“…Occasionally, that rejection has found curious expression, however. In the 2011 election, for instance, the For Heaven and Earth Party, closely associated with Santi Asoke, ran a ‘Vote No’ campaign with the slogan ‘Don’t let animals into parliament’ (Jones 2014). These are, however, such marginal phenomena that most recent studies of the Thai political party system and of Thai voting behaviour contain no mention of ‘religion’, ‘Buddhism’, or ‘Islam’ (representative examples include Ockey 2005, Hicken 2013, and Huang and Stithorn 2018).…”
Section: Political Parties and Social Cleavagesmentioning
The political salience of religious issues and identities has been rising in Thailand, and this is increasingly reflected in electoral politics. Thai political parties seek to position themselves in relation to struggles over the location of the ideological centre of gravity, which has pitted defenders of the religio-political status quo—a monarchy-centred civil-religious nationalism—against Buddhist nationalists, on the one hand, and proponents of greater secularization, on the other. In the 2019 general election, political entrepreneurs ‘particized’ these religio-political differences, which has far-reaching implications for majority-minority relations, to an extent that appears unprecedented in recent Thai political history. This argument is developed through an analysis of the platforms, policies, and rhetoric put forward by political parties contesting the election, which concluded an almost five-year period of direct military rule. This analysis suggests we need to pay greater attention to the role of political parties and electoral competition in maintaining and contesting the secular settlement in Thailand.
“…Occasionally, that rejection has found curious expression, however. In the 2011 election, for instance, the For Heaven and Earth Party, closely associated with Santi Asoke, ran a ‘Vote No’ campaign with the slogan ‘Don’t let animals into parliament’ (Jones 2014). These are, however, such marginal phenomena that most recent studies of the Thai political party system and of Thai voting behaviour contain no mention of ‘religion’, ‘Buddhism’, or ‘Islam’ (representative examples include Ockey 2005, Hicken 2013, and Huang and Stithorn 2018).…”
Section: Political Parties and Social Cleavagesmentioning
The political salience of religious issues and identities has been rising in Thailand, and this is increasingly reflected in electoral politics. Thai political parties seek to position themselves in relation to struggles over the location of the ideological centre of gravity, which has pitted defenders of the religio-political status quo—a monarchy-centred civil-religious nationalism—against Buddhist nationalists, on the one hand, and proponents of greater secularization, on the other. In the 2019 general election, political entrepreneurs ‘particized’ these religio-political differences, which has far-reaching implications for majority-minority relations, to an extent that appears unprecedented in recent Thai political history. This argument is developed through an analysis of the platforms, policies, and rhetoric put forward by political parties contesting the election, which concluded an almost five-year period of direct military rule. This analysis suggests we need to pay greater attention to the role of political parties and electoral competition in maintaining and contesting the secular settlement in Thailand.
“…Political discourse produced by media actors, that is, “discourses produced by journalists or editorial leaders (including op‐ed articles),” and civil society actors, that is, “discourse produced by actors from the civil society, in the broad sense of the term (i.e., citizens, social movements, experts, scholars and religious leaders)” (Randour, Perrez, and Reuchamps 2020:434–435), usually add valuable insights. As such, there is a wide range of data available; for instance speeches (Hardjanto and Mazia 2019; Wodak and Boukala 2015), parliamentary debates (Cheng 2019; Simon‐Vandenbergen 1997, 2008; Vuković 2014a, 2014b), diplomatic condolences (Fenton‐Smith 2007), press articles (Musolff 2017), campaign posters (Jones 2014), tweets (Kreis 2017), citizen forums (Perrez and Reuchamps 2012, 2015) and graffiti (Hanauer 2011). (Randour, Perrez, and Reuchamps 2020:429)While all these domains and sources of data would be interesting for a comprehensive analysis of Brexit, the aim of this paper limits itself to the domain of political elites in parliamentary debates.…”
Section: Political Discourse and Epistemic Modalitymentioning
The United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union, known as Brexit, is arguably the most important political, social, and economic phenomenon in British post‐WWII history. This paper analyses parliamentary debates from December 2018 concerning the European Withdrawal Act, focusing on the epistemic modality of Member of Parliaments' (MP) statements, to investigate the ontology of Brexit. Epistemic modality refers to linguistic devices that allow modification with regards to confidence, truthfulness, and probability, and enables investigation of MPs' commitments. Commitments are a part of their status function declaration, which create institutional reality. Analysis of such commitments permits inference about the institutional reality of Brexit. A video abstract is available at
https://youtu.be/90RRWApg0rQ.
“…Whalen () investigates how presidential campaign posters were defaced in the 2009 election in Kabul, Afghanistan. Jones () conducted a semiotic analysis of the “Vote No” campaign posters from the For Heaven and Earth Party in Thailand during 2011. He argued that these posters “depicting politicians as animals is a continuing political discourse of conservative Buddhist philosophers/Scholars” (269).…”
This study analyzes American presidential campaign posters from 1828 to 2012 using the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse. It advances the theory by investigating a hitherto unexplored medium, posters; more importantly, visual elements (e.g., the bald eagle) were analyzed along with words. Acclaims were more frequent than attacks; no difference occurred in the functions of early and recent posters. Visual symbols used acclaims even more than verbal symbols. Character was a more frequent topic than policy; the relative proportion of these two topics did not change over time. Visual symbols discussed character even more than verbal symbols.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
