Abstract
This paper utilizes Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to explore the dimensions of domination and freedom within two significant public forums on climate change in Utah: (1) the resolution HJR 12 passed in the Utah State Legislature in 2010 and (2) the Blue Ribbon Committee on Climate Change (BRAC) process organized in 2006. The resolution HJR 12 reflects an extremist or inflammatory rhetoric point of view, while BRAC presents itself as a beacon of bureaucratic rationality, efficiency, and hierarchy. Forums such as these are force-feeding Americans subtly and not so subtly with divisive discourse and restrictive visions that pollute American politics and weaken the nation's capacity to address and solve its most challenging problems. HJR 12 exemplifies the role interpretive control plays in silencing those who disagree. The BRAC process illustrated how bureaucracy and rationalization may constrain future vision and action, reinforce current power structures, and encourage extreme rhetoric further down the road. This analysis uncovers the idealization of rational power underlying both forums. This idealization creates an unstable ground where powerplays, poorly disguised as rational policy making, dominate while silencing other voices. Scholars, government bureaucracies at all levels, and the American public wishing to deal with today’s complex challenges must purposefully address destructive assumptions associated with idealized rational processes, while recognizing the important role uncertainty, values, worldviews, and interests play in encouraging or discouraging policy change.
Highlights
Many have said that in a democracy controversy is healthy
This paper utilizes Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to explore the dimensions of domination and freedom within two significant public forums on climate change in Utah: (1) the resolution HJR 12 passed in the Utah State Legislature in 2010 and (2) the Blue Ribbon Committee on Climate Change (BRAC) process organized in 2006
This paper will focus on two significant public forums on climate change that have taken place within the last 7 years in Utah: (1) the bill HJR 12 passed in the State Legislature and (2) the Blue Ribbon Committee on Climate Change (BRAC) process conducted several years earlier
Summary
Many have said that in a democracy controversy is healthy. It is reasonable to assume that complex issues such as health care, immigration and military intervention will not lend themselves to simple, consensual solutions (Gutmann, 2007). The passage of resolution HJR 12 in the Utah State Legislature in February of 2010 is a perfect illustration of how inflammatory discourse silences a large portion of the public and hamper the ability to move forward in finding solutions. Within this resolution, the House of Representatives accused climate change science and scientists as being part of a conspiracy. Despite the outward differences between these two forums both chose to silence the general public and their values, stymying the opportunity for deep dialog leading towards better decision-making
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
