Does Good Political Speech Really Look Like In A Democracy?

Which do you prefer, the statement that “We will build a wall!” that President Donald Trump promised during his campaign trail or when a senator talks for three house on the Senate floor? In America, we have a multitude of different types of political speech, but what does good political speech actually look like in a democracy? Within this paper I will argue that good political speech inside of a democracy should encourage citizens to have discussions and deliberate and be clear and straightforward. This can be achieved by changing our societal norms to include increased deliberation, further our intuitions to fact check, and develop more direct communication. Additionally, the government can alter its educational policies in order to further

This is perfectly summed up by Stanley who states “an important form of propaganda in a democracy is speech that presents itself as embodying the normative ideals of public reason but that in fact contributes content that can be expected by a rational person in the situation to erode those very ideas” (Stanley 93). There should be no underlying tones in political speech or an attempt to masquerade it as something it is not. It should clearly relate to the citizens what the message or issue being discussed is. When political speech is not clear or straightforward it can lead to confusion. Stanley emphasizes this when he talks about how Bernanke, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, “chose to handle the situation by relying on the false beliefs of the public to communicate alarm” and how this led to the public remaining confused about the situation (Stanley 85). When you are confused it is usually a sign that you are having trouble thinking through something. Therefore, if the public is confused by the political speech or lacks information the political speech should have included then there is no possibility of having the proper discussions and deliberations needed in order to create and maintain good political speech within a

I have previously mentioned deliberation and discussed how it as a sign of good political speech. It helps the public contemplate and essentially think through their thoughts using deliberations and discussions. When I argue that we need to make a societal effort to increase deliberations it is so citizens know and understand how to deliberate well and how to use discussion to work through political speech. This means that we have to change our habits in our everyday lives. I think this especially pertains to situations where questions are raised between authority and subordinate figures. For example, when a child and parent have disagreeing views or the child raises a controversial question. It is fairly common for the parent to simply enforce their will with a simple phrase like “because I am the parent and I said so”. Not to say that the child should not show respect and some deferment to their parents, but this way of dealing with differing opinions or disputed questions enforces the mindset of “I should always defer to authority figures and not raise questions or have discussions because they will simply overpower me with their authority”. This mindset it very harmful to having good political speech because political speech should always be questioned in order to consolidate legitimacy. Plus, even if good political