HomePublications

“What Is the Point of Parliamentary Debate?” Deliberation, Oratory, Opposition and Spectacle in the British House of Commons

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Open Access permissions

Open

Documents

DOI

Authors

Organisational units

Abstract

This article seeks to open up debate about Parliamentary debate by exploring the history of ideas about Parliamentary debate and rhetoric through the lens of four core concepts: deliberation, oratory, opposition and spectacle. These are not the names of singular ideas let alone schools of thought; they are conceptual fields each of which gives a particular shape to ways of conceiving, criticizing and defending Commons debate. In mapping this topos – identifying historical debates and practices alongside contemporary arguments found in political theory, political science and Rhetoric – I show that our thinking and arguing about the Commons is part of a contested and ongoing history more complex than we acknowledge. I argue that Parliamentary Debate has a number of purposes and that our thinking about it, and evaluation of it, should not be contained within the frame of “deliberation” but should also take account of the political value and importance of oratory, opposition and spectacle.  

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)11-31
Number of pages21
JournalRedescriptions
Volume20
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Peer-reviewedYes

Downloads statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

ID: 113373945

Related by author
  1. YouTube and Political Ideologies: Technology, Populism & Rhetorical Form

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. The Metaphysics of Brexit

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  3. Rethinking Political Communication

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  4. “Dancing with doxa”: A “Rhetorical Political Analysis” of David Cameron’s sense of Britishness

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

  5. Interpretation and Social Explanation

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle