Journal of Language and Politics - Volume 20, Issue 3, 2021

Abstract

This article seeks to explore the discursive rediscovery of the left menace and the ideological relevance between the far right and the right wing in Greece in times of political turmoil. Drawing on some historical aspects of modern Greece, first, I intend to explain the resurgence of Greece’s divided past. By emphasising references to Gramsci and the ‘hegemony of the left’, the article investigates the discursive construction of ingroups and outgroups on the basis of haunted memories of modern Greek history. By synthesising the Discourse Historical Approach and the concept of Aristotelian topos, I explicate how Gramsci has been re-utilised in an extreme right context by Greek far-right figures in order to stigmatise their ideological opponents. In a second step, my aim is to study the normalisation of political enmity by highlighting far-right discourses’ resemblance to New Democracy’s members’ rhetoric through references to Greek culture and economic imaginaries.

Abstract

This paper examines how, within the context of meritocracy, a highly differentiated education system can coexist with assertions of equal opportunity. Drawing on the example of Singapore’s education policy texts from 1991 to 2012, the paper exemplifies and expands the analytical potential of a micro-meso-macro movements framework with which to critically engage the discursive role of neo-liberal metaphors in ameliorating the tension of providing ‘equal opportunities’ between students who will undertake the university pathway and those who will have to undergo vocational training. Based on the interconnected discourses of opportunity-choice and opportunity-skills through a more flexible system, the analytical development of these two simultaneous sub micro-meso-macro movements demonstrates how the playing field is levelled, and competition for society’s occupations and academic progression is fair even for Vocational and Industrial Training Board Act (VITB) trainees.

Abstract

Since the 1980s, debates on security have expanded and security has become a catchphrase in virtually every area of life. In Finland, the government elected in 2003 began its four-year period in power by launching a special Internal Security Programme (ISP) that stressed the threat of social exclusion. Altogether four ISPs have been launched in Finland since 2004. They all repeat the menace of social exclusion. In this article, we examine how these speech acts materialised on the level of legislation. Our study suggests that in Finland, the securitization of exclusion was only accepted in the media. Overall it ‘failed’, as on the level of law, internal security and exclusion were not, in the main, connected when security measures were justified. On the other hand, we contend that by introducing more monitoring and less privacy – especially among youth – the legislation effectively opened novel avenues for ‘security nothings’.

Abstract

It has been argued that far-right populist parties (FRPP) distinguish themselves from other parties on the right of the political spectrum through their strong association with nationalism, anti-elitism, authoritarianism and historical mythologizing. These features typically manifest in discourse that attempts to justify exclusionist immigration and asylum policies by presenting Islam as an existential threat to predominantly white societies. This paper seeks to establish whether a conservative party that has never been considered populist could possess the same features as an FRPP by comparing three selected discursive texts – one from mainstream conservative party leader John Howard and two from prominent European FRPP leaders. The analysis revealed that the key difference between the three leaders was Howard’s failure to satisfy the authoritarianism criterion, which was interpreted as a decisive factor in his party’s moderate guise. This suggests that some mainstream parties may be more ideologically extremist than they are perceived to be.

Abstract

Power, conforming to particular political groups of the society, is exercised on the masses by making them believe in the legitimacy of that dominance. This association enables the groups to exercise their power and promulgate their ideologies through their discourse as well. One illustration of this discourse appears in the form of political manifestos. Utilizing the tool of language, the political actors (as agents of political parties) set agendas, pertinent topics and position their stance in these manifestos. Framed under critical discourse analysis, the current study attempts to investigate this act of ‘legitimation’ promulgated by Chilton (2004) and the strategies of Authority Legitimation, devised by Van Leeuwen (2008). The article illustrates how the power-holders utilize their linguistic resources to authorize their stance, idea, and action. The study helps explicating the relation between power, ideology and language and promulgates consciousness regarding the reality constructed by humans, as social and political actors.

This article reviews The Art of Political Storytelling: Why Stories Win Votes in Post-truth Politics9781350107410£ 10.88

This article reviews Österreichische Identitäten im Wandel: Empirische Untersuchungen zu ihrer diskursiven Konstruktion 1995–2015

This article reviews Variation in political metaphor

This article reviews Metaphor, Nation and Discourse9789027202499eBook 9789027262677