Language of Persuasion: Analysis of Conceptual Metaphors in Political Discourse

The aim of this article is to study the scope of conceptual metaphors as a persuasive tool inherent to political discourse in English. In particular, it dwells upon the use of four conceptual metaphors such as NATION IS A FAMILY, STATE IS A BODY, POLITICS IS A WAR, and POLITICS IS A GAME. For this purpose, the transcripts of twenty-eight public speeches delivered by David Cameron, Hillary Clinton, Theresa May, and Donald Trump were analysed. The results revealed numerous functions of these metaphors in the process of persuasion. Apart from that, the analysis showed that the majority of the analysed politicians resort to the source domain of WAR to conceptualise their political activities, while the source domain of GAME is the least frequently used.

Comparison of American and British political texts (based on the material of the inaugural speeches)

The article presents a comparative analysis of American and British political texts, aimed to reveal the content of speech tactics and strategies, and to comment on their functional purpose. Special attention is paid to the issues of using the means of speech expressiveness, among which key words and metaphors are highlighted. This study is based on the texts of the inaugural speeches of American presidents (George W. Bush, Barak H. Obama, Donald J. Trump, Joe R. Biden) and British prime ministers (Tony Blair, David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson), published on the official websites of the US and UK administrations.

El rol de los jueces en relación con los derechos económicos y sociales

Los jueces son hoy actores políticos importantísimos. Esto es efectivo tanto en Chile como en el mundo entero. El Brexit, por ejemplo, fue publicitado, entre otras cosas, como una forma de librarse de una buena vez del enorme poder de la Corte Europea de Justicia, la cual supuestamente tenía a los Británicos subyugados de modo que debían, en palabras de Theresa May, “retomar el control”. En los EEUU, las recientes elecciones tenían a todos pendientes de lo que harían los tribunales, recordando que el año 2000, cuando compitió George Bush contra Al Gore, fue la Corte Suprema la que finalmente decidió quien ocuparía el sillón presidencial estadounidense. En este trabajo entregaremos algunas nociones básicas sobre el rol político que cumplen hoy los jueces, y en especial en relación con los DESC. Podemos adelantar que en el tema existen defensores y detractores, todos con fuertes argumentos. Dividiremos el ensayo en tres partes distintas. Una primera de introducción al tema, donde fijaremos algunos conceptos básicos. La segunda, en que analizaremos los argumentos de quienes defienden y quienes condenan la actividad del juez en relación con los DESC. En la tercera parte veremos algunos ejemplos sacados de la realidad chilena que ilustran lo planteado en las secciones uno y dos del presente trabajo.

Prisoners of their own device: Brexit as a failed negotiating strategy

Brexit has occasioned a rightward shift in British politics as successive leaders have grappled with the difficulties of negotiating with the European Union and the vicissitudes of politics in the governing Conservative party. Explanations for the hardening of Eurosceptic preferences focus on the demands of ‘taking back control’ and the polarisation of post-referendum politics as key drivers. But they have not explored the ways in which negotiation strategies shaped – rather than reflected – domestic political developments. Drawing on two-level games accounts of ‘synergistic’ bargaining, this article argues both David Cameron and Theresa May sought to leverage Eurosceptic sentiment in their respective negotiations to make it more credible the United Kingdom would walk away if its demands were rejected. While both leaders failed to convey their resolve, they inadvertently strengthened Eurosceptic constituencies back home, contributing to the paucity – and the rejection – of their negotiated agreements.

The Curious Case of Theresa May and the Public That Did Not Rally: Gendered Reactions to Terrorist Attacks Can Cause Slumps Not Bumps

Terrorist attacks routinely produce rallies for incumbent men in the executive office. With scarce cases, there has been little consideration of terrorism’s consequences for evaluations of sitting women executives. Fusing research on rallies with scholarship on women in politics, we derive a gender-revised framework wherein the public will be less inclined to rally around women when terrorists attack. A critical case is UK Prime Minister Theresa May, a right-leaning incumbent with security experience. Employing a natural experiment, we demonstrate that the public fails to rally after the 2017 Manchester Arena attack. Instead, evaluations of May decrease, with sharp declines among those holding negatives views about women. We further show May’s party loses votes in areas closer to the attack. We then find support for the argument in a multinational test. We conclude that conventional theory on rally events requires revision: women leaders cannot count on rallies following major terrorist attacks.

The Brexit Elections, 2017–19

The years immediately after the 2015 general election were dominated by another vote, held in 2016. In 2013, the electoral challenge from UKIP had forced David Cameron to promise an in–out referendum on the EU should his party win the next general election. Cameron fulfilled his promise, after negotiations with the EU which only partially addressed the grievances of Eurosceptics in UKIP and within his own party. The chapter discusses the narrow victory for ‘Leave’ in the 2016 referendum, arising from divisions within the UK which cut across previous party allegiances and introduced a new element of volatility in an electorate which was already barely recognizable from that of 1964. The situation was complicated further by the election of the radical left-wing MP Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader after his party’s 2015 defeat. By contrast, when David Cameron resigned as Conservative leader and Prime Minister after the referendum he was succeeded by Theresa May, who was regarded as a pragmatic centre-right politician who could negotiate a compromise ‘Brexit’ deal with the EU. The chapter examines May’s failure to carry out this promise, marked in particular by her inept attempt to secure a convincing parliamentary majority in the 2017 general election. When May was forced from office in 2019 she was succeeded by Boris Johnson, a far more controversial and divisive character who nevertheless was able to lead the Conservatives to a comfortable electoral victory, not least because their pro-European opponents were hopelessly divided. However, the victorious Conservatives had no reason to feel complacent; even if Johnson’s government could deliver the favourable Brexit deal which it had promised, over the years since 1964 the British electorate had become far more fickle and parties were increasingly vulnerable to events outside their control. Within a few months of the 2019 election, party competition in Britain, which had seemed so stable back in 1964, was exposed to a new and deadly source of disturbance—the outbreak in China of the Covid-19 virus—which presented the most serious challenge faced by any UK government since 1945.

When Cosmopolitans Get Ahead

The anticosmopolitanism that Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May endorsed as a guiding ideology of Brexit has a long history in British discourse. This article links the anticosmopolitanism alive in Brexit to late-nineteenth-century antisemitism, racism, and antiglobalization by examining the content, context, and reception of W. T. Eady's I.D.B. or The Adventures of Solomon Davis (1887). As an effort to lampoon diamond magnate Barney Barnato's rise in society, the novel throws up warnings about how deserving English will be impoverished when Jewish immigrants and other so-called “cosmopolitans” take advantage of the mobilities enabled by British entanglements with the larger world. The novel shows how fears of globalization and European immigration comingled with a racialized sense of Englishness, all intimations of Brexit discourse.