Shpak I.V.

 

Oles Honchar Dnipropetrovsk National University

 

IW as part of political discourse

 

The study of political discourse, like that of other areas of discourse analysis, covers a broad range of subject matter, and draws on a wide range of analytic methods. Perhaps more than with other areas of discourse, however, one needs at the outset to consider the reflexive and potentially ambiguous nature of the term political discourse. The term is suggestive of at least two possibilities: first, a discourse which is itself political; and second, an analysis of political discourse as simply an example discourse type, without explicit reference to political content or political context. But things may be even more confusing. Given that on some definitions almost all discourse may be considered political, then all analyses of discourse are potentially political, and, therefore, on one level, all discourse analysis is political discourse. (3)

The purposes of political discourse include:

o      clarifying citizens’ understanding of the issue;

o      helping citizens reach their best reasoned judgment as to which course of action will solve a problem;

o      increasing citizen participation in the political process;

o      socializing the next generation into the procedures and attitudes they need to be active citizens. (1)

Thomas Jefferson, and the other founders of the American Republic, considered political discourse to be the heart of democracy. Jefferson believed that instead of the social rank within which a person was born, the basis of influence within society should be discourse in a free and open discussion characterized by conflict among ideas and opinions. (1) Political discourse is the formal exchange of reasoned views as to which of several alternative courses of action should be taken to solve a societal problem. It is intended to involve all citizens in the making of the decision, persuade others (through valid information and logic), and clarify what course of action would be most effective in solving the societal problem. (1)

Today one of the aspects of political discourse is mass media discourse, which is to some extent a form of non-institutional political discourse. Over the last decades the character of political discourse in many countries, both developed democratic societies and developing ones, was extremely belligerent. It seemed the only aim for that discourse was to serve the media’s desire to get a story or the politician’s desire to obtain power, which eventually led to the so-called information wars. Information wars are the wars of the third wave. They follow the wars practiced on previous stages – agricultural and industrial ones. One of the problems with Information Warfare (IW) was that for a long time no official definition existed. The main reason for this is that this kind of warfare is relatively new and that the term IW has many different meanings. It should be noted that there is a military aspect of it; nevertheless IW is also used to describe the “war” on the Internet or on TV.

Being a part of political discourse, mass media discourse in general and information wars in particular are to serve the same purposes as political discourse does. However, it should be noted that information manipulation in the context of information warfare normally distorts the information with the intent to change the opponent's picture of reality and thus not ‘clarifying citizens’ understanding of the issue, but delivering the message, which is appropriate for the party in question. Provocation is one of the weapons of The Information Warfare. It is a special operation, which forces the opponent to use a losing strategy against them. It is clear, that before launching a provocation campaign one has to calculate a number of strategies for one’s opponent’s defeat. The major mean in informational war is disinformation. Blackmail, physical effects, bribery and intimidations are not used in information wars. They are more typical for terrorism. Although these types of impacts can be used, still they are not a required element. The object of disinformation is not only mass, but also individual consciousness.

It is not as if this is a totally new phenomenon, we can pluck the ideas and aggression from the past. One doesn’t have to look very hard to find evidence that public discourse in the past was, perhaps, as rough then as it is today. For example, Federalist editors spoke of Jefferson as a “cold thinking villain whose black blood always runs temperately bad.”  It was said that if he were elected president, “the seal of death is that moment set on our holy religion, our churches will be prostrated, and some infamous prostitute, under the title of the Goddess of Reason, will preside in the Sanctuaries now devoted to the Most High.” Still, in our day, the intensity of polarization seems greater than in the past, if only because the electronic media won’t let us ignore it. (2) Technologies of the Information Warfare are used not only in resolving interstate and intrastate conflicts or contradictions. They are actively used in the political sphere to obtain the desired result. These technologies are also used to form the image of a political leader. Some writers and futurists of XX century, such as George Orwell and Aldous Huxley presaged that information will have such a big influence in the near future. They predicted that mass media will form our consciousness, the truth will be hidden from people or will be lost in the ocean of informational noise and people will degrade to the complete passivity and selfishness.

 

References

 

1.     David W. Johnson, Roger T. Johnson.  Civil Political Discourse In A Democracy: The Contribution Of Psychology. Peace & Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 6(4), 291-317.

2.     Discourse and Democracy. Reference online <http://www.iasc-culture.org/THR/archives/Discourse&Dem/6.3BIntroduction.pdf>

3.     WILSON, JOHN. "Political Discourse." The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Schiffrin, Deborah, Deborah Tannen and Heidi E. Hamilton (eds). Blackwell Publishing, 2003. Blackwell Reference Online. 03 March 2007 <http://www.blackwellreference.com/subscriber/tocnode?id=g9780631205968_chunk_g978063120596821>