This book is a companion to Political Debasement: Incivility, Contempt, and Humiliation in Parliamentary and Public Discourse. It brings together interdisciplinary contributions to provide a comprehensive and detailed exploration of the nature, function, and effect of debasement language used by selected political leaders in Western and non-Western countries. Among them are Donald Trump (in the USA), Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (Turkey), Rodrigo Roa Duterte (Philippines), Jair Bolsonaro (Brazil), Abe Shinzô (Japan), Pauline Hanson (Australia), Kyriakos Mitsotakis (Greece), Geert Wilders (the Netherlands), Beppe Grillo (Italy), and Santiago Abascal (Spain). Chapters focus specifically on the language of these leaders while examining debasement discourse from narrow and broad perspectives. The former includes the use of crude or abusive language (e.g., curses, obscenity, and swearing) to demean, humiliate, mock, insult, or belittle, based on the actual or perceived object or entity (e.g., race, religion, national, gender identity, or sexual orientation); the latter includes the use of devious or indirect irony, sarcasm, cynicism, ridicule, subtlety, and understatement to degrade and discredit other individuals or groups. The book represents the collective wisdom of scholars and researchers, experts in fields such as communication, political science, international relations, and social and political psychology. Cumulatively, the authors develop a global analysis of debasement discourse in societies from West to East and offer a cutting-edge approach to expand a framework assessing the role and effect of such rhetoric in contemporary politics.

This edited book is an innovative collection of studies—pioneering scholarship systematically exploring the various features of debasement language used by political leaders in their speeches, statements, and remarks during parliamentary and other official as well as unofficial, private activities. The book examines in particular the forms, functions, and effects of political debasement in Western and non-Western countries, including Spain, Malaysia, the UK, Japan, China, India, Montenegro, Greece, Poland, and Israel. It addresses the growing interest in recent years in issues related to the increase of debasement in the public sphere. These include high-echelon politicians’ invective and vulgarity toward their colleagues in houses of parliament; their abusive and cynical language toward sections of the public, including women and minorities; and their crude sarcasm and irony expressed toward media representatives. The book focuses on those instances where political leaders at the very highest-level employ debasement discourse; it identifies the specific language they use in different political cultures and under different situations; the reasons for using this type of language; and its consequences. The book brings together a team of distinguished political scientists, communication and linguistics researchers, and social and political psychologists, with expert backgrounds and experience in understanding the reciprocal interaction between language and politics, in this case: debasement. They discuss and provide a number of novel insights of theoretical and practical importance regarding debasing discourse, as well as potential avenues for future research on the nature and effect of this type of language.

This book presents a new approach to the analysis of political psychology, political culture, and communication. Using data from Japanese political interviews and parliamentary deliberations, it reveals how Japanese politicians address their audience. In addition to analyzing the use of verbal political rhetoric, the book shows that nonverbal communication is highly relevant as well. In a context where political leaders are becoming increasingly important, identifying the techniques used by Japanese politicians – especially facial expressions, hand gestures, and other forms of body language – to gain support from the audience, leads us to consider communication practices of political leaders around the world. Politicians adopt different communication styles based on their specific electoral system. The more single-seat constituency political candidates use rhetoric, the greater their chance of appealing to voters. In addition, the use of personal experiences and others' speech quotations function as effective political rhetoric, further attracting the audience’s attention. In short, this book presents a more comprehensive and holistic picture of political “rhetoric” than usually offered by other studies of political communication.

This book offers a systematization of the recourse to political incivility by different subjects and in different contexts. The authors argue that incivility has now become a strategic resource that can be used by various actors in the public arena to achieve specific goals. We are referring not only to traditional political subjects, but also to journalists, citizens, movements and protest groups, that is to a plurality of actors who, from different angles, contribute to the construction of the "political spectacle". This resource can be activated according to circumstances and conveniences, whether their nature be political (to place an issue at the center of public debate or a new actor in the offer range), mediatic (to achieve an increase in visibility or viewership) or relational (to expand one's visibility and centrality in social media). The book identifies common elements linking the different levels of use of incivility, which can be traced in uncivil forms of communication. These are their expressive power (memorable gestures and unequivocal messages, which are immediately recognizable and visible), their aggregation power (they build group identities, and consolidate allegiances and bonds) and their mobilization power (they galvanize people, and inspire them to participate and take action). Sara Bentivegna is Full Professor at the Sapienza University of Rome, Italy. Rossella Rega is Associate Professor at the University of Siena, Italy.

The volume brings together scholars from across the Americas to address the complex evolution of political and policy media spaces as they are studied from a range of perspectives.

Presents and seeks to explain the variety of humor in democratic politics. The humor ranges from the bawdy political comedies of Aristophanes in ancient Athens to the journalistic satires of our daily newspapers, and includes the jokes and comic invective of the people and their politicians.

This book is a companion to Political Debasement: Incivility, Contempt, and Humiliation in Parliamentary and Public Discourse. It brings together interdisciplinary contributions to provide a comprehensive and detailed exploration of the nature, function, and effect of debasement language used by selected political leaders in Western and non-Western countries. Among them are Donald Trump (in the USA), Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (Turkey), Rodrigo Roa Duterte (Philippines), Jair Bolsonaro (Brazil), Abe Shinzô (Japan), Pauline Hanson (Australia), Kyriakos Mitsotakis (Greece), Geert Wilders (the Netherlands), Beppe Grillo (Italy), and Santiago Abascal (Spain). Chapters focus specifically on the language of these leaders while examining debasement discourse from narrow and broad perspectives. The former includes the use of crude or abusive language (e.g., curses, obscenity, and swearing) to demean, humiliate, mock, insult, or belittle, based on the actual or perceived object or entity (e.g., race, religion, national, gender identity, or sexual orientation); the latter includes the use of devious or indirect irony, sarcasm, cynicism, ridicule, subtlety, and understatement to degrade and discredit other individuals or groups. The book represents the collective wisdom of scholars and researchers, experts in fields such as communication, political science, international relations, and social and political psychology. Cumulatively, the authors develop a global analysis of debasement discourse in societies from West to East and offer a cutting-edge approach to expand a framework assessing the role and effect of such rhetoric in contemporary politics.

This dissertation explores the relationship between rhetoric and democracy. More specifically, it examines the theoretical demeaning of the rhetorical pursuit of political advantage that pervades normative theories of public deliberation in democracy, including both liberal and discourse theories. The main argument of the dissertation is that such theories wrongly oppose the idea of authentically democratic speech to strategic, tactical, or rhetorical modes of address. In contrast with the aversion to rhetoric found in normative theories of public deliberation, particularly those variously inspired by John Rawls and Jurgen Habermas, I advance an argument for an essential and productive relationship between rhetoric and democracy as suggested by Kenneth Burke and Michel de Certeau. Since currently marginalized citizens must, by necessity, deploy hegemonic discourses strategically in pursuit of a measure of political power or representation, theories of public deliberation in democracy that deny the general democratic legitimacy of the rhetorical pursuit of political advantage ideologically undermine democratic challengers. Instead of encouraging citizens to seriously attend to, and value, the essential democratic struggle for political advantage, prominent theories of public deliberation in democracy denigrate it. While the rhetorical pursuit of political advantage is susceptible to anti-democratic excesses, particularly of the sort that jeopardize peaceful association and truthful politics, theorists and citizens should not imagine an end to such excesses in visions of understanding or justification-oriented communication, but should look instead to effective counter-rhetorics. Peaceful association and epistemically accountable political speech should be regarded as situated, rhetorical-political achievements against the aims of the militant and the deceptive. Hence, this dissertation recommends that, rather than opposing democracy to rhetorical politics, citizens and theorists alike should recognize democracy in the broad proliferation of an effective ability, among diversely motivated people and groups, to win a share of political power rhetorically.