Post-truth Politics, Performatives and the Force
Fridlund, Patrik LU
(2020)
In Jus Cogens
2(3).
p.215-235
- Abstract
- This paper on post-truth politics argues that to the extent that one wants to understand political discourses generally (post-truth political discourses in particular) it is crucial to see them as circulating talk that performs rather than reports. This implies a shift in focus. Many react strongly to ‘post-truth’ assertions by appealing to evidence, objectivity, facts and truth. In this paper it is suggested that, when analysing political discourses, there is no point asking, ‘Is it true?‘ One should rather ask, ‘What happens as a result?’ Understanding political discourses as performative demands that the resulting doing, transforming and changing may transcend established parameters and known patterns. That also means problematising the... (More)
- This paper on post-truth politics argues that to the extent that one wants to understand political discourses generally (post-truth political discourses in particular) it is crucial to see them as circulating talk that performs rather than reports. This implies a shift in focus. Many react strongly to ‘post-truth’ assertions by appealing to evidence, objectivity, facts and truth. In this paper it is suggested that, when analysing political discourses, there is no point asking, ‘Is it true?‘ One should rather ask, ‘What happens as a result?’ Understanding political discourses as performative demands that the resulting doing, transforming and changing may transcend established parameters and known patterns. That also means problematising the types of argument allowed, or discourse considered appropriate, in a given situation. What, then, is the force within the performative discourse driving transformation? What role does intention play? And who—if anybody—can be designated as the master of the discourse? One way of answering these questions is to broaden the perspective of what happens in verbal exchanges. The hearer-speaker relation is fundamental, one in which meaning is shaped and the performative force is formed. A political discourse in general, and a post-truth political discourse in particular, cannot do and perform—cannot function—in a vacuum. This evokes serious questions about accountability and responsibility and also about human action and freedom. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/780c8440-e551-41ea-9d35-d0f723024c17
- author
- Fridlund, Patrik
LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2020-11-05
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- post-truth politics, political discourses, Trump, performatives, Austin, Derrida, speaker-hearer responsibility, post-truth politics, performatives, poltical discourses, Trump, Austin, Derrida, speaker-hearer responsibility
- in
- Jus Cogens
- volume
- 2
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 21 pages
- publisher
- Springer Nature
- ISSN
- 2524-3977
- DOI
- 10.1007/s42439-020-00029-8
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 780c8440-e551-41ea-9d35-d0f723024c17
- date added to LUP
- 2020-11-06 13:19:20
- date last changed
- 2024-03-26 11:11:04
@article{780c8440-e551-41ea-9d35-d0f723024c17,
abstract = {{This paper on post-truth politics argues that to the extent that one wants to understand political discourses generally (post-truth political discourses in particular) it is crucial to see them as circulating talk that performs rather than reports. This implies a shift in focus. Many react strongly to ‘post-truth’ assertions by appealing to evidence, objectivity, facts and truth. In this paper it is suggested that, when analysing political discourses, there is no point asking, ‘Is it true?‘ One should rather ask, ‘What happens as a result?’ Understanding political discourses as performative demands that the resulting doing, transforming and changing may transcend established parameters and known patterns. That also means problematising the types of argument allowed, or discourse considered appropriate, in a given situation. What, then, is the force within the performative discourse driving transformation? What role does intention play? And who—if anybody—can be designated as the master of the discourse? One way of answering these questions is to broaden the perspective of what happens in verbal exchanges. The hearer-speaker relation is fundamental, one in which meaning is shaped and the performative force is formed. A political discourse in general, and a post-truth political discourse in particular, cannot do and perform—cannot function—in a vacuum. This evokes serious questions about accountability and responsibility and also about human action and freedom.}},
author = {{Fridlund, Patrik}},
issn = {{2524-3977}},
keywords = {{post-truth politics; political discourses; Trump; performatives; Austin; Derrida; speaker-hearer responsibility; post-truth politics; performatives; poltical discourses; Trump; Austin; Derrida; speaker-hearer responsibility}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{11}},
number = {{3}},
pages = {{215--235}},
publisher = {{Springer Nature}},
series = {{Jus Cogens}},
title = {{Post-truth Politics, Performatives and the Force}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42439-020-00029-8}},
doi = {{10.1007/s42439-020-00029-8}},
volume = {{2}},
year = {{2020}},
}