Advertisement

The Rhetorical Satisfactions of Hate Speech

  • James MartinEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Studies in the Psychosocial book series (STIP)

Abstract

In this chapter I explore the phenomenon of ‘hate speech,’ understood as a rhetorical practice whereby aggressive hostility is directed at others. Drawing upon Jacques Lacan’s account of the tension between the imaginary and symbolic registers of subjectivity, I present political speech as a means to sublimate violence. Political controversies enact confrontations between rivals who seek to diminish the integrity of their opponent’s self-image. Speaking hatefully is thus a familiar dimension of most political contests. Yet it can also become a refusal of any symbolic mediation with one’s opponent. Lacan describes this type of hate as ‘a passion of being.’ I employ the example of the controversy over antisemitism in the British Labour Party after 2015 to illustrate this variety of hateful speech.

References

  1. Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berke, J. H. (1988). The tyranny of malice: Exploring the dark side of character and culture. London: Summit.Google Scholar
  3. Billig, M. (1991). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Boothby, R. (1991). Death and desire: Psychoanalytic theory in Lacan’s return to Freud. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Boothby, R. (2001). Freud as philosopher: Metapsychology after Lacan. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Boromisza-Habashi, D. (2013). Speaking hatefully: Culture, communication, and political action in Hungary. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Chambre, A. (2016, May 2). Labour suspends councillor over anti-Semitic social media posts. PoliticsHome. Retrieved from https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/discrimination/news/74510/labour-suspends-councillor-over-anti-semitic-social
  8. Conley, T. (2010). Toward a rhetoric of insult. London: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davies, L., & Lukes, S. (2016, May 27). Unravelling the charge of Labour Party anti-Semitism. The Morning Star. Retrieved from https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-8995-Unravelling-the-Charge-of-Labour-Party-Anti-Semitism#.WOya-nA_5DE
  10. Elgot, J. (2017, March 30). Ken Livingstone “brought Labour into disrepute” with Hitler Zionism remarks. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/30/ken-livingstone-labour-party-disrepute-hitler-zionism-former-london-mayor
  11. Fine, R. (2009). Fighting with phantoms: A contribution to the debate on antisemitism in Europe. Patterns of Prejudice, 43(5), 459–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fine, R., & Spencer, P. (2017). Antisemitism and the left: On the return of the Jewish question. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Fish, S. (2016). Winning arguments: What works and doesn’t work in politics, the bedroom, the courtroom, and the classroom. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  14. Freedland, J. (2016, March 18). Labour and the left have an antisemitism problem. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/18/labour-antisemitism-jews-jeremy-corbyn
  15. Freud, S. (1957). Instincts and their Vicissitudes. In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 14), pp. 109–140. London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1915).Google Scholar
  16. Frosh, S. (2005). Hate and the “Jewish Science”: Anti-Semitism, Nazism and psychoanalysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harrison, B. (2006). The resurgence of Anti-Semitism: Jews, Israel, and liberal opinion. Plymouth, UK: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  18. Heinze, E. (2013). Review essay: Hate speech and the normative foundations of regulation. International Journal of Law in Context, 9(4), 590–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Herbst, S. (2010). Rude democracy: Civility and incivility in American politics. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hirsh, D. (2015). The Corbyn left: The politics of position and the politics of reason. Fathom (Autumn). Retrieved from http://fathomjournal.org/the-corbyn-left-the-politics-of-position-and-the-politics-of-reason/
  21. Hirsh, D. (2016). Boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) and antisemitism (Pamphlet No. 1). Retrieved from Academic Engagement Network, London: http://academicengagement.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/David-Hirsh-pamphlet.pdf
  22. Klein, M. (1997). Envy and gratitude and other works 1946–1963. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  23. Klein, M., & Riviere, J. (1964). Love, hate and reparation. London: Norton & Co.Google Scholar
  24. Klug, A., Rees, E., & Schneider, J. (2016). Momentum: A new kind of politics. Renewal, 24(2), 36–44.Google Scholar
  25. Korostelina, K. (2014). Political insults: How offenses escalate conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lacan, J. (1988). The seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book I: Freud’s papers on technique 1953–1954. (J.-A. Miller, Ed., & J. Forrester, Trans.). London: Norton.Google Scholar
  27. Lacan, J. (1992). The seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book VII: The ethics of psychoanalysis 1959–1960. (J.-A. Miller, Ed., & D. Porter, Trans.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Lacan, J. (2006). Écrits: The first complete edition in English. (B. Fink, Trans.). London: Norton.Google Scholar
  29. Lacan, J. (2013). On the names-of-the-father. (B. Fink, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  30. Lear, J. (1998). Love and its place in nature: A philosophical interpretation of Freudian psychoanalysis. London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Lundberg, C. (2012). Lacan in public: Psychoanalysis and the science of rhetoric. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
  32. Martin, J. (2014). Politics and rhetoric: A critical introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Martin, J. (2016a). Capturing desire: Rhetorical strategies and the affectivity of discourse. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18(1), 143–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Martin, J. (2016b, June 16). Arguing to excess: The rhetoric of the EU referendum. Disclaimer. Retrieved from http://www.disclaimermag.com/politics/arguing-to-excess-the-rhetoric-of-the-eu-referendum-3631
  35. Martin, P. (2016, July 20). Labour Party members clash over dealing with “vile abuse.” BBC News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-36850783
  36. McGowan, T. (2013). Enjoying what we don’t have: The political project of psychoanalysis. London: University of Nebraska Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  38. Murphy, A. R. (2009). Prodigal nation: Moral decline and divine punishment from New England to 9/11. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Norwood, S. H. (2013). Antisemitism and the American far left. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Recalcati, M. (2012a). Jacques Lacan: Desiderio, godimento e soggettivazione. Milan: Raffaello Cortina.Google Scholar
  41. Recalcati, M. (2012b). Hate as a passion of being. Qui Parle, 2(20), 151–182.Google Scholar
  42. Rich, D. (2016). The left’s Jewish problem: Jeremy Corbyn, Israel and anti-Semitism. London: Biteback.Google Scholar
  43. Saint-Amand, P. (1996). The laws of hostility: Politics, violence, and the Enlightenment. (J. Curtiss Gage, Trans.) London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  44. Thompson, P. (2016, August 24). Corbynism isn’t a social movement and Labour shouldn’t be one. Renewal [Blog post]. Retrieved from www.renewal.org.uk/blog/corbynism-isnt-a-social-movement-and-labour-shouldnt-be-one
  45. Waldron, J. (2012). The harm in hate speech. London: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Waltman, M., & Haas, J. (2011). The communication of hate. Oxford: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zupančič, A. (2008). Why psychoanalysis? Three interventions. Aarhus: NSU Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Politics and International Relations, Goldsmiths College, University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations