Political Rhetoric
Lecture 1: Introduction to Political Rhetoric....................................................................... 2
The importance of political rhetoric.................................................................................... 2
What is rhetoric?................................................................................................................ 2
Political rhetoric.................................................................................................................. 2
Rhetoric, a contested notion...............................................................................................3
Rhetoric was central to ancient democracy........................................................................3
Plato................................................................................................................................... 3
Aristotle.............................................................................................................................. 4
Cicero................................................................................................................................. 4
Rhetoric diminished when the modern state emerged....................................................... 4
Hobbes............................................................................................................................... 5
Rousseau........................................................................................................................... 5
Politics vs. the political....................................................................................................... 5
Situating rhetoric................................................................................................................ 6
Lecture 2: Classical rhetoric - discovery & arrangement...................................................7
1. Occasions of speech...................................................................................................... 7
2. The issue........................................................................................................................7
3. Five canons of speech................................................................................................... 8
Five canons of speech: 1. Discovery............................................................................8
Logos......................................................................................................................8
Ethos.................................................................................................................... 10
Pathos.................................................................................................................. 10
Five canons of speech: 2. Arrangement..................................................................... 11
1. Introduction (best suitable artistic proof: ethos).......................................... 11
2. Narrative (best suitable artistic proof: logos and ethos)............................. 12
3. Proof / Refutation (best suitable artistic proof: all 3 of them)......................12
4. Conclusion (best suitable artistic proof: pathos)......................................... 13
Lecture 3: Classical rhetoric: style & delivery + Rhetorical political analysis............... 14
Classical rhetoric.............................................................................................................. 14
Five canons of speech: 3. Style................................................................................. 14
Figures of speech....................................................................................................... 15
Schemes...............................................................................................................15
Tropes...................................................................................................................16
Five canons of speech: 4. Delivery............................................................................ 18
Rhetorical political analysis (RPA)....................................................................................18
Focus on ideas (RPA).................................................................................................19
Question of ‘agency’ (RPA)........................................................................................ 19
How to do rhetorical political analysis (RPA).............................................................. 19
Lecture 4: Mass media & rhetoric.......................................................................................20
The mediatization of politics............................................................................................. 20
, The rhetoric of politicians................................................................................................. 22
The rhetoric of mass media..............................................................................................23
Lecture 5: Emotions (pathos) & reason (logos)................................................................ 25
1. Emotions in rhetoric: antagonistic to reason?.............................................................. 25
1.1 Deliberative democracy........................................................................................ 25
1.2 Neuroscience....................................................................................................... 26
2. Motivated reasoning..................................................................................................... 28
3. Emotional rhetoric: curse or blessing?......................................................................... 29
Lecture 6: Guest lecture 1: Negativity and Incivility in political rhetoric........................30
Lecture 7: Populist rhetoric................................................................................................ 33
What is populism?............................................................................................................ 33
Style elements of populist rhetoric................................................................................... 34
Populist rhetoric, simplistic rhetoric?................................................................................ 36
Lecture 8: Guest lecture 2: The rhetoric of protest (Ruud Wouters, Tilburg University)..
38
Lecture 9: Gender & rhetoric.............................................................................................. 39
1. Gender inequality in political rhetoric........................................................................... 39
2. Feminism and rhetoric..................................................................................................40
3. Gender roles as rhetorical means to persuade............................................................ 42
Lecture 10: Guest lecture 2: Political Rhetoric in practice - Vincent Stuer.................... 43
1
,Lecture 1: Introduction to Political Rhetoric
The importance of political rhetoric
- No politics without persuasion (protest, go on the street) -> fundamental political skill
- Reason: the world is uncertain
- Persuasion by speech vs. persuasion by force
Persuasion/rhetoric: a symbolic process in which communicators try to convince other
people to change their attitudes or behaviours regarding an issue through the transmission
of a message in an atmosphere of free choice: you choose to listen -> more powerful than
persuasion by force.
”Democracy . . . is distinguished as a form of governance by the extent of persuasion relative
to coercion”: Democratie ... onderscheidt zich als bestuursvorm door de mate van
overtuiging ten opzichte van dwang.
What is rhetoric?
Retoriek = de kunst van het spreken in het openbaar, welsprekendheid
Rhetor = speaker
Tekhne = art
< Greek
Studying rhetoric = learning the practical skills of persuasion
= studying the persuasiveness of speech
Not limited to spoken word (oratory), also written word & visuals.
Political rhetoric
Many areas of rhetorical studies: law, organization studies, marketing…
Persuasion in the political realm (domein) = Not limited to politicians! (for example Lady
Gaga’s speech about gay people in the military, Emma Watson gives a speech about the
United Nations, Greta Thunberg)
“What makes a political speech persuasive (or not)?”
“Most famous persuasive speech in history?” -> Martin Luther King: “I have a dream”
- Activist leader of civil rights movement
- August 1963
- March on Washington for jobs and freedom
- 100 years after Emancipation Proclamation (Lincoln)
2
,Elements that make this speech persuasive:
- A lot of metaphors (= rhetorical device): ‘lonely island of poverty’, ‘we refuse to
believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt’
- Repetition: ‘100 years later’, ‘I have a dream’, ‘now is the time’
- Use of the word ‘we’ (audience feels connected to speaker)
- ‘My four little children’ -> touching the feelings of the audience, making it personal,
emotional
- Rhythm: almost like a song (intonation), with a few pauses to let the message
resonate before he continues, rhyme…
- Loud & clear speech
- Staying hopeful, positive
- Credibility as a person (he is a black person himself, he has a reason)
Rhetoric, a contested notion
Rhetoric is often associated with words like ‘mere’, ‘empty’, as if it is contrasted with reality.
Association with danger: “Can people be persuaded of anything? Violence,
misinformation…”
No democracy without free speech.
Rhetoric was central to ancient democracy
Retoriek stond centraal in de oude democratie;
- Greece, 500 BC
- From aristocracy (heerschappij in handen van een kleine groep)
to democracy (demos = people, ekklesia = assembly) (de wil van het volk is de bron
van legitieme machtsuitoefening)
- Highly participatory system: the status of being a citizen comes with obligations
- Rhetorical skills were important
- Teachers: sophists (sophos = wisdom) = filosofen die tegen betaling lessen gaven
(bv. Protagoras, Gorias…)
- Culture of oral transmission
- Different views of classical thinkers… (Plato - Aristotle - Cicero)
Plato
- Classical philosopher
- 427-347 v.C.
- “Rhetoric is empty and dangerous” -> his teacher Socrates was sentenced to death,
because he was accused of doing bad to the youth by his speeches.
- Plato concluded that rhetoric can do bad instead of good, it can persuade most
people of anything: ‘a rudderless boat’ (stuurloze boot)
- Belief in one moral truth: there is 1 truth, but not many people can see it. They can
only see the shadows of the things that are happening. Only a small elite can see the
truth.
3
, -> Allegory of the cave
- The republic: society should be based on reason. There is a strict division:
philosopher-kings, guardians and traders.
- Ideas were later criticised
- More sympathetic reading: argument for alternative type of rhetoric
- He is an anti-political thinker who believes society should be based on pure reason.
Rhetoric is unnecessary and dangerous.
Aristotle
- 384 - 322 v.C.
- Student of Plato
- More positive interpretation of rhetoric:
“We are political animals.”
“Good life is life in accordance with community.” (vs. Plato: natural state)
- Rhetoric complements philosophical reasoning: How should the best case be put,
given the argument, evidence, audience? Best case is not always clear.
- “The art of rhetoric”
- Disclaimer: exclusive notion of ‘citizen’: importance of ‘enthymeme’ (Argumentatie met een
verzwegen argument. Voorbeeld Jan is niet thuis, want hij neemt de telefoon niet op. Het verzwegen argument: Als
Jan thuis is, neemt hij altijd de telefoon op.),
degree of permitted disagreement is limited
- He thinks that rhetorical techniques can help in the pursuit of truth.
Cicero
- Great orator (redenaar) of the Roman world
- He wrote several pieces on rhetoric, for example: ‘Orator’
- He was like Aristotle, refuted sophism (weerlegde de redenering die juist lijkt te zijn
maar dat niet is). Understanding of topic comes first, then follows good speech. He
was pragmatic (=praktisch, nuttig en bruikbaar).
- Persuasion is not about techniques, but about the talent to adapt.
Rhetoric diminished when the modern state emerged
- Centralized, powerful authorities
- Laws to be obeyed without discussion (monopoly of violence): subordination of
citizen assemblies to rules (onderwerping van burgervergaderingen aan regels)
- Two thinkers (Hobbes and Rousseau): contrasting interpretations of sovereign state
(= die de meeste macht heeft), similar perception of danger of rhetoric.
4
, Hobbes Rousseau
Pessimist about the nature of human Optimistic about the human nature:
beings: uncertainty & competition driven by “Humans are naturally good, but modern
passion/appetite. society made them selfish.”
“We all have our own truth, there is no Modern society has the risk of being
shared morality.” -> We are capable of chaotic. Return to harmony through
reasoning (not like animals), but different agreement among citizens.
interpretations of the same event.
“Leviathan” (1651) “Social contract” (1762)
Rational thing to do = one-time social No external authority.
contract:
To return to harmony humans need to agree
“Humans have agreed on a social contract, on a social contract and obey to ‘the
where we give the power to a higher general will’(= deep inside ourselves we all
instance who makes us obey to the rules. know what is best, we should follow this
Supreme power is needed to bring civil (shared sentiment from within, internal
peace.” Rhetoric will lead to only more motivation)). This is not developed through
confusion (for example: metaphors). rhetoric.
He believes that one voice should be He envisions a society where citizens
granted primacy over all other voices to deliberately come to an agreement, but
temper an otherwise conflictual society. without actually communicating.
Politics vs. the political
“Why do so many people (and classical thinkers/political theorists) see rhetoric as
dangerous?”
Argument of James Martin (handbook):
- Politics = regular activities taking place within the rules of the game
- The political = higher principles (what are the rules of the game?)
The political is only partially settled…
- Realisation that things might be done differently
- Power relations can always change (we don’t have slavery anymore)
… vs. philosophers who search for stable principles
Potential for chaos, disorder, crisis.
Dismissal of rhetoric is a symptom of that concern
Because rhetoric involves both politics & the political
- “Just rhetoric”: Mundane day-to-day-business
5
, - “Speeches that changed the world”: efforts to establish new principles
- Most often in between
If thinker has sympathy for rhetoric (e.g. Aristotle), often limits (e.g. very exclusive public
sphere) to eliminate discussion about the political.
Impossible to reconcile stability with inclusive rhetoric?
Situating rhetoric
Language
- Rhetoric uses language
- Not all rhetoric is language
- Not all language is rhetoric
Ideology
- = Organized belief system (ex: liberalism, communism…)
- But rhetoric is about assembly/construction of ideas (and delivery)
- Ideology is a resource for rhetoric
- Rhetoric can change (or create) ideologies
Discourse
- Is also about how people ‘make meaning’ of things
- Also deals with persuasion and power (critical discourse analysis)
- Discourse is broad and ongoing; rhetoric concentrates on situated encounters
______________
Example exam question: What explains, according to James Martin, why many political
theorists see political rhetoric as something dangerous? Illustrate by referring to one political
theorist of your choice (e.g. Plato, Rousseau,...).
Answer:
______________
+ read chapters 1 & 2 of the handbook.
6
,Lecture 2: Classical rhetoric - discovery &
arrangement
1. Occasions of speech
Aristotle: “Good rhetoric is context-dependent. It depends on the occasion.”
There are 3 different ‘occasions’/’genres’/’branches’ of speech:
Epideictic speech Forensic speech (judicial) Deliberative speech
(ceremonial) (political)
Honour/commemorate Guilt or innocence Debate legislation, budget,
individuals war…
Ex: wedding/funeral speech, Ex: defence given in court Ex: parliamentary debate
rousing oration before battle
Goal: Creating shared Goal: Persuade jury of a Goal: Persuade people of
sentiment judgement course of action
Praise or blame Evidence Possible outcomes and their
potential benefits or
drawbacks
Focus on present Focus on past Focus on future
It is important to conform to expectations.
- Ex: You can’t talk about what the bride did wrong in her life during her wedding
speech.
- Unless the goal is to surprise (risk of inappropriateness)
- Arguments are social and not strictly logical
Classifications are not mutually exclusive. In real life it is not that strict.
2. The issue
Aristotle: “Once you know the occasion, it is also important to know what the issue is.”
What specifically is being spoken about?
Related to the occasion (ex: different attitude required for a defence (defensive) vs. a
proposal (joyful/enthusiastic)).
‘Status theory’ - Cicero
- Conjecture - What is the truth?
- Definition - What does it mean?
- Quality - What is the nature of the act?
- Circumstance - Is it relevant?
7
,Examples of the status theory:
“It is not true, I didn’t take it.” (Conjecture)
“I took it, but I intended to give it back.” (Definition)
“I took it, because I wanted to help a friend in need - altruism.” (Quality)
“This is not a crime, it shouldn’t be discusses in criminal court.” (Circumstance)
Sometimes political actors “talk past each other”, when there is no agreement on the issue
or when the focus is on another quality (framing).
-> Example of ‘Definition’:
3. Five canons of speech
Aristotle talked about occasions & the issue, but most importantly:
1. Discovery (ethos - pathos - logos): What kind of arguments do you use?
2. Arrangement: How do you order them? What’s the best way to arrange them?
3. Style: How do you bring it? (linguistic)
4. Delivery: How do you bring it? (behavioural)
5. Memory: To what extend do you memorize your message beforehand?
Five canons of speech: 1. Discovery
Selecting arguments from a range of options so that the audience reaches the conclusion of
the speaker.
3 types of “appeal”/ “artistic proofs”, most speeches involve all types.
- Logos (reason)
- Ethos (authority/character of the speaker)
- Pathos (emotion)
Logos
Vital form of argumentation: based on reason (f.e. when you use scientific numbers).
Reach a conclusion based on a premise (or premises).
“Sale of hand weapons should be prohibited because each year 200 people die of it”
-> you make use of numbers.
8
, Inductive (start from the empirics): ex: 200 people died because of it so we
need to ban it.
Deductive (start from broader moral principle): ex: weapons are wrong so
they should be prohibited.
Many different types: scientific/normative/everyday experience (I once saw someone
shooting someone else)/a case (it happened there that someone was killed)/historical
analogy (in the past we’ve seen this happen and…)/…
Acceptance of a reasoned argument is furthered by a smooth connection between premise
and conclusion.
Syllogism: major premise + minor premise -> conclusion
Major premise Murder is wrong.
Minor premise Killing animals to eat them is murder.
Conclusion Killing animals to eat them is wrong.
Enthymeme: omission of a premise
Strength: listener reaches conclusion himself
“Murder is wrong, so killing animals to eat them is wrong.” - You don’t need to mention the
minor premise, because the listener comes to this conclusion on his own.
Debating means explicating and then disputing the (hidden) premises.
-> Difficult when actors talk ‘past each other’ as they disagree on the issue (above).
Refutation: presentation of counter-arguments: the counter-arguments don’t always
come from another party, often times you need to incorporate them in your own speech.
Typical set-up of the refutation:
1. Present/anticipate a counterposition yourself
2. Refute the counterposition
9
