Political Discourses, Corrupt Discourses

  • David BlockEmail author


This chapter begins with an extended discussion of key background concepts, such as the manufacture of consent, political communication and discourse, and the interrelated notions of corruption, discourses of corruption and corrupt discourses. It also provides a short history of the Spanish conservative party, the Partido Popular, which is the focus of analysis here. The chapter then moves to a lengthy discussion of political communications related to corruption scandals involving the Partido Popular. This discussion shows how discourses of corruption and corrupt discourses are constructed and how they serve, at the same time, to construct the Partido Popular as a particular type of political party. There is a specific focus on how party members avoid taking any responsibility for wrongdoing via the use of topoivictimism, history as teacher, equivalence and incommensurable alternatives—and discursive strategies designed to shift the focus away from the party and onto other agents.


Post-truth politics Manufacture of consent Political communication/discourse Corruption Discourses of corruption Corrupt discourses Partido Popular The Gürtel case Topoi Discursive strategies 


  1. Alonso Pérez, M., & Furió Blasco, E. (2010) La economía española: Del crecimiento a la crisis pasando por la burbuja inmobiliaria. Cahiers de civilisation espagnole contemporaine, 6. Accessed June 8, 2018.
  2. Anduiza, E., Gallego, A., & Muñoz, J. (2013). Turning a blind eye: Experimental evidence of partisan bias in attitudes toward corruption. Comparative Political Studies, 46 (12), 1664–1692. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arendt, H. (1972). Crises of the republic. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  4. Audiencia Nacional, Sala de lo Penal, Sección Segunda. (2018). Sentencia no. 20/2018. Accessed June 15, 2018.
  5. Aznar, J. M. (1994). España. La segunda transición. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
  6. Baudrillard, J. (1996). Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Block, D. (2016). Discursos corruptos y el mundo al revés. La Maleta de Portbou, 19, 19–24.Google Scholar
  8. Block, D. (2018). Political economy in sociolinguistics: Neoliberal, inequality and social class. Bloomsbury: London.Google Scholar
  9. Block, D. (in preparation). ¡viva españa! redux: The Catalan independence movement and the rise of the right-wing Spanish nationalist party Ciudadanos.Google Scholar
  10. Brooks, R. C. (1909). The nature of political corruption. Political Science Quarterly, 24(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burkhardt, A. (1996). Politolinguistik. Versuch einer Ortsbestimmung. In J. Klein & H Diekmannshenke (Eds.), Sprachstrategien und Dialogblockaden. Linguistische und politikwissenschaftliche Studien zur politischen Kommunikation (pp. 75–100). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  12. Cameron, D. (1995). Verbal hygiene. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Castillo, D., & Eggington, W. (2017). Medialogies: Reading reality in the age of inflationary media. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  14. Catalá, R. (2018). TATA TA TATA TA. La condena de la Gürtel no tiene nada que ver con el Partido Popular. May 28, 2018. Accessed June 2, 2018.
  15. Chomsky, N. (1982). Noam ChomskyConcision. Accessed June 25, 2018.
  16. Corruption Perceptions Index. (2017). Accessed February 20, 2018.
  17. Cospedal, M. D. (2013). Colección de mentiras de Dolores de Cospedal y resto del PP sobre Luis Bárcenas. Accessed January 15, 2017.
  18. Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar
  19. De la Dehesa, G. (2009). La primera gran crisis financiera del siglo XXI. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.Google Scholar
  20. Di Febo, G., & Juliá, S. (2012). El Franquismo: Una introducción. Barcelona: Crítica.Google Scholar
  21. Duménil, G., & Lévy, D. (2011). The crisis of neoliberalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Duménil, G., & Lévy, D. (2018). Managerial capitalism. London: Pluto.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ekaizer, E. (2010). Ekaizer saca los colores a Cospedal: “Camps está imputado, no podéis negar la evidencia”, May 19, 2010. Accessed February 16, 2018.ç.
  24. Ekaizer, E. (2013). El caso Bárcenas. Barcelona: Espasa.Google Scholar
  25. (2018). “Esto es una trama contra el PP” y otras frases del vídeo de Rajoy en Génova. Accessed June 8, 2018.
  26. Escolar, I. (2018, May 29). Las mentiras de María Dolores de Cospedal sobre la sentencia de la Gürtel. Accessed June 10, 2018.
  27. Espejo Público. (2018, May 29). Antena 3, reproduced by Periodista Digital. Accessed June 10, 2018.
  28. Fernández-Vázquez, P., Barberá, P., & Rivero, G. (2013). Rooting out corruption or rooting for corruption? The heterogeneous electoral consequences of scandals. Political Science Research and Methods, 4(2), 379–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fish, W. (2017). “Post-truth” politics and illusory democracy. Psychotherapy and Politics International, 14(3), 211–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Forchtner, B. (2014). Historia magistra vitae: The topos of history as a teacher in public struggles over self and other representation. In C. Hart & P. Cap (Eds.), Contemporary critical discourse studies (pp. 19–43). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  31. Fraga, M. (1987, September 5). Sociedad abierta y sistema democrático. El Pais. Accessed June 1, 2018.
  32. García Delgado, J. L., & Jiménez, C. (2003). La economía. In S. Juliá, J. L. García Delgado, J. C. Jiénez, & J. P. Fusi (Eds.), La España del siglo XX (pp. 277–440). Madrid: Marcial Pons.Google Scholar
  33. Harsin, J. (2006). The rumour bomb: Theorising the convergence of new and old trends in mediated US politics. Southern Review, 39(1), 84–110.Google Scholar
  34. Harvey, D. (2014). Seventeen contradictions and the end of capitalism. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  35. Haskell, R. (1978). An Analogic model of small group behavior. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 26(1), 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Herman, E., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  37. Hernández, J. (2016). ¿Japon ganó la Guerra! Santa Cruz de Tenerife: Melusina.Google Scholar
  38. Hernando, R. (2018). Discurso completo Rafael Hernando - Moción de Censura Rajoy, June 1, 2018. Accessed June 12, 2018.
  39. Juliá, S. (2003). Política y sociedad. In S. Juliá, J. L. Garcia Delgado, J. C. Jiénez, & J. P. Fusi (Eds.), La España del siglo XX (pp. 13–275). Madrid: Marcial Pons.Google Scholar
  40. Juliá, S. (2018). Transition. Madrid: Galaxia Gutenberg.Google Scholar
  41. Lesser, J. (1999). Negotiating national identity. Durham, NC: Duke Univesity Press.Google Scholar
  42. Lewis, C., & Reading-Smith, M. ([2008] 2014). False pretenses. The Centre for Public Integrity. Accessed June 11, 2018.
  43. Lutz, W. (1988). Fourteen years of doublespeak. The English Journal, 77(3), 40–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Machiavelli, N. ([1532] 1985). The Prince. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Marx, K., & Engels, F. ([1846] 1998). The German ideology. London: Lawrence & Wisart.Google Scholar
  46. Morais, F. (2000). Corações Sujos: A História da Shindo Renmei. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.Google Scholar
  47. Moran, G. (2014). Adolfo Suarez: Ambición y destino. Barcelona: Debate.Google Scholar
  48. Muniesa, B. (2005). La España Lapidusiano. Dictadura y Transición. La España lampedusiana. II: La monarquía parlamentaria. Barcelina: Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.Google Scholar
  49. Muñoz, J., Anduiza, E., & Gallego, A. (2016). Why do voters forgive corrupt mayors? Implicit exchange, credibility of information and clean alternatives. Local Government Studies, 42(4), 598–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Payne, S. (1984). Spanish Catholicism: An historical overview. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  51. Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2016). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd ed., pp. 23–61). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  52. Saul, J. M. (2013). Lying, misleading, and what is said: An exploration in philosophy of language and in ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Shore, C., & Haller, D. (2005). Sharp practice: Anthropology and the study of corruption. In D. Haller & C. Shore (Eds.), Corruption: Anthropological perspectives (pp. 1–26). London: Pluto.Google Scholar
  54. Steiner, G. (1975). After babel: Aspects of language and transaltion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Streeck, W. (2016). How will capitalism end? London: Verso.Google Scholar
  56. Tijeras, R. (2015). Periodismo de Investigación en España. Comunicación 21, 8. Accessed June 1, 2018.
  57. Trias Sagnier, J. (2018). El baile de la corrupción. Barcelona: Ediciones B.Google Scholar
  58. van Dijk, T. (2015). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton, & D. Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 466–485). Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  59. Vattimo, G. (2011). A farewell to truth. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Vázquez Montalbán, M. (2003). La Aznaridad. Barcelona: Arena Abierta.Google Scholar
  61. Wag the Dog. (1997). Accessed June 10, 2018.
  62. Wodak, R. (2013). ‘Anything goes’—The Haiderization of Europe. In R. Wodak, M. KhosraviNik, & B. Mral (Eds.), Right wing populism in Europe (pp. 23–38). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  63. Wodak, R., & Forchtner, B. (2018). Introduction: The language politics nexus. In R. Wodak & B. Forchtner (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and politics (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ICREADepartament d’Anglès i Lingüística, Universitat de LleidaLleidaSpain

Personalised recommendations