The dynamics of ‘pacifism’ and ‘warmongering’: the denial of stake in debates preceding the 2003 invasion of Iraq
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter (peer-reviewed)
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’.
|Title of host publication||Discourse, Peace, and Conflict|
|Subtitle of host publication||Discursive Psychology Perspectives|
|Number of pages||16|
|Publication status||Published - 1 Feb 2019|
|Name||Peace Psychology Book Series|