Democracy in a Debate: Presentations of Self and Others in Pakistani Parliamentary Discourse

Abstract

The surprising victory of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) in the 2013 general election and election of Mr Sharif as Prime Minister changed the power dynamic. In the following year, two of the minority parties held sit-ins. Using ideological square analysis (van Dijk, 2006), this article examines discursive strategies used by the four leading political parties represented in the Pakistani Parliament that characterize both their own activities and those of other parties with regard to the Islamabad sit-ins of 2014. The article presents data from the analysis of fourteen speeches by the four political parties (PML-N, PPP, PTI and MQM). The results indicate that the Pakistani parliamentarians focused more frequently on presenting other parties in a negative light than they did in presenting themselves (the in-group) in a positive light. They presented their own ordinary and routine actions as indicating sincerity and loyalty to the country and its institutions. When other parties were in agreement, they were treated as being part of the in-group, which then characterized the others as enemies of the state and their actions as unconstitutional and inhumane.  The results of this study thus reveal a certain fluidity in the application of in-group or out-group status, providing evidence that van Dijk’s ideological square analysis can be more nuanced than the model itself seems to suggest (cf. Wirth-Koliba, 2016).