Daily political communication and argumentation in direct democracy: advocates and opponents of nuclear energy

Abstract

In a direct democracy, the public and media debate by referendums and popular votes presupposes a particular type of political communication and argumentation. The example chosen is the debate between the advocates and opponents of nuclear energy, a very conflictual debate based on daily argumentation which cannot be defined as simply irrational. There are specific logics involved. The struggle for social and political representation and the `game of placement—displacement' are fundamental. Specific discourse strategies permit the definition of a larger conception of argumentation and a multidimensional approach to communication and discourse, as well as shade typologies of effective discourses.

Keywords

conflictual communication daily argumentation debates in direct democracy discourse strategy discourses typology interdisciplinary discourse analysis political communication popular votes social representations socio-cognitive mechanisms

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gerstlé, J. (1992) La communication politique. Paris: Colin.

Habermas, J. (1981) Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Windisch, U. (1987) Le K.O. verbal, la communication conflictuelle . Lausanne: L'Age d'Homme.

Windisch, U. (1990a) Le prêt-à-penser, les formes de la communication et de l'argumentation quotidiennes. Lausanne: L'Age d'Homme.

Windisch, U. (1990b). Speech and Reasoning in Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Windisch, U. (1995) L'Argumentation politique: un phénomène social total . Paris : Année sociologique.

Windisch, U. (2002) Suisse-immigrés. Quarante ans de débats 1960—2001 . Lausanne: L'Age d'Homme.

Wolton, D. (1991) La communication politique: construction d'un modèle . Paris: Hermés.