Argumentation

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 399–417 | Cite as

Legitimation and Strategic Maneuvering in the Political Field

Article

Abstract

This article combines a pragma-dialectical conception of argumentation, a sociological conception of legitimacy and a sociological theory of the political field. In particular, it draws on the theorization of the political field developed by Pierre Bourdieu and tries to determine what new insights into the concept of strategic maneuvering might be offered by a sociological analysis of the political field. I analyze a speech made by the President of Romania, Traian Băsescu, following his suspension by Parliament in April 2007. I suggest that the argument developed in this speech can be regarded as an example of adjudication and I discuss its specificity as an adjudication in the political field in an electoral campaign. I also try to relate legitimation as political strategy to strategic maneuvering oriented to meeting the contradictory demands of the political field, which I see—following Bourdieu—as involving a double political game, a game of democratic representation and a game of power.

Keywords

Adjudication Bourdieu Legitimacy Legitimation Political field Pragma-dialectics Public justification Strategic maneuvering Traian Băsescu 

References

  1. Beetham, D. (1991). The legitimation of power. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  2. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  3. Christiano, T. (2004). Authority. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2004 edition), ed. E.N. Zalta. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2004/entries/authority/.
  4. D’Agostino, F. (2007). Public Justification. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2007 edition), ed. E.N. Zalta. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2007/entries/justification-public/.
  5. Habermas, J. (1976). Legitimation crisis. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  6. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Volume one. Reason and the rationalization of society. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  7. Habermas, J. (1996). Legitimation problems in the modern state. In The Habermas reader, ed. W. Outhwaite, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ieţcu, I. (2006). Discourse analysis and argumentation theory: Analytical framework and applications. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
  9. Ieţcu-Fairclough, I. (2007). Populism and the Romanian orange revolution: A discourse-analytical perspective on the presidential election of December 2004. Studies in Language and Capitalism 2(1): 31–74.Google Scholar
  10. Ieţcu-Fairclough, I. (in press). Branding and strategic maneuvering in the Romanian presidential election of 2004. A critical discourse-analytical and pragma-dialectical perspective. Journal of Language and Politics. Google Scholar
  11. Jacobs, S. (2002). Messages, functional contexts, and categories of fallacy: Some dialectical and rhetorical considerations. In Dialectic and rhetoric. The warp and woof of argumentation analysis, ed. F.H. van Eemeren and P. Houtlosser, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. van Eemeren, F.H., and R. Grootendorst. (1992). Argumentation, communication and fallacies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. van Eemeren, F.H., and R. Grootendorst. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. van Eemeren, F.H., and P. Houtlosser. (2002). Strategic maneuvering: Maintaining a delicate balance. In Dialectic and rhetoric. The warp and woof of argumentation analysis, ed. F.H. van Eemeren and P. Houtlosser, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. van Eemeren, F.H., and P. Houtlosser. (2005). Theoretical construction and argumentative reality. An analytic model of critical discussion and conventionalized types of argumentative activity. In The uses of argument. Proceedings of a conference at Mcmaster university, ed. D. Hitchcock and D. Farr, 18–21, Hamilton, Ontario: OSSA.Google Scholar
  16. van Eemeren, F.H., and P. Houtlosser. (2007). Coming to grips with argumentative discourse. In Reason reclaimed, ed. H.V. Hansen and R.C. Pinto, Newport News, VA: Vale Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BucharestBucharestRomania

Personalised recommendations