Negotiating the middle: the construction of CAFTA-DR through discourse in the United States and Costa Rica

This dissertation explores the ways in which the broader ideological positions of neoliberalism and “socialism for the 21st century” pressure the discourse of CAFTA-DR in the U.S. and Costa Rica. Through a frame analysis of mainstream newspapers “of record,” The New York Times in the U.S. and La Nación in Costa Rica, along with independent and campaign discourse in Costa Rica, substantial reflection, negotiation, and rejection of the discourses of neoliberalism and “socialism for the 21st century” was found. The discourse of the Times largely reflected the discourse of neoliberalism, and La Nación largely echoed the NY Times’ framing. The Costa Rican discourse was more nuanced than the Times, illustrating the effect of both national cultural, and broader ideological pressures from below. Reflections of neoliberal discourse were found in La Nación’s and the “yes” campaign’s framing of CAFTA-DR, as both sources constructed the agreement as progress and advancement, and good for Costa Rican consumers. Negotiation of neoliberal and “socialism for the 21st century” discourses was also detected, with La Nación and the “yes” campaign negotiating a middle position by muting the strong individual rhetoric of neoliberalism and instead using more popular imagery of the “people” and “families.” The discourse of “socialism for the 21st century” was also rejected, as the social movement in the street was constructed negatively, framed as social disorder and tied to notorious, foreign “communist” actors such as Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. The independent media and the “no” campaign framing of CAFTA-DR through calls to, and images of, the social movement in the streets, reflected the more popular discourse of solidarity and participation that is encapsulated by “socialism for the 21st century.” Both oppositional sources, however, balanced this reflection with a negotiated position that incorporated institutional resolution of CAFTA-DR (through the referendum, the legislature, etc…) and called for “free” trade with the United States. Despite this negotiation, evidence of a rejection of the strong neoliberal discourse of individualism was seen, as a main argument against CAFTA-DR was that it would benefit only a few, transnational and local capitalists.Ph.D.Includes bibliographical referencesby Kristin A. Comefor