{"title":"‘The Wind of Change’: a rhetorical political analysis of Harold Macmillan’s 1960 ‘decolonization’ speech","authors":"Andrew S. Roe-Crines","doi":"10.1057/s41293-023-00234-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article contributes to the literature on Conservative Party politics through an exploration of the political rhetoric of former Prime Minister and Conservative Party leader, Harold Macmillan in relation to decolonization and the end of empire. Macmillan’s Wind of Change speech has been analysed in the existing literature as purely a historical moment in relation to imperial decline. This article contends that Macmillan’s arguments for and defence of decolonisation in fact remain relevant for modern understandings of contemporary Conservative Party politics because residual affections for imperialism remain within some conservative audiences, as well as the ongoing processes of decolonisation. He sought to address such sentiments at the time of delivery, yet they remain today amongst similar audiences who remain committed to imperial notions. As such, simply considering the speech as a historic moment is inadequate given its value as an enduring argument relevant to contemporary conservative debates. Because of the language and justification used, I re-evaluate the speech through the process of ‘Rhetorical Political Analysis’ ( ethos, pathos, logos ). By doing so, I will demonstrate how Macmillan’s historical speech remains relevant as a living argument for scholars and practitioners of Conservative Party politics, which is a perspective presently absent in the scholarship. This methodological approach is also augmented by an analysis of archival materials helping to shed light on the embeddedness of the speech within the broader context of the tumultuous South African politics of the time, and by doing so show why a speech delivered in the 1960s remains relevant to UK domestic policy, foreign policy, and conservative studies in the 2020s.","PeriodicalId":46067,"journal":{"name":"British Politics","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-023-00234-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract This article contributes to the literature on Conservative Party politics through an exploration of the political rhetoric of former Prime Minister and Conservative Party leader, Harold Macmillan in relation to decolonization and the end of empire. Macmillan’s Wind of Change speech has been analysed in the existing literature as purely a historical moment in relation to imperial decline. This article contends that Macmillan’s arguments for and defence of decolonisation in fact remain relevant for modern understandings of contemporary Conservative Party politics because residual affections for imperialism remain within some conservative audiences, as well as the ongoing processes of decolonisation. He sought to address such sentiments at the time of delivery, yet they remain today amongst similar audiences who remain committed to imperial notions. As such, simply considering the speech as a historic moment is inadequate given its value as an enduring argument relevant to contemporary conservative debates. Because of the language and justification used, I re-evaluate the speech through the process of ‘Rhetorical Political Analysis’ ( ethos, pathos, logos ). By doing so, I will demonstrate how Macmillan’s historical speech remains relevant as a living argument for scholars and practitioners of Conservative Party politics, which is a perspective presently absent in the scholarship. This methodological approach is also augmented by an analysis of archival materials helping to shed light on the embeddedness of the speech within the broader context of the tumultuous South African politics of the time, and by doing so show why a speech delivered in the 1960s remains relevant to UK domestic policy, foreign policy, and conservative studies in the 2020s.
期刊介绍:
British Politics offers the only forum explicitly designed to promote research in British political studies, and seeks to provide a counterweight to the growing fragmentation of this field during recent years. To this end, the journal aims to promote a more holistic understanding of British politics by encouraging a closer integration between theoretical and empirical research, between historical and contemporary analyses, and by fostering a conception of British politics as a broad and multi-disciplinary field of study. This incorporates a range of sub-fields, including psephology, policy analysis, regional studies, comparative politics, institutional analysis, political theory, political economy, historical analysis, cultural studies and social policy.
While recognising the validity and the importance of research into specific aspects of British politics, the journal takes it to be a guiding principle that such research is more useful, and indeed meaningful, if it is related to the field of British politics in a broader and fuller sense.
The scope of the journal will therefore be broad, incorporating a range of research papers and review articles from all theoretical perspectives, and on all aspects of British politics, including policy developments, institutional change and political behaviour. Priority will, however, be given to contributions which link contemporary developments in British politics to theoretical and/or historical analyses. The aim is as much to encourage the development of empirical research that is theoretically rigorous and informed, as it is to encourage the empirical application of theoretical work (or at least to encourage theorists to explicitly signify how their work could be applied in an empirical manner).