In the spring of 2011 (Arab Spring), revolutions occurred in some Arab countries (Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya) against the rulers of these countries. The rulers could not stand before the revolutionists and were forced to leave their positions. After the revolutions, parliamentary elections were held, with Islamic parties winning the majority of the seats. This result led the media to present many television debates about the future of many issues such as freedom of speech, women’s rights, and applying Islamic law. These television debates have been studied by many scholars from various perspectives, such as rhetoric and critical discourse analysis. This paper presents a critical discourse analysis of one of the most popular television debate programs called the Doha Debates. The first section begins with the purpose of study. The second section concerns the theoretical framework. Then, I present my approach, the discourse-historical approach (Reisigl & Wodak, 2001; Wodak, 2001). This is followed by a detailed analysis of the data from the Doha Debates and discussion.
This study seeks to answer the following question: How are the Islamic parties named and represented linguistically in the Doha Debates program? I focus here on Islamic parties for two reasons. First, Islamic parties won the majority of the parliament seats. This means that part of the media discourse in these countries will be concerned with the future imagined for these countries. Dunmire (2007) stated that “an important task for critical discourse analysis is to demonstrate the linguistic and discursive means through which the future is claimed and appropriated by dominant groups and institutions” (p. 19). In the analysis, we will see how the participants in the Do...
... middle of paper ...
...il in Libya and is the interim prime minister, and Rabab el-Mahdi, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the American University in Cairo, also a co-founder of a number of Egyptian opposition groups, including Kifaya.
I chose this program for many reasons. First, it is a popular program not just in the Arab world, but also in Europe. Second, this episode discusses an important issue in the Arab world, women’s rights. Third, the timing of this episode is important because it came after the end of the parliamentary elections.
Analysis
In this section, the analysis examines how Islamic parties are named and represented linguistically. For the purpose of this study, I focus only on the four speakers and exclude the moderator from the analysis. I begin with the two speakers who speak for the motion. Then, I look at the two speakers who speak against the motion.
However, as I grow older it occurs to me that the American rhetorical culture of freedom and democracy seem unreflective of the material conditions of specific communities of non-dominant groups. The voices of marginalized communities are not equally represented in this specific case of international terrorism. If the media and powerful authority figures are controlling the public discourse of international affairs, rhetorical culture is very much shaped by how the powerheads control our ability to think and act. I propose that in order to “[restore] democracy through public [discourse].... ‘all citizens [are] entitled to participate in the process of political dialogues [be present]” in order to deliberate and construct a truth that is hidden from us (Citizens Talking Together). So where have our “rhetorical cultures gone?” I argue that the rhetorical culture of deliberation remains deeply embedded in the fabrics of our society, but is not accessed due to the unequal distribution of wealth and social and power in
Ayoob, M. (2007) The Many Faces of Political Islam: Religion and Politics in the Muslim
Democracy and Islam, an article written by Irfan Ahmad1 strives to show that there is a possibility that Islam can move towards democracy. On the other hand, Islam and Liberal Democracy: A Historical Overview, an article written by Bernard Lewis2 discusses how a democracy is unable to work in Islamic States. In this essay, I will be comparing and contrasting the two articles. Both Bernard and Irfan carry weight in their arguments and have certain strong points, as well as weaknesses. The major difference between the two articles is the variation of the core definition of democracy that the writers have, and their distinct perspectives of the workings of a democracy. In addition, the articles also differ in their chosen format and the authors’ thoughts on the Catholic and Western influence. The fundamental dispute of democracy and Islam are strong in both articles, and they are resolved in a respective manner. Irfan was successful in formulating a more compelling case and was able to maintain better structure; however, I am a firm believer that Islam is a theocratic system and it is not compatible with democracy as a system of governance.
This is a strength in Deeb’s book because the reader can seek to understand the different discourse and assessment about modern-ness that the Islamist debate in various ways. It is also helpfu...
In the context of the book, Media Framing of the Muslim World: Conflicts, Crises and Contexts, it has been questioned that why western media associates Muslims as violent oppressors? Through their media and visual framing they emphasized the notion that there are certainly Muslims who commits various human rights violations. This book is illustration of media framing that how media covers and represent the images and how people will perceive it in different parts of the world. As media is considered one of the most powerful tool. In the
Wodak, Ruth and Meyer, Michael, eds. Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2009.
The source text was originally published in print, in Gee’s book, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method.
In the Middle East, Arab uprisings that included many women activists made a major impact on their society. According to the Washington Post, “The Arab uprisings of early 2011 disrupted virtually every dimension of Arab politics and societies, forcing a systematic reevaluation of many long-held political science theories and assumptions. The place of women in politics and the public sphere was no exception.” These uprisings were just the beginning to long road on the way to women’s
Ibnouf, Fatma Osman. “Women And The Arab Spring.” Women & Environments International Magazine 92/93(2013): 18-21. MasterFILE Elite.Web.31 Mar. 2014.
There is a strong belief that Islam and politics are directly tied. They are tied in the sense that the building blocks of the religion dictate how they ought to behave in the political environment. Through this mandatory follow up behavior that the religion delineates, many have come to believe that its teachings are a form of terrorism. Mandaville argues that what has challenged the Islamic link between politics and religion was the emergence of secularism, which went against the belief that politics and religion could go together. Islam has been a religion that has been accused of supporting terrorist activities in the world. Different assumptions have been brought up to understand better the linkages between what really lies behind the Islam religion and politics. Peter Mandaville argues that Islam is dynamic and that it has changed over time; situated within time and politics.
Mohsin Hamid has successfully captured the dominant political discourses of the contemporary world and presented them as mutually exclusive. What makes this book work is the masterful employment of irony and controlled suspense to create a subtle polemic. As one reviewer has put it:-
Moreover contrary to the claims of the critics, and some of its own advocates, the key trends are broadly consistent with a moderate, pragmatic yet, inevitably uneven multiculturalism. Later multiculturalism generally came to mean the political accommodation of non-white, mainly post-immigration minorities, in ways which went beyond the analysis of colour-racism and socio-economic disadvantage, even though it varies between countries. Present day study of multiculturalism not only acts as an anti-racist critique but also has taken the Muslim challenge with new and deserved seriousness (Modood,
Aday, S. et al. 2012. New Media and Conflict After the Arab Spring. United States Institute of Peace. [online] Available at: http://www. usip. org/files/resources/PW80. pdf. [Accessed: 29 April, 2014.]
Her approach is capable of identifying and describing the underlying mechanisms that contribute to those disorders in discourse which are embedded in a particular context, at a specific moment, and inevitably affect communication. Wodak’s work on the discourse of anti-Semitism in 1990 led to the development of an approach she termed the Discourse-Historical Method. The term historical occupies a unique place in this approach. It denotes an attempt to systematically integrate all available background information in the analysis and interpretation of the many layers of a written or spoken text. As a result, the study of Wodak and her colleagues’ showed that the context of the discourse had a significant impact on the structure, function, and context of the utterances. This method is based on the belief that language “manifests social processes and interaction” and generates those processes as well (Wodak & Ludwig, 1999, p. 12). This method analyses language from a three-fold perspective: first, the assumption that discourse involves power and ideologies. “No interaction exists where power relations do not prevail and where values and norms do not have a relevant role” (p. 12). Secondly, “discourse … is always historical, that is, it is connected synchronically and diachronically with other communicative events which are happening at the same time or which have happened before” (p. 12). The third feature
“Are political Islam and democracy compatible?” This question has been troubling both Muslims and non-Muslims living in East and West for a long time now. Contemporary Islamic political thought has become deeply influenced by attempts at reconciling Islam and democracy. Muslim thinkers who deal with political debates cannot disregard the significance of the democratic system, as it is the prevailing theme of modern western political thought. Hence, it is necessary for any alternative political system, whether it is religious or secular, to explore its position with regards to democratic government. In fact, a large literature and media publications have developed over the last century on this heated discourse of democracy versus Islam. While many argue that Islam has all the ingredients of modern state and democratic society, many other reject the phenomena “modernism” and “democracy” as a whole because of their “foreign nature”—alien to “Islamic values”. For Islamists and modernists, the motivation for such effort to either embrace or reject democracy often is to remove suspicion about the nature and goals of Islamic movements and Islamic revivalism or resurgence. But before diving into this discourse, one needs to understand the definition and origins of “democracy.” Although purely a Western ideology in its origin, there is no consensus on the definition of “democracy” as a political system. The Oxford English Dictionary describes democracy as: “A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives” (“democracy, n.”). In my paper, I will examine whether or not democracy and Sunni political Islam are compatible through the eyes of three revolutionary Sun...