Cover not available

Article published In: Branding Political Entities in a Globalised World
Edited by Bessie Mitsikopoulou
[Journal of Language and Politics 7:3] 2008
► pp. 413–430

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

“Global” discourses of democracy and an English city

 | University of Birmingham
Published online: 1 April 2009
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.7.3.04far
In many contemporary polities, democracy is portrayed as a universal good, a democratic ideal appears to be spreading globally, its practice burgeoning; it seems to be appearing for the first time in some places and deepening in established democracies. Yet, when one looks for the concrete touch of democracy in one’s own activities, groups, communities and nation it becomes elusive. I discuss this apparent contradiction in relation to discourse and a new “Area Forum” in the English city of Preston. The categories of ‘global’ and ‘local’, ‘identity’ and ‘branding’ prove useful in discussing the contradiction as situated in the English context. I suggest that this problem of democracy may be understood in terms of the ideological concept of ‘democratism’: the assumption that the status quo in England is unproblematically democratic whilst discursively closing off the possibility of genuine democratic progress.
References (32)
References
Bekkers, Victor, et al.. (Eds). 2007. Governance and the Democratic Deficit. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 1996. “Toward a deliberative model of democratic legitimacy.” In Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, Seyla Benhabib (Ed.), 67—94.Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blair, Tony. 2006. Speech by Prime Minister Tony Blair at the Los Angeles World Affairs Council 1st August 2006.
Byrne, Tony. 2000. Local Government in Britain. (7th ed.). London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Canovan, Margaret. 2005. The People. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chouliaraki, Lilie and Fairclough, Norman. 1999. Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comaroff, Jean and Comaroff, John L. 2000. “Millennial capitalism: First thoughts on a second coming.” Public Culture 12(2): 291—343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Michelis, Lidia. 2008. “Britain� and ‘corporate’ national identity.” In Communication in the Public Sphere. [Handbook of Applied Lniguistics vol. 4], Ruth Wodak and Veronika Koller (Eds), 203—222.Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2000. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dupuis-Deri, Francis. 2004. “The political power of words: The birth of pro-democratic discourse in the nineteenth century in the United States and France.” Political Studies 52(1): 118—134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. “Democracy and the public sphere in critical research on discourse.” In Challenges in a Changing World, Ruth Wodak and Christopher Ludwig (eds): 63—85, Vienna: Passagen Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. New Labour, New Language? London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London and New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Femia, Joe. 2001. Against the Masses. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John. 2004. “The discursive construction of a world-class city.” Discourse and Society 15(5): 579—605. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A.K. and Matthiessen, Christian M.I.M. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. (3rd ed.). London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Held, David. 2006. Models of Democracy. (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koller, Veronika. Forthcoming a. “Brand images: Multimodal metaphor in corporate branding messages.” In Multimodal Metaphor, Charles Forceville and Eduardo Urios-Aparisi, (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. Forthcoming b. “‘Our customers embrace us as an essential partner’: Corporate brands as socio-cognitive representations.” In Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems, Gitte Kristiansen and René Dirven (Eds), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kovacs, Andras and Wodak, Ruth (Eds). 2003. NATO, Neutrality, and National Identity: The Case of Austria and Hungary. Vienna: Bohlau. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labour Party. 1997. New Labour: because Britain deserves better. London: Labour PartyGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lowndes, Vivien. 2002. “Between Rhetoric and Reality: Does the 2001 White Paper Reverse the Centralising Trend in Britain?” Local Government Studies 28(3): 135—147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ODPM. 1998. “Modern Local Government: in touch with the people.” (White Paper). London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paley, Julia. 2002. “Toward an anthropology of democracy.” Annual Review of Anthropology 311: 469—496. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poulantzas, Nicos. 1980. State, Power, Socialism. London: Verso.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Preston City Council. Undated. Constitution of the Council. Preston: Preston City Council Sullivan, Helen. 2001. “Modernisation, democratisation and community governance.” Local Government Studies 27(3): 1—24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Leeuwen, Theo. 1993. “Genre and field in Critical Discourse Analysis: a synopsis.” Discourse and Society 4(2): 193—225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Representing social action.” Discourse and Society 6(1): 81—106. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. “The representation of social actors.” In Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, Carmen Rosa Caldas-Coulthard and Malcolm Coulthard (Eds), 32—70.London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth. 2001. “The discourse-historical approach.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer (Eds), 63—94.London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Hibbert, Liesel
2014. Expressions of neo-traditional patriarchal power in the speeches of President Zuma. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 32:4 ► pp. 499 ff. DOI logo
Farrelly, Michael
2009. Citizen Participation and Neighbourhood Governance: Analysing Democratic Practice. Local Government Studies 35:4 ► pp. 387 ff. DOI logo
Farrelly, Michael
2010. Critical Discourse Analysis in Political Studies: An Illustrative Analysis of the ‘Empowerment’ Agenda. Politics 30:2 ► pp. 98 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue