Modalities of Democratic Transformation

Abstract

This article is based on the premise that social systems are justified via the discursive use of modal statements (i.e. sentences in which actors delineate that which is possible, impossible, inevitable or contingent) and their associated rationales. Within authoritarian states such modal discourse usually reflects a relatively coherent `modality of permission'. However, when the citizens of such states unite to overthrow their totalitarian leaders, their activities are typically justified in terms of two mutually inconsistent discursive forms: a `modality of achievement' (based on market justice among competitors) vs a `modality of necessity' (based on social justice for the masses). These three discursive modalities have theoretical roots in Simmel's forms of sociation, and can be differentiated using content analysis. In an analysis of editorials during Hungary's first seven years of post-Soviet democratization, evidence is found of a steady increase during these years in mentions of Hungarians' opportunities being based on economic circumstances as well as in mentions of their responsibilities being grounded in political circumstances. This latter finding suggests that as late as 1997, Hungarian political discourse was heading toward a modality of necessity, more like the predominant political modality in Western Europe than the achievement modality that characterizes political discourse in the US.

On the Cultural Foundations for Universal Healthcare: Implications From Late 20th-Century U.S. and Canadian Health-Related Discourse

“…Given the liberal leanings of the two newspapers on social issues like the health-related ones examined here, it is not surprising that 45% of all news frames were welfare-related and (consistent with H5) nearly a third of all modal arguments were ones of inevitability for welfare-related reasons. As in previous modal analyses, contingency is the least common reality claim and security is the least used news frame within editorial data like these Roberts et al, 2009). Possibility and impossibility were nearly as likely to be conveyed in the modal arguments, as were economic, political, and cultural news frames.…”

“…Thus preliminary research on Muslim and Hindu societies shows most modal arguments in their largest national newspapers to evoke cultural frames, with normative justifications typically applied in Saudi editorials but with appeals to ''conformity to one's nature'' in Indian ones . And when a relatively secularized country is afforded press freedom in the aftermath of authoritarian rule, it may take time for elites and journalists to learn that an electorate's frames as well as its shared national reality need to be accommodated in their editorializing (Roberts, Popping, & Pan, 2009).…”

The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods

“…In my view, the other problems are usually ignored or even not recognized. An exception is Popping and Roberts (2009) who explain in detail how they made their choices with regard to types of modal auxiliary verbs and rationales as used in studies they performed, among which is Roberts, Popping and Pan (2009).…”

Coding Issues in Cognitive Mapping of Games

“…Motions contain requests. This invites to ally modality analysis as for example in Roberts et al (2009). In this type of analysis one looks at what in our case the government can (possible), must (inevitable) or must not (impossible) do.…”