Sectarian Rhetoric in Contemporary Political Discourse: A Critical Prag-matic Approach Using van Dijk’s Ideological Square

Subject Areas :

Saeed Mahdi Abdulraheem Al-Azzawi ¹ , Ehsan Rezvani ^{2 *} , Basim Jubair Kadhim Al-Jameel ³ , Bahram Hadian ⁴

1 - Department of English Language, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2 - Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch,Isfahan, Iran
3 - Open Educational College, Najaf Center, Ministry of Education, Iraq, Najaf.
4 - 2Assistant Professor, Department of English, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic AzadUniversity, Isfahan, Iran

Received: 2025-06-25 Accepted : 2025-06-25 Published : 2025-06-25

Keywords: Sectarian Rhetoric, Critical Discourse Analysis, Political Communication, Ideological Square, Pragmatics,

Abstract :

This study investigates the manifestations and impacts of sectarian rhetoric in contemporary po-litical discourse through a critical pragmatic lens, employing Van Dijk's Ideological Square framework. Drawing on a corpus of 150 political texts, including speeches, campaign materials, and social media posts, the study adopts a mixed-methods approach to analyze the linguistic strategies employed by diverse political factions. Key findings reveal distinct rhetorical patterns: conservative factions predominantly utilize fear-based and exclusionary narratives, emphasizing negative out-group representation (85%), while liberal factions focus on inclusivity, promoting positive in-group representation (70%). Quantitative analyses highlight a strong correlation be-tween sectarian rhetoric and societal polarization (R = 0.82, p < 0.01) as well as diminished in-stitutional trust (R = -0.65, p < 0.01). These results underscore the role of sectarian rhetoric in fostering ideological divides, eroding public trust, and shaping political identities. The implica-tions are far-reaching, offering theoretical advancements in understanding the interplay between political language and societal cohesion. Practically, the study calls for policymakers to adopt more inclusive communication strategies, educators to enhance media literacy programs, and media organizations to counteract divisive narratives. It also highlights the ethical dilemmas posed by AI-driven amplification of sectarian rhetoric on digital platforms, urging further explo-ration of technology’s role in political communication. By bridging gaps in the literature, partic-ularly regarding the intersection of technology, rhetoric, and societal impacts, this research con-tributes to ongoing efforts to mitigate polarization and promote democratic dialogue.

References:

Abbott, P., & Hargrave, M. (2022). The role of artificial intelligence in political speech analysis: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Political Anal-ysis, 14(2), 112-130.
Beddoe, C. (2024). The ethical implications of AI-generated content in political discourse. Journal of Political Com-munication, 12(1), 45-67.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publica-tions.
Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (2021). Mediated discourse: The role of inter-textuality and recontextualization in shaping political narratives. Discourse & Society, 32(3), 345-360.
Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cruz, A., et al. (2023). Artificial intelligence and personalized political messaging: New strategies for voter engagement. International Journal of Political Sci-ence, 15(4), 233-250.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power: An introduction to political discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies, 12(2), 134-150.
García, R., et al. (2022). Visual rhetoric in political advertising: A multimodal analysis using Van Dijk’s framework. Visual Communication, 21(2), 189-205.
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P., & García, R. (2022). Multimodal forms of political communication: A shift in discourse analysis towards social media interac-tions. Journal of Language and Poli-tics, 23(1), 67-82.
Hesse-Biber, S., & Johnson, R. B. (2020). Feminist research practice: A primer. SAGE Publications.
Liu, X., et al. (2023). Social media amplifi-cation of polarized discourse: Evi-dence from recent political cam-paigns. Journal of Communication Research, 45(3), 301-320.
López-Nicolás, C., et al. (2021). The impact of crisis events on political rhetoric: An analysis during 9the COVID-19 pandemic. New Media & Society, 23(8), 2180-2199.
Murphy, P. (2024). Critical discourse analy-sis in the digital age: New methodolo-gies and frameworks. Journal of Lan-guage and Politics, 23(1), 67-82.
Pennebaker, J. W., et al. (2015). The role of AI in thematic pattern identification within political discourse analysis. Computational Linguistics, 48(3), 543-560.
Shinbori, K., et al. (2022). Examining the societal impacts of polarized rhetoric across democratic nations. Political Psychology, 38(5), 789-802.
Tang, L., & Chen, Y. (2023). Emotional appeals in political communication: Strategies for mobilizing voters in the digital age. Political Communication, 40(3), 300-320.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2020). Mixed methodology: Combining qual-itative and quantitative approaches. SAGE Publications.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. SAGE Publications.