Abstract
Discursive Psychology, in its multiple forms, has long been interested in issues relating to categorization, especially in terms of the ways in which it can undermine the legitimacy of a speaker’s contribution on the basis that they have a ‘stake’ or interest in the matter at hand (Edwards & Potter, 1992). Drawing upon data from the British public debate preceding the 2003 invasion of Iraq, this chapter considers how contributors to debate resisted the possibility of being categorized in particular ways that would be unhelpful to their cause. In a manner of direct interest to peace psychology, for those arguing against the proposed invasion of Iraq, it was important to avoid being viewed as ‘pacifists’, and for those in favour of military action, it was important to avoid being seen as ‘warmongers’.
This chapter synthesises and develops two chapters from my ESRC-funded PhD thesis (Burridge, 2005) and was greatly enhanced by time spent at Loughborough University as part of my ESRC-funded postdoctoral fellowship (Reference: R4220134082 and PTA-026-27-0591, respectively).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
An important point of clarification is that these two categories—pacifist and warmonger—are not entirely congruent with the binary avian metaphors often used to make sense of positions on foreign policy—the hawk and the dove. For more on ‘Avian Metaphors’ see Burridge (2005, pp. 211–214).
- 2.
Space permits the inclusion of only a limited number of examples. More can be found in Burridge (2005), and many others are spread throughout the UK parliamentary record.
- 3.
Members of the UK House of Lords who are independent of the major political parties, which includes many clergy, are described as crossbench—and sit on benches which cross the sides of the chamber.
References
Antaki, C., & Horowitz, A. (2000). Using identity ascription to disqualify a rival version of events as ‘interested’. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33, 155–177.
Augoustinos, M., & Every, D. (2007). The language of ‘race’ and prejudice: A discourse of denial, reason, and liberal-practical politics. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 123–141.
Augoustinos, M., & Every, D. (2010). Accusations and denials of racism: Managing moral accountability in public discourse. Discourse and Society, 21, 251–256.
Bamford, J. (2004). A pretext for war: 9–11, Iraq and the abuse of America’s intelligence agencies. London: Doubleday.
Billig, M. (1991). Ideology and opinions: Studies in rhetorical psychology. London: Sage.
Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). (2003). ‘Million’ march against Iraq war. BBC Online. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2765041.stm
Burridge, J. D. (2005). The construction of discursive difficulty: The circulation of, and resistance to, moral asymmetries in the public debate over the invasion of Iraq in 2003 (Doctoral thesis, University of Nottingham).
Burridge, J. D. (2007). The ‘spectre of anti-Americanism’ in the British public debate over the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The Journal of Language and Politics, 6, 201–221.
Burridge, J. D. (2013). Appeasement analogies in British parliamentary debates preceding the 2003 invasion of Iraq. In C. Karner & B. Mertens (Eds.), The use and abuse of memory: Interpreting WWII in contemporary European politics (pp. 42–58). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Burridge, J. D., & McSorley, K. (2013). Too fat to fight? Obesity, bio-politics and the militarisation of children’s bodies. In K. McSorley (Ed.), War and the body: Militarisation, practice and experience (pp. 62–77). London: Routledge.
Cady, D. L. (2010). From warism to pacifism: A moral continuum (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Chilcot, J. (2016). The report of the Iraq inquiry, Executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/the-report/
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.
Christie, D. J. (2006). What is peace psychology the psychology of? Journal of Social Issues, 62, 1–17.
Christie, D. J., & Montiel, C. J. (2013). Contributions of psychology to war and peace. American Psychologist, 68, 502–513.
Christie, D. J., Tint, B. S., Wagner, R. V., & Winter, D. D. (2008). Peace psychology for a peaceful world. American Psychologist, 63, 540–552.
Christie, D. J., Wagner, R. V., & Winter, D. D. (2001). Introduction to peace psychology. In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner, & D. D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Edwards, D. (1991). Categories are for talking: On the cognitive and discursive bases of categorization. Theory and Psychology, 1, 515–542.
Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive psychology. London: Sage.
Fiala, A. (2014). Contingent pacifism and contingently pacifist conclusions. Journal of Social Philosophy, 45, 463–477.
Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6, 167–191.
Galtung, J. (1990). Cultural violence. Journal of Peace Research, 27, 291–305.
Geyer, M. (1989). The militarization of Europe, 1914-1945. In J. Gillis (Ed.), The militarization of the western world (pp. 65–102). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Gibson, S. (2011). Social psychology, war and peace: Towards a critical discursive peace psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 239–250.
Gibson, S. (2012a). History in action: The construction of historical analogies in televised debates concerning the Iraq war. Papers on Social Representation, 21, 13.1–13.35.
Gibson, S. (2012b). ‘I’m not a warmonger but…’ discourse analysis and social psychological peace research. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 22, 159–173.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity.
Gilbert, G., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora’s box: A sociological analysis of scientists’ discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hansard. (2002a, September 24). Official report of the House of Commons, 390(187), 1–155.
Hansard. (2002b, September 24). Official report of the House of Lords, 638(180), 857–1026.
Hansard. (2003a, February 26). Official report of the House of Lords, 645(52), 244–379.
Hansard. (2003b, March 18). Official report of the House of Commons, 401(65), 760–911.
Hansard. (2003c, March 18). Official report of the House of Lords, 646(66), 138–232.
Harold, J. A. (2013). Distinguishing the lover of peace from the pacifist, the appeaser, and the warmonger. Forum Philosophicum, 18, 5–17.
Hewitt, J. P., & Stokes, R. (1975). Disclaimers. American Sociological Review, 40, 1–11.
Iraq Body Count. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Jackson, R. (2014). Bringing pacifism back into international relations. Social Alternatives, 33, 63–66.
Jackson, R. (2016). Pacifism and the ethical imagination in IR. Paper presented at the Sie Cheou-Kang Center for International Security and Diplomacy, Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver.
Lutz, C. (2009). The military normal: Feeling at home with counter-insurgency in the United States. In Network of Concerned Anthropologists (Ed.), The counter-counterinsurgency manual (pp. 22–37). Chicago, IL: Prickly Paradigm Press.
Martin, D. A. (1965). Pacifism: An historical and sociological study. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Narveson, J. (1965). Pacifism: A philosophical analysis. Ethics, 75, 259–271.
Narveson, J. (1999). Moral matters. Letchworth: Broadview.
Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction. London: Sage.
Potter, J. (2005). Making psychology relevant. Discourse and Society, 16, 739–747.
Rapley, M. (1998). ‘Just an ordinary Australian’: Self-categorization and the discursive construction of facticity in ‘new racist’ political rhetoric. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 325–344.
Rose, N. (1998). Inventing ourselves: Psychology, power, and personhood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stapleton, K. (2015). Accountable preferences? Discourse, identity, and the anti-prejudice norm. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35, 491–514.
Stokoe, E. (2015). Identifying and responding to possible -isms in institutional encounters: Alignment, impartiality, and the implications for communication training. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34, 427–445.
UK Government. (2002). Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction: The assessment of the British government. Retrieved from https://archive.org/stream/IraqsWeaponsOfMassDestruction/IraqsWeaponsOfMassDestructionByTonyBlairBritishPrimeMinister#page/n0/mode/2up
van Eemeren, F. H., Meuffels, B., & Verburg, M. (2000). The (un)reasonableness of ad hominem fallacies. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19, 416–435.
Vollhardt, J. K., & Bilali, R. (2008). Social psychology’s contribution to the psychological study of peace: A review. Social Psychology, 39, 12–25.
Wanner, K. J. (2016). In a world of super-violence, can pacifism pack a punch?: Nonviolent superheroes and their implications. The Journal of American Culture, 39, 177–192.
Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Whitehead, K. A., & Stokoe, E. (2015). Producing and responding to -isms in interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34, 368–373.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Burridge, J. (2018). The Dynamics of ‘Pacifism’ and ‘Warmongering’: The Denial of Stake in Debates Preceding the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. In: Gibson, S. (eds) Discourse, Peace, and Conflict. Peace Psychology Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99094-1_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99094-1_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99093-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99094-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)