POLITICAL RHETORIC
HS1: INTRODUCTION
The importance of political rhetoric:
No politics without persuasion -> core thing of what politics is about
Reason: uncertainty
Persuasion by speech vs. persuasion by force
- Persuasion is “a symbolic process in which communicators try to convince other
people to change their own attitudes or behaviors regarding an issue through the
transmission of a message in an atmosphere of free choice” (Perloff, 2020, p. 24)
- ”Democracy . . . is distinguished as a form of governance by the extent of
persuasion relative to coercion” (Mutz, Sniderman & Brody, 1996)
Matter of politics = persuasion
Simple definition persuasion = getting people to do something > by speech or by
force
Speech is more powerfull -> the person will acually come to agree with you &
identify with the decision
The fundamental political skill?
What is rhetoric?:
< Greek ‘retoriketekhne’
- Rhetor = speaker
- Tekhne = art
Studying rhetoric = learning the practical skills of persuasion
Studying rhetoric = studying the persuasiveness of speech
Not limited to spoken word (oratory)
- Written word
- Visuals
Rhetoric is not limited to spoken words but it’s the whole act of persuasion ->
how they bring it, the voice,…
Political rhetoric:
Many areas of rhetorical studies
- E.g. law, organization studies, marketing,…
Persuasion in the political realm
Not limited to politicians! Bv. Taylor Swift influencing elections, Bv. The media
“What makes a political speech persuasive (or not)?”
Most 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
Possible elements:
- Credibility as a person
o Who he is
o Displaying expertise & eloquence
o Worthiness
- Arousal of emotion
- The way he speaks
- Convincing arguments
- Use of rhetoric devices
- He uses comparisons, metaphors,… the speech is given at an important place,
he can speak with expertise but also says things about his personal life Bv. His
little children, he speaks very easily almost like singing
A divers research field?:
Different backgrounds, different questions
- Linguistics (e.g. rhetorical figures)
- Psychology (e.g. emotions vs. the cognitive)
- Political science (e.g. questions of power)
Communcation science (e.g. mass media)
Each with their own terminology & research methods
Difficulty: they don’t always talk to each other
This course: eclectic approach
Rhetoric, a contested notion:
Words often associated with rhetoric: “mere”; “empty”; “hallow”
- Rhetoric is contrasted with reality -> they say they do it, but don’t actually do it
Association with danger
- Can people be persuaded of anything? (racism, violence, misinformation) bv.
Bestorming van capitol
At the same time: no democracy without free speech?
Rhetoric = essence of what makes us a free nation
Rhetoric was central to ancient democracy:
Greece, 500 BC
, From aristocracy to democracy
- Demos = people -> power of the people
- Ekklesia = assembly
Highly participatory system
Status of being citizen comes with obligations
Rhetorical skills were important -> for everyone
Teachers: sophists
- Sophos = wisdom
- E.g. Gorgias, Protagoras
Culture of oral transmission
Different views of classical thinkers
Plato: the first to criticise the system
Rhetoric is empty and dangerous
- Can do bad instead of good (death of his mentor Socrates) They made
Socrates drink poison
- It can persuade most people of anything; a ‘rudderless boat’; “sophistries”
you can make something sound persuasive even tough there is no truth in it
Belief in one moral “truth”
- Allegory of the cave -> the truth is outside but we are all in a cave, only a few of
us have the ability to leave and see the actual truth
- Only a small elite can see it
“The Republic”
- Society should be based on reason
- Strict division: philosopher-kings; guardians and traders
Ideas were later criticized (e.g. Popper)
More sympathetic reading: argument for alternative type of rhetoric
(dialectic)
- Cf. technocracy today
Aristotle:
Student of Plato
More positive reading of rhetoric
- Man is a ‘political animal’
- ‘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’ middle aged white man
- Cf. importance of ‘enthymeme’ (vs. syllogism) Bv. Socrates in a man -> man are
mortal -> so Socrates will die at some point
- Degree of permitted disagreement is limited
He assumes an audience that is quite like-minded -> that’s why he was more
positive
Cicero:
Great orator of the Roman world
Treatises on rhetoric (e.g. “Orator”)
Like Aristotle, refuted sophism
- Understanding of topic comes first; then follows good speech
- But he himself was pragmatic
Persuasion is not about techniques but about the talent to adapt ->
specific audience
Rhetoric diminished when modern state emerged:
Centralized, powerful authorities
Laws to be obeyed without discussion (monopoly of violence)
- Subordination of citizen assemblies to rules
Two thinkers (Hobbes and Rousseau)
- Contrasting interpretations of sovereign state
- Similar perception of danger of rhetoric
Hobbes:
“Leviathan” (1651)
Pessimist about nature of human beings: uncertainty & competition
driven by passion/appetite -> pessimist about the society
- Capable of reasoning (not like animals) but they don’t do it
- But different interpretations of the same event; no shared morality ->
what one person does is different for someone else
Rhetoric leads to even more confusion
- E.g. metaphors
- vs. ‘Perspicious words’
Rational thing to do: one-time “social contract”
- Appoint supreme power to bring civil piece
Rousseau:
“Social contract” (1762)
HS1: INTRODUCTION
The importance of political rhetoric:
No politics without persuasion -> core thing of what politics is about
Reason: uncertainty
Persuasion by speech vs. persuasion by force
- Persuasion is “a symbolic process in which communicators try to convince other
people to change their own attitudes or behaviors regarding an issue through the
transmission of a message in an atmosphere of free choice” (Perloff, 2020, p. 24)
- ”Democracy . . . is distinguished as a form of governance by the extent of
persuasion relative to coercion” (Mutz, Sniderman & Brody, 1996)
Matter of politics = persuasion
Simple definition persuasion = getting people to do something > by speech or by
force
Speech is more powerfull -> the person will acually come to agree with you &
identify with the decision
The fundamental political skill?
What is rhetoric?:
< Greek ‘retoriketekhne’
- Rhetor = speaker
- Tekhne = art
Studying rhetoric = learning the practical skills of persuasion
Studying rhetoric = studying the persuasiveness of speech
Not limited to spoken word (oratory)
- Written word
- Visuals
Rhetoric is not limited to spoken words but it’s the whole act of persuasion ->
how they bring it, the voice,…
Political rhetoric:
Many areas of rhetorical studies
- E.g. law, organization studies, marketing,…
Persuasion in the political realm
Not limited to politicians! Bv. Taylor Swift influencing elections, Bv. The media
“What makes a political speech persuasive (or not)?”
Most 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
Possible elements:
- Credibility as a person
o Who he is
o Displaying expertise & eloquence
o Worthiness
- Arousal of emotion
- The way he speaks
- Convincing arguments
- Use of rhetoric devices
- He uses comparisons, metaphors,… the speech is given at an important place,
he can speak with expertise but also says things about his personal life Bv. His
little children, he speaks very easily almost like singing
A divers research field?:
Different backgrounds, different questions
- Linguistics (e.g. rhetorical figures)
- Psychology (e.g. emotions vs. the cognitive)
- Political science (e.g. questions of power)
Communcation science (e.g. mass media)
Each with their own terminology & research methods
Difficulty: they don’t always talk to each other
This course: eclectic approach
Rhetoric, a contested notion:
Words often associated with rhetoric: “mere”; “empty”; “hallow”
- Rhetoric is contrasted with reality -> they say they do it, but don’t actually do it
Association with danger
- Can people be persuaded of anything? (racism, violence, misinformation) bv.
Bestorming van capitol
At the same time: no democracy without free speech?
Rhetoric = essence of what makes us a free nation
Rhetoric was central to ancient democracy:
Greece, 500 BC
, From aristocracy to democracy
- Demos = people -> power of the people
- Ekklesia = assembly
Highly participatory system
Status of being citizen comes with obligations
Rhetorical skills were important -> for everyone
Teachers: sophists
- Sophos = wisdom
- E.g. Gorgias, Protagoras
Culture of oral transmission
Different views of classical thinkers
Plato: the first to criticise the system
Rhetoric is empty and dangerous
- Can do bad instead of good (death of his mentor Socrates) They made
Socrates drink poison
- It can persuade most people of anything; a ‘rudderless boat’; “sophistries”
you can make something sound persuasive even tough there is no truth in it
Belief in one moral “truth”
- Allegory of the cave -> the truth is outside but we are all in a cave, only a few of
us have the ability to leave and see the actual truth
- Only a small elite can see it
“The Republic”
- Society should be based on reason
- Strict division: philosopher-kings; guardians and traders
Ideas were later criticized (e.g. Popper)
More sympathetic reading: argument for alternative type of rhetoric
(dialectic)
- Cf. technocracy today
Aristotle:
Student of Plato
More positive reading of rhetoric
- Man is a ‘political animal’
- ‘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’ middle aged white man
- Cf. importance of ‘enthymeme’ (vs. syllogism) Bv. Socrates in a man -> man are
mortal -> so Socrates will die at some point
- Degree of permitted disagreement is limited
He assumes an audience that is quite like-minded -> that’s why he was more
positive
Cicero:
Great orator of the Roman world
Treatises on rhetoric (e.g. “Orator”)
Like Aristotle, refuted sophism
- Understanding of topic comes first; then follows good speech
- But he himself was pragmatic
Persuasion is not about techniques but about the talent to adapt ->
specific audience
Rhetoric diminished when modern state emerged:
Centralized, powerful authorities
Laws to be obeyed without discussion (monopoly of violence)
- Subordination of citizen assemblies to rules
Two thinkers (Hobbes and Rousseau)
- Contrasting interpretations of sovereign state
- Similar perception of danger of rhetoric
Hobbes:
“Leviathan” (1651)
Pessimist about nature of human beings: uncertainty & competition
driven by passion/appetite -> pessimist about the society
- Capable of reasoning (not like animals) but they don’t do it
- But different interpretations of the same event; no shared morality ->
what one person does is different for someone else
Rhetoric leads to even more confusion
- E.g. metaphors
- vs. ‘Perspicious words’
Rational thing to do: one-time “social contract”
- Appoint supreme power to bring civil piece
Rousseau:
“Social contract” (1762)
