Speech Cycle? ‘Election-Defining Rhetoric’ in Westminster Democracies

Grube, Dennis

doi:10.1080/10361146.2010.544285

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pinto-Duschinsky 1999), ‘Westminster democracies’ (e.g. Brenton 2014; Grube 2011; Kaiser 2008), countries adhering to a ‘Westminster system’ (e.g. Eggers and Spirling 2016; Estevez-Abe 2006) or indeed members of a ‘Westminster family’ (e.g.…”

Section: Origins Of the Westminster Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Muddle of the ‘Westminster Model’: A Concept Stretched Beyond Repair

Russell

Serban

2020

Gov. & oppos.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term ‘Westminster model’, widely used in both the academic and practitioner literatures, is a familiar one. But detailed examination finds significant confusion about its meaning. This article follows Giovanni Sartori's advice for ‘reconstructing’ a social science term whose meaning may be unclear through review of its use in the recent literature. It finds that many authors in comparative politics use the term ‘Westminster model’ without definition, while those providing definitions associate it with a large (and sometimes conflicting) set of attributes, and a set of countries often not demonstrating those attributes. Some have sought to respect this diversity by proposing variants like ‘Washminster’ or ‘Eastminster’, while others suggest that the term should be seen as a loose ‘family resemblance’ concept. But on examination it no longer meets even the – relatively weak – requirements for family resemblance. To end the muddle, and the risk of flawed inferences and false generalization, comparative scholars should drop this term, and select cases based on more precise attributes instead.

show abstract

Section: Origins Of the Westminster Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Muddle of the ‘Westminster Model’: A Concept Stretched Beyond Repair

Russell

Serban

2020

Gov. & oppos.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As outlined by Aristotle over two millennia ago, rhetoric allows a speaker to utilise their ethos, logos and pathos to connect with an audience and persuade them to support a particular point of view (see Finlayson 2012). There is now an emerging body of literature on the role played by political rhetoric in states governed by parliamentary systems (Uhr and Walter 2014;Toye 2011;Kane and Patapan 2010;Bennister 2013;Grube 2011;Atkins et al 2014). This complements the much larger and longer established literature in the US, which focusses on the rhetorical power of the presidency (Tulis 1987;Kernell 2006;Medhurst 2006;Friedman and Friedman 2012), and the ways in which rhetoric frames political debates (Druckman 2004;Lakoff 2004).…”

Section: Discursive Institutionalism and The Explaining Of Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Rhetorically defining a social institution: how leaders have framed same-sex marriage

Grube

Acker

2016

Australian Journal of Political Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the presidential studies literature in the United States (US), there has been considerable work done on the concept of the 'rhetorical presidency' as an institutional force (Tulis, 1987;Medhurst, 1996;Ellis, 1998;Stuckey, 2010). There has been less work on aspects of rhetorical leadership in the Westminster world, although interest is increasing (Uhr, 2002;Curran, 2004;Finlayson, 2004Finlayson, , 2007Grube, 2010Grube, , 2011Kane and Patapan, 2010). Corcoran (1994Corcoran ( , 1995Corcoran ( , 1998 has examined the rhetoric of concession speeches in both the Australian and American context and Kabanoff et al (2001) have used the techniques of content analysis to interrogate the conference speeches of Australian political leaders.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Prime Ministers and political narratives for policy change: towards a heuristic

Grube

2012

Policy &Amp; Politics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political narratives play a central role in modern governance. They explain a government's driving principles, and underpin their ability to implement policy change. Rhetoric is the tool that Prime Ministers use to articulate and frame political narratives to support their policy prescriptions. This article examines four case studies of how Prime Ministers in Westminster systems have used political rhetoric to create narratives capable of making a persuasive case for policy change. Common themes are explored to provide the basis for a heuristic that encapsulates contemporary prime ministerial practice in articulating political narratives for policy change.Democratically elected leaders seeking to propose policy change are faced with a difficult question: how can we explain why we are doing this in a way that people actually understand? It is a question asked and answered -often in great haste -in the offices of Prime Ministers across the Westminster world. The question is in fact more significant than it sounds. Underlying the question is not only a political communication problem but more importantly also a governance problem. The inability to articulate a coherent political narrative for action can lead to governments being unable to implement policy decisions. What on the surface may appear to be an argument about 'spin' is in reality an argument about the limitations in modern governance of democratically elected governments being able to implement their policies. Under the conditions of network governance, governments rely on the goodwill and support of an array of external actors to govern effectively (see Rhodes, 1997Rhodes, , 2007. If a political narrative fails to persuade key actors of the necessity for change, governments can quickly lose control of a debate and of the momentum needed to carry through a policy change. The study of political narratives therefore becomes an essential component of understanding modern governance.Political narratives operate at two distinct levels, although the relationship between them is by no means clearly established. At the first level, every political leader and government consciously or unconsciously promulgates a meta-narrative -an allencompassing story about what their government stands for. Its breadth covers the litany of individual policies that make up the everyday work of government. At the second level, each major policy announcement has linked with it a narrative of its own -commensurate with the meta-narrative -but more specific in its rationale for a particular policy. It is a story that explains why a new law or policy is necessary.There is a strong and developing popular literature about political narratives. According to the Global Language Monitor website, the word itself -'narrative' -was the third top word in global discourse in 2010, primarily because of its growing use in the political sphere. 1 A commensurate academic literature to systematically characterise the components of political narratives and explain their significance to modern governan...

show abstract

Speech Cycle? ‘Election-Defining Rhetoric’ in Westminster Democracies

Cited by 9 publications

References 30 publications

The Muddle of the ‘Westminster Model’: A Concept Stretched Beyond Repair

The Muddle of the ‘Westminster Model’: A Concept Stretched Beyond Repair

Rhetorically defining a social institution: how leaders have framed same-sex marriage

Prime Ministers and political narratives for policy change: towards a heuristic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About