Речевой имидж публичного политика
The author explores the correspondence between the system of political views and values and the system of stylistic means used in public communication. On a material of public images of the Russian politicians this article suggests possible methods of assessment of compliance between the chosen rhetoric and declared political tasks and goals.
The article describes the results of comparative analysis of three texts created in three different countries under totalitarian power, delivered by three political leaders. The texts in German, Italian, and Russian have been analysed.
Upon analyzing the political processes occurring during the nineteenth-twentieth centuries, G.Musikhin posits that the popular idea about the supremacy of professional managers in politics over demagogues speculating with mass’ political aspirations conceals an attempt by the power holders to get rid of the axiological rationale for the political hegemony. He concludes that when the governmental policy is supported by the voters’ will rather than sovereign power per se, the ideological discourse becomes of fundamental importance since support is lent to someone who can present his ideological position as a majority’s goal. The debate within the political space is built around an ability to offer to the society a more attractive political (to be more precise, ideological) prospect rather than detailed mechanisms of how to govern society (that are largely universal).
Performatives are helpful in analyzing and interpreting political actions and events. Speech act and logical studies often reduce performatives to performative utterances. HSE scholars differentiate performative event, performative act and performative utterance. Their mutual interface coupled with reactive speech acts produce nested performative.Structural patterns of nested performatives are established with the help of funnel of performativity fashioned after the funnel of causality.
The paper deals with the creative works of an outstanding German philosopher-anthropologist Helmut Plessner. He addresses to an existential structure of individuality as to a social existence and considers it as the carrier of roles. He proves that social identification is based on the idea of the person possessing a social role, but not defined by it. Plessner starts with the idea of a duality of the role relation in which the performer identifies himself. Such identification appears as the only condition in the basic relation of a social role and a human nature. On this basis in the structure of duality of the human existence, a role connecting the carrier and its figure, Plessner finds a constant of sociality. Plessner addresses to an ontologic structure of the person, an eccentric pozitionality, within social subject and defines it as “duality structure in which the carrier of a role and a figure of a role are connected”. Plessner believes that what we find exactly in this structure is "a constant" which is the condition of “human generalization”, and considers it in a quality of “the unique constant in the basic relation of a social role and a human nature”.
Formation of democratic societies of the Western type presupposes appearance on the historical scene of a new strong actor - the bourgeois class: "No bourgeoisie, no democracy" (Barrington Moore). The articulation and defense of vital interests of that class creates a new social space - "the bourgeois public sphere" which helps to make up "counterbalance" to absolutism of a corporate state - a civil society, the core of which is composed by public opinion. In the confrontation between the authorities and society one of the most important roles is played by the press that provides free debate and discussion of generally valid problems, especially economic and political. The recognition of the mass media role was stamped in its characterization in XIII century as "the fourth power". Technological development of the media incredibly expanded its functions, turning journalists into creating informational analogue of reality, saturating daily life with new meanings. Methods of the representation of reality, the specific nature of political influence of journalists - key members of the reflexive elites (Helmut Shelski), are the themes of this article.
Публичная сфера, журналистика, четвертая власть, порядки знания, Повседневность, научное и повседневное знание, экспертиза, Репрезентация, public sphere, journalism, fourth estate, orders of knowledge, Everyday life, scientific and everyday knowledge, Expertise, representation
According to the given article the main basis of the present political regime’s legitimacy in Russia seems to be the absence of institutionalized citizen’s communication across differences. In the absence of effective political competition and social critically media there is not public communication. This, in turn, does not generate the collective form of political change’s internalization. A consequence is the private character of political preference formation which rationality is aimed not at improvement of own political knowledge, but on improvement of own material welfare. For this reason the public sphere institutions/political communication institutions are devaluated as a basis of preference formation in the opinion of most citizens. The exclusion of the democratic institutions from possible ways to improve one’s personal situation does not conflict with interventions of the authoritarianism.
This book addresses a subject that can in the broadest sense be stated as interplay of language and ideology in process of instantiating historical knowledge in texts of political significance. The aim of the present volume is to discuss how history is recontextualized in national political discourse in the framework of two basic strategies of in-group and out-group categorization and biased representation of historical facts. It is contended that such recontextualization leads to what can be described as blending of national political discourse with a nationalistic one.
The evidence for the above contention is provided through linguistic analysis of three chunks of texts.
First, American presidential rhetoric spanning the last 50 years of history was analyzed. This part of the analysis suggests that a productive way to analyze the ‘enemy construction’ strategy seen as one of the key strategies of the discourse of the New World Order is to analyze it in a broader historic perspective, viz. as taking over the same principles, which defined the discourse of the Cold War. The ‘enemy construction’ strategy in both discourses is analyzed as resting on logic of binarism of the classical Us and Them opposition. Thus, it is contended that textual actualization of the ‘enemy’ is the projection of the basic category of the ‘other’ which is perpetuated in the political discourse and gets lexicalized differently depending on the text’s instantiating a particular order of discourse and the ideology informing it.
Second, a chunk of texts produced by those claiming to be professional historians has been addressed to see how national historical discourse is reinstantiated vis-à-vis a newly acquired national identity. An example of such discourse would be texts by Ukrainian historians writing on Great Patriotic War/World War II.
Third, texts of public figures, state leaders among them, instantiating post-Soviet geopolitical situation in the Caucasus, in particular, tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorny Karabakh were looked into. The tension aggravated with unresolved conflicts, involvement of both Russia and the USA, results in this material being a valuable source for pinpointing linguistic patterns of historical and political discourse in general and patterns indicative of national historical discourse transforming into nationalistic discourse, in particular.
Discourse analysis is neither meant to substitute historical analysis, nor claims that all historical permutations are of discursive nature solely. Instead, we see the role of discourse analysis in placing a broader question: To what extent that which has really happened is displaced by its recontextualization in discourse, i.e. by its description? Since any conflict is always closely tied with conflicting values the question can be restated as: To what extent in such historical accounts accurate rendition is displaced with evaluation and appraisal? What comes first: the unresolved issues themselves or discursive practice perpetuating those issues? In other words, is it the conflict itself or the conflict of conflicting textual descriptions?
One way or the other, historical representations are not static; they are flexible and more than prone to distortion when values come into play. Reinventing the history to mesh with a new national identity is number one example. A clash of different political perspectives is a clash of different historical descriptions. And in this clash a power-wielding social agent has the power to reinterpret the history that will fit their political narrative with other interpretations outlawed and rendered unhistorical.
In the meantime, the true power of history as a field of study and an academic discipline should be seen in presenting multiple interpretations of phenomena in question with these interpretations being mutually complementary rather than mutually exclusive. In which lies the real power and the mission of all the humanities.