Ideological Polarization as a Deception Strategy in the Discourse of American Think Tanks: A Critical Discourse Analysis

Ali Hamzah Lafta
{"title":"Ideological Polarization as a Deception Strategy in the Discourse of American Think Tanks: A Critical Discourse Analysis","authors":"Ali Hamzah Lafta","doi":"10.36586/jcl.2.2022.0.44.0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Deception is an inseparable facet of political discourse in attaining strategic political gains though compromising public opinion. However, the employment of discursive deception strategies by the policy-making institutions of think tanks has not received due attention in the literature. The current study aims at exploring how the ideologizing deception strategies are utilized by the conservative American think tank of the Washington Institute to reproduce socio-political realities and re-shape public opinion. To fulfill this task, van Dijk’s (2000) notion of ideological polarization which shows positive self-representation and negative other representation is adopted to conduct a critical discourse analysis of four Arabic texts released with the main focus on four different political topics. Results reveal the centrality of employing deception strategies for the sake of realizing political wins for establishing an ideological hegemony while simultaneously polarizing an Us against Them extreme.","PeriodicalId":125897,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the College of languages","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the College of languages","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36586/jcl.2.2022.0.44.0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Deception is an inseparable facet of political discourse in attaining strategic political gains though compromising public opinion. However, the employment of discursive deception strategies by the policy-making institutions of think tanks has not received due attention in the literature. The current study aims at exploring how the ideologizing deception strategies are utilized by the conservative American think tank of the Washington Institute to reproduce socio-political realities and re-shape public opinion. To fulfill this task, van Dijk’s (2000) notion of ideological polarization which shows positive self-representation and negative other representation is adopted to conduct a critical discourse analysis of four Arabic texts released with the main focus on four different political topics. Results reveal the centrality of employing deception strategies for the sake of realizing political wins for establishing an ideological hegemony while simultaneously polarizing an Us against Them extreme.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
意识形态极化作为美国智库话语中的欺骗策略:批判性话语分析
欺骗是政治话语中通过妥协民意来获得战略性政治利益的一个不可分割的方面。然而,智库决策机构对话语欺骗策略的运用在文献中并没有得到应有的重视。本研究旨在探讨华盛顿研究所的美国保守派智库如何利用意识形态化的欺骗策略来再现社会政治现实和重塑公众舆论。为了完成这一任务,本文采用了van Dijk(2000)的意识形态极化概念,即积极的自我表征和消极的他者表征,对主要关注四种不同政治话题的四篇阿拉伯语文本进行了批判性话语分析。结果表明,为了实现政治上的胜利,以建立意识形态霸权为目的而采用欺骗策略的中心地位,同时使“我们对他们”两极分化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Phono-stylistic Analysis of Utterance Stress in Steve Harvey's talk show A comparative study of the motif of love in the poems of Nizar Qabbani and Saadi Shirazi Speech Act of Request :A Contrastive Study Between EFL And ESL Undergraduate Students Ideological and Linguistic Features Analyses of US Presidential Written Discourse addressing Immigration and Terrorism Issues The Jewish town in Eastern Europe and its impact on the literary works of Judah Steinberg
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1