Abstract
This article explores the recent upsurge of using prejudicial discourses in political communication. Following in the footprints of US president Donald Trump many right-wing populist politicians around the world used the strategies of fear to coerce policy making. This article examines the implicit and explicit discursive strategies that were used by Australian Senator Pauline Hanson in order to persuade policymakers to stop immigration and ban the woman's headscarf. The study involves a critical discourse analysis of the maiden speech delivered by Pauline Hanson in Parliament in 2016. The article focuses on the methodologies of Van Dijk's Ideological Square and Ruth Wodak's discourse –historical approach to inspect the linguistic devices used. The findings of the study show that Pauline Hanson used certain lexical choices to represent Australian Muslims as the 'Other' and politicized the issue to achieve her long-lasting wish of banning the immigrants.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
