What do you think?
Rate this book
New Labour, New Language?
The first book on this subject, New Labour, New Language? is a critique of New Labour and its policies via an in-depth analysis of the language and rhetoric employed by Tony Blair and his spin doctors.
192 pages, Paperback
First published February 3, 2000
2 people are currently reading
56 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 16, 2023
Norman Fairclough, the proverbial God of the 'critical' analysis of language directs his attention to the greatest spin-operation of them all: New Labour's term in office. A beautifully staged play (often parodied - think: 'The Thick of It') that left some in the cold (welfare recipients) and others sorely appeased (all of Englands liberals). Fairclough follows closely the words and ways of the grandmaster of neoliberalism, the global playboy, the moral warmonger, and pinpoints where the knots are pulled tight with polished rhetoric on the global working classes.
In a recent paper on a similar topic I summarized some of these tricks, and lent heavily from Faircloughs grand work. The essay applies the tools of CDA to the discursive methods used by Blair in his public speeches to morally legitimate the social values demanded by the new SETF. Demonstration of the existence of 'systems of narration' (Smith, 1998) that seek the resignification of inherited political concepts, such as the social values of 'opportunity, fairness and mutual responsibility' (Blair, 2002) evidences processes of political hegemonic formation (Mouffe, 1990; Hall, 2003). Blairs methods of language stylization for ends of moral legitimation are divided into techniques of: 'synthetic personalization' (Fairclough, 1995) which have as object Blair's personal ethic and identity, and 'spin' (Pitcher, 2003) which have as object political and moral trade-offs in policy.
Synthetic Personalization
This discursive practice seeks to make productive the inherent tensions that exist in negotiating between the identity of the private individual and the one assumed in public office. Each technique lends itself to a honing of a 'distinctive repertoire' (Fairclough, 2002) that allows the personal identity of Blair to be seen as legitimating his moral, and thus by extension, political position of authority (Chilton, 2008).
Ethos and Conviction:
The discursive privileging of the personal identity of Blair over his political one, is recognized in its most succinct form at the beginning of a speech given to single parents on welfare:
"Reform is just a word. / It has no meaning in itself. / It's the purpose of it that matters. / I will tell you why I am passionate about reform." (2002)
There is first a recognition of the vacuity of meaning inherent in political terms as abstract as 'reform', one used by all politicians, thus lending to its role as a mere signifier of change; one without necessary content for the sceptic. Instead of assuming a traditional political role and arguing for the signified content, Blair first accommodates for the vacuity of the term or its 'purpose' by demonstrating his personal conviction or passion for it. By first aligning his personal values with the project Blair establishes character traits of honesty and openness, traits that are key for communicatively generating political consent by fulfilling its maxim of recognition of 'truthfulness' (Grice, 1975). Such demonstrations of character lend themselves to a 'meta-language' that essentially convinces audiences that they are not being deceived (Chilton, 2008).
In demonstrating that there are no false-intentions, this meta-language evidences a rational attempt at ideological coherency in the political speech. This is especially important for moral legitimation as an ethos must similarly have coherent maxims across action (Selznick, 1993). Blair underlines this by claiming:
"There have been no excuses, and no prevarications" (1997)
Demonstrations of honesty and personal conviction, besides being a virtuous character trait itself, establishes the authority of the speaker as the legitimate informal representative of what is essentially a formal process.
Religion:
The dissolution of the distinction between the private and public intentions of Blair: 'The Britain I want to build' (1997) / 'I make no apology' (1999)
allows for a new 'system of narration' (Smith, 1998) that focusses on the leader as a cult/spiritual personality. This, in tandem with the object of the speech being the impression of social values, allows us to understand Blairs intertextual allusions to religious teachings and assumption of the role of a prophet. References to faith allows for moral legitimation on the basis of an authority of tradition (van Dijk, 2000). Further, by arguing for the institutionalization of these values in the mechanisms of the state there is also legitimation through mythopoesis; otherwise, the generation of a myth, the belief in which generates a legitimate reward for the subject (van Leeuwen, 2007). This emphasis on the necessity of faith in the moral/political project is deictically redefined as the necessity for 'hope' with which Blair ends two out of the four speeches in the corpus:
'Pessimism or Hope / Despair or Confidence / Decline or Renewal' (2003), 'The best thing any government can bring is hope, and that is what I bring today' (1997)
The first quote is an example of the intertextual method of the adoption of a social language (Gee, 2014, p.165), specifically the poetic form of biblical prophetization’s. In a similar vein those in his audience that have failed to demonstrate correct social values, otherwise the 'socially excluded' tackled by his new SETF, are given the option of repenting for their sins and beginning anew:
'To those who have lost hope over the past 18 years, I offer them a fresh start' (1997)
Normalization:
Recognition of synthetic personalization as a 'repertoire' (Fairclough, 2002) means that there is a hybridity to the language; otherwise, natural transitions between enacting multiple distinct social languages (Gee, 2014, p.166). As a countervailing tendency to the 'bad cop' religious moralizations, Blair switches to informal modes of speech to demonstrate the character trait of authenticity; this is one parallel to honesty, but is an honesty grounded in the 'normal' daily life shared by his audience. This can thus be recognized as a method of 'discoursal democratization' (Fairclough, 1995); the social values he seeks to morally legitimize are not only enacted by him, but also in a language common to the citizenry. This is achieved in part through the informal use of the 'I' as seen in previous sections, but is done more obviously in the mixing of language forms such as the opening of a speech with a joke and poem:
'I am particularly flattered and privileged to be the warm-up act for the poet laureate. (Laughter) In fact, I am so flattered and so privileged I have written you a little poem, which I will read to you:
"Change your ways, clean up your act, modernise or die"' (1999)
Due to the non-dialogical nature of the political speech, discursive practices that aim for normalization of the author can only be achieved through monological theatrics. In recognition that this speech (1999) was given at the Trade Union Conference, who constitute the major left-political opposition to New Labour on welfare, this serves two functions. In tune with the political focus on 'partnership' and 'new governance' (Prideaux, 2005) joviality obscures genuine political difference and thus avoids ideological hegemonic agonism (Hall, 2003; Mouffe, 1990). In line with Smith (1998) however, Blairs short and dark reference to this antagonism ('modernise or die'), but only through the informal nature of a joke, establishes any serious discussion of the idea of modernization as 'illegitimate' (p.172) and thus sees the organic political crisis as dissolved under his leadership. Such political moves are also occasionally reified through informal expressive slang:
'Come on! This isn't the betrayal of public services. It's their renewal.' (2003)
Spin
The political promotion of the SETF involved the double act of legitimizing the social values of responsibility and self-reliance (Atkins, 2011) and delegitimizing or condemning behaviour of those that have 'languished on the dole for months' (Blair, 1999). 'Spin' here refers to the discursive methods utilized not to argue for such values directly, as this would be counterproductive to seeing them as naturalized, but instead relating these values with societal trends that are either naturally desirable or inevitable. This produces the moral subject that seems both normatively right and necessary, thus reifying, or obscuring the political nature (van Dijk, 2000) of a discursively produced positionality.
Desirable Values of Partnership:
New Labour develops a new language of governance utilizing words such as 'participant groups', 'partnership' and 'transparent cooperation' extensively (Fairclough, 2002, p.79). This is a lexical field that Blair constantly refers to in his discourse on what is morally required of responsible citizens for his SETF to succeed. The contractual element of his welfare applied to the 'socially excluded' thus derives its general moral legitimation from claiming each person in society has a new responsibility, failure to take up this 'bargain' is equally a moral failure:
'It is something for something. A society where we play by the rules, you only take out if you put in. That’s the bargain' (1997)
Those that are socially excluded are thus failing not only to help themselves, but to help society as a whole; equally, those that are not on benefits are not only morally legitimated, but are posed as positively altruistic. This generalist form of moral legitimation where institutional actions are portrayed as mutually beneficial:
'It's right for them, for the country, for society.' (2002)
obscures political antagonisms and thereby disallows hegemonic competition (van Dijk, 1997). Consider for example that what is purposefully excluded here is the responsibility of those best off, in their own way 'socially excluded' from society, to contribute fairly to society by paying higher taxes.
Inevitability of Modernization:
One of the 'mythologies' identified by Barthes that justifies false ideology is the discursive practice of honestly admitting some evil, only to falsely triumph over it with a non-ideal solution (1972, p.41). The discursive production of a 'figured world' (Gee, 2014) to make sense of the social crisis for New Labour was a discourse on modernization that conceived of it as both as such a necessary evil, but equally as positive possibility if people complied. The supposed inevitability of modernization thus functions to morally legitimize a change in social values, whilst politically justifying the social costs that come with it.
'The values of progressive politics - solidarity, justice for all - have never been (...) more in need of modernisation' (2003)
The need to do so immanently due to the threat of inaction strengthens the effect of its inevitability (Dunmire, 2007):
'None of these measures are easy. But early action can save money later on as well as being morally right' (1997)
Here the situated meaning (Gee, 2014) of 'morally right' is a posed equivalency with doing the fiscally responsible thing. The neo-liberal 'common-sense' values that fashion the moral maxims of Thatcher's homo economicus are thus accommodated in the policy legitimation of the SETF by claiming these actions equally lead to maximally socially just outcomes. That these outcomes are not ideally just is thus honestly admitted:
'Lots of people want more for the minimum wage and I agree it would be nice to pay everyone everything you want' (1999)
and it is not only the outcome, but also the values that underlie these outcomes that are morally legitimated despite a forced revision under modernization:
'We have to have our values intact and secure but apply them to the modern world.' (1999)
Here moralising discourse can be seen as producing social inequities through their perpetuation, this perpetuation is recognized in the 'X (positive), but X (trade-off)' form (Fairclough, 2002):
'we gave opportunity to people on benefit to get into work; but demanded responsibility in return; where we came down hard on crime; but offered ways out to those committing crime' (2002)
These negative trade-offs are finally justified and mythologized by an inevitable modernisation which is equivocated with the positive signifiers of both progress and victory:
'Progress won in the end' (2003)
In a recent paper on a similar topic I summarized some of these tricks, and lent heavily from Faircloughs grand work. The essay applies the tools of CDA to the discursive methods used by Blair in his public speeches to morally legitimate the social values demanded by the new SETF. Demonstration of the existence of 'systems of narration' (Smith, 1998) that seek the resignification of inherited political concepts, such as the social values of 'opportunity, fairness and mutual responsibility' (Blair, 2002) evidences processes of political hegemonic formation (Mouffe, 1990; Hall, 2003). Blairs methods of language stylization for ends of moral legitimation are divided into techniques of: 'synthetic personalization' (Fairclough, 1995) which have as object Blair's personal ethic and identity, and 'spin' (Pitcher, 2003) which have as object political and moral trade-offs in policy.
Synthetic Personalization
This discursive practice seeks to make productive the inherent tensions that exist in negotiating between the identity of the private individual and the one assumed in public office. Each technique lends itself to a honing of a 'distinctive repertoire' (Fairclough, 2002) that allows the personal identity of Blair to be seen as legitimating his moral, and thus by extension, political position of authority (Chilton, 2008).
Ethos and Conviction:
The discursive privileging of the personal identity of Blair over his political one, is recognized in its most succinct form at the beginning of a speech given to single parents on welfare:
"Reform is just a word. / It has no meaning in itself. / It's the purpose of it that matters. / I will tell you why I am passionate about reform." (2002)
There is first a recognition of the vacuity of meaning inherent in political terms as abstract as 'reform', one used by all politicians, thus lending to its role as a mere signifier of change; one without necessary content for the sceptic. Instead of assuming a traditional political role and arguing for the signified content, Blair first accommodates for the vacuity of the term or its 'purpose' by demonstrating his personal conviction or passion for it. By first aligning his personal values with the project Blair establishes character traits of honesty and openness, traits that are key for communicatively generating political consent by fulfilling its maxim of recognition of 'truthfulness' (Grice, 1975). Such demonstrations of character lend themselves to a 'meta-language' that essentially convinces audiences that they are not being deceived (Chilton, 2008).
In demonstrating that there are no false-intentions, this meta-language evidences a rational attempt at ideological coherency in the political speech. This is especially important for moral legitimation as an ethos must similarly have coherent maxims across action (Selznick, 1993). Blair underlines this by claiming:
"There have been no excuses, and no prevarications" (1997)
Demonstrations of honesty and personal conviction, besides being a virtuous character trait itself, establishes the authority of the speaker as the legitimate informal representative of what is essentially a formal process.
Religion:
The dissolution of the distinction between the private and public intentions of Blair: 'The Britain I want to build' (1997) / 'I make no apology' (1999)
allows for a new 'system of narration' (Smith, 1998) that focusses on the leader as a cult/spiritual personality. This, in tandem with the object of the speech being the impression of social values, allows us to understand Blairs intertextual allusions to religious teachings and assumption of the role of a prophet. References to faith allows for moral legitimation on the basis of an authority of tradition (van Dijk, 2000). Further, by arguing for the institutionalization of these values in the mechanisms of the state there is also legitimation through mythopoesis; otherwise, the generation of a myth, the belief in which generates a legitimate reward for the subject (van Leeuwen, 2007). This emphasis on the necessity of faith in the moral/political project is deictically redefined as the necessity for 'hope' with which Blair ends two out of the four speeches in the corpus:
'Pessimism or Hope / Despair or Confidence / Decline or Renewal' (2003), 'The best thing any government can bring is hope, and that is what I bring today' (1997)
The first quote is an example of the intertextual method of the adoption of a social language (Gee, 2014, p.165), specifically the poetic form of biblical prophetization’s. In a similar vein those in his audience that have failed to demonstrate correct social values, otherwise the 'socially excluded' tackled by his new SETF, are given the option of repenting for their sins and beginning anew:
'To those who have lost hope over the past 18 years, I offer them a fresh start' (1997)
Normalization:
Recognition of synthetic personalization as a 'repertoire' (Fairclough, 2002) means that there is a hybridity to the language; otherwise, natural transitions between enacting multiple distinct social languages (Gee, 2014, p.166). As a countervailing tendency to the 'bad cop' religious moralizations, Blair switches to informal modes of speech to demonstrate the character trait of authenticity; this is one parallel to honesty, but is an honesty grounded in the 'normal' daily life shared by his audience. This can thus be recognized as a method of 'discoursal democratization' (Fairclough, 1995); the social values he seeks to morally legitimize are not only enacted by him, but also in a language common to the citizenry. This is achieved in part through the informal use of the 'I' as seen in previous sections, but is done more obviously in the mixing of language forms such as the opening of a speech with a joke and poem:
'I am particularly flattered and privileged to be the warm-up act for the poet laureate. (Laughter) In fact, I am so flattered and so privileged I have written you a little poem, which I will read to you:
"Change your ways, clean up your act, modernise or die"' (1999)
Due to the non-dialogical nature of the political speech, discursive practices that aim for normalization of the author can only be achieved through monological theatrics. In recognition that this speech (1999) was given at the Trade Union Conference, who constitute the major left-political opposition to New Labour on welfare, this serves two functions. In tune with the political focus on 'partnership' and 'new governance' (Prideaux, 2005) joviality obscures genuine political difference and thus avoids ideological hegemonic agonism (Hall, 2003; Mouffe, 1990). In line with Smith (1998) however, Blairs short and dark reference to this antagonism ('modernise or die'), but only through the informal nature of a joke, establishes any serious discussion of the idea of modernization as 'illegitimate' (p.172) and thus sees the organic political crisis as dissolved under his leadership. Such political moves are also occasionally reified through informal expressive slang:
'Come on! This isn't the betrayal of public services. It's their renewal.' (2003)
Spin
The political promotion of the SETF involved the double act of legitimizing the social values of responsibility and self-reliance (Atkins, 2011) and delegitimizing or condemning behaviour of those that have 'languished on the dole for months' (Blair, 1999). 'Spin' here refers to the discursive methods utilized not to argue for such values directly, as this would be counterproductive to seeing them as naturalized, but instead relating these values with societal trends that are either naturally desirable or inevitable. This produces the moral subject that seems both normatively right and necessary, thus reifying, or obscuring the political nature (van Dijk, 2000) of a discursively produced positionality.
Desirable Values of Partnership:
New Labour develops a new language of governance utilizing words such as 'participant groups', 'partnership' and 'transparent cooperation' extensively (Fairclough, 2002, p.79). This is a lexical field that Blair constantly refers to in his discourse on what is morally required of responsible citizens for his SETF to succeed. The contractual element of his welfare applied to the 'socially excluded' thus derives its general moral legitimation from claiming each person in society has a new responsibility, failure to take up this 'bargain' is equally a moral failure:
'It is something for something. A society where we play by the rules, you only take out if you put in. That’s the bargain' (1997)
Those that are socially excluded are thus failing not only to help themselves, but to help society as a whole; equally, those that are not on benefits are not only morally legitimated, but are posed as positively altruistic. This generalist form of moral legitimation where institutional actions are portrayed as mutually beneficial:
'It's right for them, for the country, for society.' (2002)
obscures political antagonisms and thereby disallows hegemonic competition (van Dijk, 1997). Consider for example that what is purposefully excluded here is the responsibility of those best off, in their own way 'socially excluded' from society, to contribute fairly to society by paying higher taxes.
Inevitability of Modernization:
One of the 'mythologies' identified by Barthes that justifies false ideology is the discursive practice of honestly admitting some evil, only to falsely triumph over it with a non-ideal solution (1972, p.41). The discursive production of a 'figured world' (Gee, 2014) to make sense of the social crisis for New Labour was a discourse on modernization that conceived of it as both as such a necessary evil, but equally as positive possibility if people complied. The supposed inevitability of modernization thus functions to morally legitimize a change in social values, whilst politically justifying the social costs that come with it.
'The values of progressive politics - solidarity, justice for all - have never been (...) more in need of modernisation' (2003)
The need to do so immanently due to the threat of inaction strengthens the effect of its inevitability (Dunmire, 2007):
'None of these measures are easy. But early action can save money later on as well as being morally right' (1997)
Here the situated meaning (Gee, 2014) of 'morally right' is a posed equivalency with doing the fiscally responsible thing. The neo-liberal 'common-sense' values that fashion the moral maxims of Thatcher's homo economicus are thus accommodated in the policy legitimation of the SETF by claiming these actions equally lead to maximally socially just outcomes. That these outcomes are not ideally just is thus honestly admitted:
'Lots of people want more for the minimum wage and I agree it would be nice to pay everyone everything you want' (1999)
and it is not only the outcome, but also the values that underlie these outcomes that are morally legitimated despite a forced revision under modernization:
'We have to have our values intact and secure but apply them to the modern world.' (1999)
Here moralising discourse can be seen as producing social inequities through their perpetuation, this perpetuation is recognized in the 'X (positive), but X (trade-off)' form (Fairclough, 2002):
'we gave opportunity to people on benefit to get into work; but demanded responsibility in return; where we came down hard on crime; but offered ways out to those committing crime' (2002)
These negative trade-offs are finally justified and mythologized by an inevitable modernisation which is equivocated with the positive signifiers of both progress and victory:
'Progress won in the end' (2003)
April 16, 2018
Honestly, one of the most informative analyses of political speeches I've read...if you're at all interested in the interaction between language and (British) politics, I would highly recommend this!
Read
January 31, 2022this was an utterly fascinating read — albeit, as someone who is a language nerd and a new labour nerd i am the target audience.
March 30, 2016
Greta book
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews