Genocide discourse functions as convertible symbolic capital in politics

Evidence

Drawing on a term proposed by Pierre Bourdieu (1991), LaCapra (1994) argues that discourses of genocide constitute symbolic capital. They can accordingly be used not only in constructing, legitimizing, and challenging racializing schemes but also in promoting political agendas. Charles Maier (1988) argues that recent debates in Germany regarding the uniqueness or comparability of the Holocaust have provided opposing sides with capital that has been used in shaping political programs and questions of identity. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 281

Categorization

• DEFINE: Introduces Bourdieuvian reading of genocide talk as symbolic capital - a concept with definitional weight.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 281
• XREF: connects to: the MOC “The Word Is a Fence: Language as Battleground, Property, and Partition”