporalato’, a form of illegal hiring and exploitation of farm day workers through an intermediary. Starting from a series of collective open interviews with farm workers, we examine the way in which the dynamics of both exploitation and resistance are reproduced through linguistic and discursive practices. What emerges from the analysis is a complex set of ambivalent experiences and representations. Despite its inherent exploitative and controlling nature, the workers tend to justify, legitimise and deny the negative aspects of caporalato. Nonetheless, they also use linguistic devices of resistance to reconfigure the meanings of, and their role in, caporalato. Interestingly, the analyses show that caporalato is also perceived as a mechanism of social mobility. Only limited attempts at explicitly challenging its criminal nature are strategically expressed.

Italian summary

In questo articolo, analizziamo il contenuto ideologico delle strategie discorsive usate da un gruppo di lavoratori migranti soggetti a ‘caporalato’, una forma illegale di reclutamento e di sfruttamento del lavoro dei braccianti agricoli mediante l’operato di un intermediario. Partendo da una serie di interviste aperte di tipo collettivo con un alcuni braccianti, si esamina il modo con il quale le dinamiche di sfruttamento e resistenza siano riprodotte attraverso pratiche linguistiche e discorsive. Ciò che emerge, è un complesso ed ambivalente sistema di esperienze e rappresentazioni. Nonostante l’intrinseca natura di sfruttamento e controllo, i lavoratori sembrano giustificare, legittimare e perfino negare gli aspetti più critici del caporalato. Pur tuttavia, i braccianti si servono anche di strumenti linguistici di resistenza con l’obiettivo di riconfigurare i significati ed i ruoli del caporalato stesso. Tra questi, si evince come tale fenomeno possa essere altresì percepito come un meccanismo di mobilità sociale. In ultima analisi, l’analisi riflette su come solo esigui tentativi siano strategicamente messi in atto dai braccianti per denunciare la nature criminale del caporalato.

Keywords

caporalatodiscursive strategyexploitationgangmaster systeminterviewsresistance
Type
Research Articles
Information
Modern Italy , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 81 - 97
Copyright
© 2018 Association for the Study of Modern Italy 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Avallone, G. 2014. ‘Migraciones y agricultura en Europa del Sur: Emergencia de un nuevo proletariado internacional’. Migraciones internacionales 7 (4): 137–169.Google Scholar
Avallone, G. 2017. Sfruttamento e resistenze. Migrazioni e agricoltura in Europa, Italia, Piana del Sele. Verona: Ombre corte.Google Scholar
Bales, K. 2000. I nuovi schiavi: la merce umana nell’economia globale. Milan: Feltrinelli Editore.Google Scholar
Berlan, J.P. 2002. ‘La longue histoire du modèle californien’. In Le gout amer de nos fruits et légumes. L’exploitation des migrants dans l’agriculture intensive en Europe, edited by Forum Civique Européen. Informations et Commentaires, 15–22.Google Scholar
Berns, N. 2001. ‘Degendering the Problem and Gendering the Blame: Political Discourse on Women and Violence. Gender & Society 15 (2): 262–281.Google Scholar
Bhugra, D. and Jones, P.. 2001. ‘Migration and Mental Illness’. Advances in psychiatric treatment 7 (3): 216–222.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1979. ‘Symbolic Power’. Critique of Anthropology 4 (13-14): 77–85.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 2002. (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cameron, L.J. 2007. ‘Patterns of Metaphor Use in Reconciliation Talk’. Discourse & Society 18 (2): 197–222.Google Scholar
Carvalho, A. 2005. ‘Representing the Politics of the Greenhouse Effect: Discursive Strategies in the British Media’. Critical Discourse Studies 2 (1): 1–29.Google Scholar
Coombs, W.T. 2007. ‘Protecting Organization Reputations during a Crisis: the Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Corporate Reputation Review 10 (3): 163–176.Google Scholar
Corrado, A. 2011. ‘Clandestini in the Orange Towns: Migrations and Racisms in Calabria’s Agriculture’. Race/Ethnicity: Multidisciplinary Global Contexts 4 (2): 191–201.Google Scholar
Corrado, A. 2017. Migrant Crop Pickers in Italy and Spain. E-paper. Berlin: Heinrich Böll Foundation.Google Scholar
Corrado, A., de Castro, C. and Perrotta, D.C., eds. 2016. Migration and Agriculture: Mobility and Change in the Mediterranean Area. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cristaldi, F. 2014. ‘I nuovi schiavi: gli immigrati del Gran Ghetto di San Severo’. Rivista Geografica Italiana 122: 119–142.Google Scholar
Curci, S. 2008. Nero invisibile normale: lavoro migrante e caporalato in Capitanata. Foggia: Edizioni del Rosone.Google Scholar
Davidson, J. 2010. ‘New Slavery, Old Binaries: Human Trafficking and the Borders of “Freedom”’. Global Networks 10 (2): 244–261.Google Scholar
De Fina, A. 2008. ‘Who Tells Which Story and Why? Micro and Macro Contexts in Narrative’. Text & Talk 28 (3): 421–442.Google Scholar
De Fina, A. and Perrino, S.. 2011. ‘Introduction: Interviews vs.‘Natural’ Contexts: a False Dilemma. Language in Society 40 (1): 1–11.Google Scholar
Fox, J.E., Moroşanu, L. and Szilassy, E.. 2015. ‘Denying Discrimination: Status, ‘Race’, and the Whitening of Britain’s New Europeans’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 41 (5): 729–748.Google Scholar
Frank, A.W. 2010. Letting Stories Breathe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Garrapa, A. M. 2016. ‘The Citrus Fruit Crisis: Value Chains and “Just in Time” Migrants in Rosarno (Italy) and Valencia (Spain)’. In Migration and Agriculture, edited by A. Corrado, C. de Castro and D. Perrotta, 135–151. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gramsci, A. 1971. Selections from the Prison Notebooks (translated by Q. Hoare and G.N. Smith). London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
Gray, R. 2002. ‘The Social Accounting Project and Accounting, Organizations and Society. Privileging Engagement, Imaginings, New Accountings and Pragmatism over Critique?’ Accounting, Organizations and Society 27 (7): 687–708.Google Scholar
Jermier, J.M., Knights, D.E. and Nord, W.R.. 1994. Resistance and Power in Organizations. Abingdon-on-Thames: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.Google Scholar
Klinke, A. and Renn, O.. 2001. ‘Precautionary Principle and Discursive Strategies: Classifying and Managing Risks’. Journal of Risk Research 4 (2): 159–173.Google Scholar
Kress, G. 1985. Linguistic Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krissman, F. 2005. ‘Sin coyote ni patron: Why the “Migrant Network” Fails to Explain International Migration’. International Migration Review 39 (1): 4–44.Google Scholar
Kwon, W., Clarke, I. and Wodak, R.. 2014. ‘Micro‐level Discursive Strategies for Constructing Shared Views around Strategic Issues in Team Meetings’. Journal of Management Studies 51 (2): 265–290.Google Scholar
Leach, C.W. and Livingstone, A.G.. 2015. ‘Contesting the Meaning of Intergroup Disadvantage: Toward a Psychology of Resistance’. Journal of Social Issues 71: 614–632. doi: 10.1111/josi.12131 Google Scholar
Leogrande, A. 2008. Uomini e caporali. Viaggio tra i nuovi schiavi nelle campagne del Sud. Milan: Mondadori.Google Scholar
Lerner, M.J. 1980. The Belief in a Just World: a Fundamental Illusion. Berlin: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Lupton, D. 1992. ‘Discourse Analysis: a New Methodology for Understanding the Ideologies of Health and Illness’. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 16 (2): 145–150.Google Scholar
Marchetti, G. 1994. Romance and the ‘Yellow Peril’: Race, Sex, and Discursive Strategies in Hollywood Fiction. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Montagna, N. 2013. ‘Labor, Citizenship, and Subjectivity: Migrants’ Struggles within the Italian Crisis’. Social Justice 39 (1): 43–61.Google Scholar
Morice, A. and Michalon, B.. 2008. ‘Les migrants dans l’agriculture: vers une crise de main-d’oeuvre? Introduction’. Études rurales (182): 9–28.Google Scholar
Mulholland, K. 2004. ‘Workplace Resistance in an Irish Call Centre: Slammin’, Scammin’, Smokin’ an’ leavin”. Work, Employment and Society 18 (4): 709–724.Google Scholar
Oliveri, F. 2012. Enacting Rights from Below. Migrant Farmworkers’ Struggles in Nardo, Southern Italy.Google Scholar
Palumbo, L. and Sciurba, A.. 2015. ‘Vulnerability to Forced Labour and Trafficking: the Case of Romanian Women in the Agricultural Sector in Sicily’. Anti-Trafficking Review 5: 89.Google Scholar
Perrotta, D.C. 2014. ‘Vecchi e nuovi mediatori. Storia, geografia ed etnografia del caporalato in agricoltura’. Meridiana 2014: 193–220.Google Scholar
Perrotta, D.C. 2015. ‘Il caporalato come sistema: un contributo sociologico’. Quaderni dell’Altro Diritto: 15–30.Google Scholar
Perrotta, D.C. and Sacchetto, D.. 2012. ‘Il ghetto e lo sciopero: braccianti stranieri nell’Italia meridionale’. Sociologia del lavoro 128: 152–166.Google Scholar
Perrotta, D.C. and Sacchetto, D.. 2014. ‘Migrant Farmworkers in Southern Italy: Ghettoes, Caporalato and Collective Action’. Workers of the World 1 (5): 75–98.Google Scholar
Piva, D. 2017. ‘I limiti dell’intervento penale sul caporalato come sistema (e non condotta) di produzione: brevi note a margine della legge n. 199/2016’. Archivio penale 69 (1): 184–196.Google Scholar
Polletta, F. 2006. It Was Like a Fever: Storytelling in Protest and Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Poncini, G. 2004. Discursive Strategies in Multicultural Business Meetings. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Poppi, F.I.M. and Di Piazza, S.. 2017. ‘In nomine patris: Discursive Strategies and Ideology in the Cosa Nostra Family Discourse’. Discourse, Context & Media 15: 45–53.Google Scholar
Poppi, F.I.M. and Castelli, P. Gattinara. 2018. ‘Aliud pro alio: Context and Narratives within a neo-Nazi Community of Practice’. Journal of Language and Politics 17 (4): 1–21.Google Scholar
Poppi, F.I.M., Travaglino, G.A. and Di Piazza, S.. 2018. ‘Talis pater, talis filius: the Role of Discursive Strategies, Thematic Narratives and Ideology in Cosa Nostra’. Critical Discourse Studies., doi: 10.1080/17405904.2018.1477685 Google Scholar
Poppi, F.I.M. and Campani, G. (forthcoming). ‘Ex nihilo crevit: Metaphorization and Ideology in an Italian neo-Nazi Group’. Ethnic and Racial Studies.Google Scholar
Pugliese, E. 2015. ‘Braccianti, caporali, imprese’. In Leggi, migranti e caporali. Prospettive critiche e di ricerca sullo sfruttamento del lavoro in agricoltura, edited by E. Rigo. Pisa: Pacini Editore.Google Scholar
Putnam, L.L., Grant, D., Michelson, G and Cutcher, L.. 2005. ‘Discourse and Resistance: Targets, Practices and Consequences’. Management Communication Quarterly 19 (1): 5–18.Google Scholar
Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R.. 2001. Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and Antisemitism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rogaly, B. 2008. ‘Intensification of Workplace Regimes in British Horticulture: the Role of Migrant Workers’. Population, Space and Place 14 (6): 497–510.Google Scholar
Sandberg, S., Tutenges, S. and Copes, H.. 2015. ‘Stories of Violence: a Narrative Criminological Study of Ambiguity’. British Journal of Criminology 55 (6) 1168–1186.Google Scholar
Scott, J. 1990. Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Shelley, L. 2007. ‘Human Trafficking as a Form of Transnational Crime’. In Human Trafficking, edited by M. Lee, 116–137. Uffculme, Devon, UK: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
Soysal, Y.N. 1994. Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Postnational Membership in Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sykes, G.M. and Matza, D.. 1957. ‘Techniques of Neutralization: a Theory of Delinquency’. American Sociological Review 22 (6): 664–670.Google Scholar
Thomas, E.F., Mavor, K.I. and McGarty, C.. 2012. ‘Social Identities Facilitate and Encapsulate Action-Relevant Constructs: a Test of the Social Identity Model of Collective Action’. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 15 (1): 75–88.Google Scholar
Thompson, J.B. 1988. ‘Mass Communication and Modern Culture: Contribution to a Critical Theory of Ideology’. Sociology 22 (3): 359–383.Google Scholar
Tondo, L and Kelly, A.. 2017. ‘Raped, Beaten, Exploited: the 21st-century Slavery Propping Up Sicilian Farming’. The Guardian. 12 March. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/mar/12/slavery-sicily-farming-raped-beaten-exploited-romanian-women Google Scholar
Travaglino, G.A., ed. 2017a. Protest, Movements and Dissent in the Social Sciences: a Multidisciplinary Perspective. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Travaglino, G.A. 2017b. ‘Support for Anonymous as Vicarious Dissent: Testing the Social Banditry Framework’. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. doi: 10.1177/1368430217722037 Google Scholar
Vaara, E. and Tienari, J.. 2008. ‘A Discursive Perspective on Legitimation Strategies in Multinational Corporations’. Academy of Management Review 33 (4): 985–993.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T.A. 2008. Discourse and Power. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Van Leeuwen, T. and Wodak, R.. 1999. ‘Legitimizing Immigration Control: a Discourse-Historical Analysis’. Discourse Studies 1 (1): 83–118.Google Scholar
Wetherell, M. and Potter, J.. 1993. Mapping the Language of Racism: Discourse and the Legitimation of Exploitation. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. 2007. ‘Pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis: a Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry’. Pragmatics & Cognition 15 (1): 203–225.Google Scholar