Totalitarian and Democratic Rhetoric as an Indicator of the Relations of Power in the Contemporary Information Society

Authors

  • Maryna Prepotenska Kyiv National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”, Kyiv, Ukraine
  • Inna Pronoza Odesa South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after of K. D. Ushynsky, Odesa, Ukraine
  • Svitlana Naumkina Odesa South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after of K. D. Ushynsky, Odesa, Ukraine
  • Tetiana Khlivniuk Odessa I. I.Mechnikov National University, Odesa, Ukraine
  • Olha Marmilova Vinnytsia Vasyl Stus Donetsk National University, Vinnytsia, Ukraine
  • Oksana Patlaichuk Mykolaiv Admiral Makarov National University of Shipbuilding, Mykolaiv, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18662/po/13.1Sup1/431

Keywords:

totalitarianism, democratism, society, monologism, dialogism, freedom, digitalrhetoric, transparency, tolerance, ambivalence

Abstract

The article is devoted to study of totalitarian and democratic types of rhetoric. The classical dichotomy of rhetorical influence has been discovered: monologic use of rhetoric as a verbal weapon through propaganda, demagoguery, populism, creation of the image of an enemy, division of society (totalitarian type of rhetoric) and dialogical use of rhetoric as consolidating communication, truth-seeking, social consent and understanding (democratic type of rhetoric). It is shown that the trigger of democratic and totalitarian regimes is the existential of freedom.

The active influence of the postmodern rhetoric of the information age in its performativity in the acquisition of snack culture is determined, which significantly strengthens the manipulative strategies. Totalitarian tendencies of digital rhetoric are found in information warfare technologies (network trolling, mobbing, hype, hatering, holy waring, click-baiting, sockpuppeting), in the processes of censorship, ambivalence and negativism of information, spreading fake news, igniting conflicts in mass media. Militarization of vocabulary and spread of obscene language in ordinary communication as factors of compensatory aggression of the population, the danger of excessive information transparency of people’s private lives are noted. Democratism of the digital rhetoric is manifested in such phenomena as the direct creation of e-democracy, access of citizens to e-voting, e-services, e-petitions, overcoming digital inequality, the ability to communicate with officials and public officers live on TV and radio, in social networks. Democratic principles of rhetoric, especially in Ukraine as a state of “transitional democracy” should be supported by quality education, fostering critical thinking and activity of civil society.

 

References

Alonso, A. (2018). Transparency, the open and its politics. In F.M. Campos, Politica y sociedad, 55(2), 597-614. https://www.academia.edu/37610664/La_transparencia_lo_abierto_y_su_pol%C3%ADtica

Arendt, X. (1996). Istoki totalitarizma [The origins of totalitarianism]. Moscow: TsentrKom. https://platona.net/load/knigi_po_filosofii/evrejskaja/khanna_arendt_istoki_totalitarizma/76-1-0-1980

Bahtin, M. (1972). Problemyi poetiki Dostoevskogo [Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics]. Moscow: Hudozhestvennaya literatura. https://www.fedordostoevsky.ru/pdf/bakhtin_ppd.pdf

Barbosa, A. M. E. S., Martins, A. Jr. (2010). Social networks and social capital: possible uses and limitations as sociological categories. Contemporanea-Revista De Sociologia Da Ufscar, 8(1), 239-264. https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/ufscar/6669

Bart, R. (1994). Smert avtora. Izbrannyie rabotyi: Semiotika. Poetika [Death of the author. Selected works: Semiotics. Poetics]. Moscow http://www.philology.ru/literature1/barthes-94e.htm

Baudrillard, J. (1981). Simulacres et simulation. Paris: Galilée.

https://monoskop.org/File:Baudrillard_Jean_Simulacres_et_simulation_1981.pdf

Bekeshkina, I. E. (2006). Avtorytaryzm[Authoritarianism].Entsyklopediia suchasnoi Ukrainy [Encyclopedia of modern Ukraine]. Kyiv: Institute of encyclopedic research of the national academy of sciences of Ukraine. http://esu.com.ua/search_articles.php?id=42475

Bell, D. (2001). Gryaduschee postindustrialnoe obschestvo. Obrazets sotsialnogo prognozirovaniya [The coming post-industrial society. A sample of social forecasting]. Moscow. https://studfile.net/preview/1805599/

Canetti, E. (1997). Massa i vlast [Mass and power]. Moscow: Politizdat. https://www.sstcc.ru/files/1114/6273/5669/massaivlast.pdf

Deleuze, G. (1998). Razlichie i povtorenie [Difference and repetition]. Translated from French by N. B. Mank-ovskaya. SPb. TOO TK “Petropolis”. http://www.bim-bad.ru/docs/deleuze1.pdf

Delhey, J., Boehnke, K., Dragolov, G., Ignacz, Z. S., Larsen, M., Lorenz, J., Koch, M. (2018). Social cohesion and its correlates: a comparison of Western and Asian societies. Comparative sociology, 17(3-4), 426-455. https://brill.com/view/journals/coso/17/3-4/article-p426_10.xml?language=en

Derrida, J. (2000). O grammatologii [On grammatology]. Moscow: Ad Marginem. http://filosof.historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/

z0000204/index.shtml

Florensky, P. (1990). U vodorazdelov myisli [At the watersheds of thought]. Moscow: Nauka. https://platona.net/load/knigi_po_filosofii/istorija_russkaja/florenskij_sochinenija_stolp_utverzhdenie_istiny_vodorazdelov_mysli/15-1-0-653

Foucault, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard. https://monoskop.org/images/2/22/Foucault_Michel_Surveiller_et_Punir_Naissance_de_la_Prison_2004.pdf

Foucault, M. (1996). Volya k istine. Po tu storonu znaniya, vlasti i seksualnosti [The will to truth. On the other side of knowledge, power and sexuality]. Moscow: Magisterium-Kastal. https://www.gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Culture/fuko_vol/index.php

Foucault, M. (2007). Poryadok diskursa. Lektsiya [The order of discourse. Lecture]. https://gtmarket.ru/library/articles/777

Freud, S. (1921). Massovaya psihologiya i analiz chelovecheskogo “Ya” [Mass Psychology and Ego Analysis]. http://freudproject.ru/?p=1248

Friedrich, C. J., Brzezinski, Zb. (1965). Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard university press. http://pavroz.ru/files/friedrichbrzezinski.pdf

Fromm, E. (2014). Begstvo ot svobodyi [Escape from freedom]. Zaporizhzhia: Big-Press. https://modernproblems.org.ru/philosofy/182-begstvo-ot-svobodi.html?start=1#content

Garnier, M., van Wessel, M., Tamas, P. A., van Bommel, S. (2019). The chick diffusion: how newspapers fail to meet normative expectations regarding their democratic role in public debate. Journalism Studies, 21(5), 636-658. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/

X.2019.1707705

Gerasymova, I., Maksymchuk, B., Bilozerova, M., Chernetska, Yu., Matviichuk, T., Solovyov, V., & Maksymchuk, I. (2019). Forming professional mobility in future agricultural specialists: the sociohistorical context. Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 11(4), 345-361. http://lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/rrem/article/view/1604/pdf

Habermas, Y. (2016). Politicheskie funktsii publichnoy sferyi [Political functions of the public sphere]. Strukturnoe izmenenie publichnoy sferyi: issledovanie otnositelno kategorii burzhuaznogo obschestva [Structural Change in the Public Sphere: A Study on the Category of Bourgeois Society], 112- 137. Moscow: Ves Mir Publishing House.

Hegel, G.V. F. (2017). Nauka logiki [Science of logic]. Saint Petersburg. https://www.marxists.org/russkij/hegel/nauka-logiki.pdf

Heidegger, M. (1993). Pismo o gumanizme [A letter about humanism]. http://www.bibikhin.ru/pismo_o_gumanizme

Kastels, M. (1996). Informatsionnaya epoha: ekonomika, obschestvo i kultura [Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture]. https://www.gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Polit/kastel/index.php

Kershaw, I. (2014). Hitler: A Profile in Power. https://www.perlego.com/book/1546749/hitler-pdf

Kontseptsiia rozvytku tsyfrovoi ekonomiky ta suspilstva Ukrainy na 2018-2020 [The concept of development of the digital economy and society of Ukraine for 2018-2020]. http://bit.ly/2DnDXyZ

Kundera, M. (2002). Nevyinosimayalegkostbyitiya [The Unbearable Lightness of Being]. SaintPetersburg: Azbuka-klassika.

https://royallib.com/book/kundera_milan/nevinosimaya_legkost_bitiya.html

Lebon, G. (1896). Psihologiyanarodov i mass [Psychology of peoples and masses]. Saint Petersburg. https://consense.com.ua/ru/lib/showbook/Lebon-psychology_of_nations_and_masses

Lenkhem, R. (2008). Elektronne slovo: demokratiia, tekhnologiia ta mystetstvo [Electronic word: democracy, technology and art]. https://chestnut-ah.livejournal.com/113738.html].

Mahlup, F. (1966). Proizvodstvo i rasprostranenie znaniy v SShA [The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States]. Progress.

Martin, W. J. (1990). Informatsionnoe obschestvo. Teoriya i praktika obschestvenno-nauchnoy informatsii [Information society. Theory and practice of social scientific information]. Ezhekvartalnik, 3, 115-123. Мoscow.

Masuda, Y. (1983). The information society as postindustrial society. Washington: World Future Society. http://cyborganthropology.com/The_Information_Society_as_Post-Industrial_Society

Mikhailenko, V.I. (2000). Totalitarizm v XX veke: Teoreticheskiy diskurs Totalitaryzm u KhKh stolitti [Totalitarianism in the XX century: Theoretical discourse]. https://elar.urfu.ru/bitstream/10995/53926/

/5-7525-1084-8_2000_01.pdf

Moreno, J. A. S. (2019). On constitutional power and populist redemption: The intangible value of democracy. Revista De Estudios Politicos, 183,161-190. https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/POSO/article/view/60224

Moskovichi, S. (2001). Strategii propagandyi i kollektivnogo vnusheniya

[Propagandaandcollectivesuggestionstrategies]. Reklama: vnushenie i manipulyatsiya: Media-orientirovannyiy podhod [Advertising: Suggestion and Manipulation: A Media-Oriented Approach],171-186. Samara. http://www.prometeus.nsc.ru/contents/books/advinc.ssi

Nerubasska, A., Maksymchuk, B. (2020). The Demarkation of Creativity, Talent and Genius in Humans: a Systemic Aspect. Postmodern Openings, 11(2), 240-255. https://www.lumenpublishing.com/journals/index.php/po/article/view/2625

Nerubasska, A., Palshkov, K., & Maksymchuk, B. (2020). A Systemic Philosophical Analysis of the Contemporary Society and the Human: New Potential. Postmodern Openings, 11(4), 275-292. https://doi.org/10.18662/po/11.4/235

Neves, C. S. (2017). Totalitarianism technocracy and mass society: a reflection on the dystopia in contemporary society and the contribution of philosophy of technology. Pensando-revista de filosofia, 8(15), 100-118. https://revistas.ufpi.br/index.php/pensando/article/view/5932

Peck, S. (2020). Transnational social capital: the socio-spatialities of civil society. Global networks-a journal of transnational affairs, 20(1), 126-149.

https://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/42961/1/glob.12234.pdf

Plato. Dialogues. Gorgias. https://classics.nsu.ru/bibliotheca/plato01/gorgi.htm

Plato. Theetetus. https://www.plato.spbu.ru/TEXTS/PLATO/theaitetos.htm

Postnikova, E., Nefedova, L. (2019). Discrediting strategy in the Fidel Castro’s media discourse. Conference: III Post mass media in the modern informational society. Journalistic text in a new technological environment: achievements and problems. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 66, 380-389.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335024281_Discrediting_Strategy_In_The_Fidel_Castro's_Media_Discourse

Prepotenska, M. P. (2008). Sotsioantropohenez rytoryky u hranychnomu butti [Socioanthropogenesis of rhetoric in extreme existence]. Multyversum. Filosofskyi almanakh [Multiverse. Philosophical Almanac], 191–204. Ukrainian Center of Spiritual Culture.

Quintilian. (1920). Institutio oratoria. Book XII.

https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Quintilian/Institutio_Oratoria/12B*.html

Russel, B. (1999). Iskusstvo myislit [The art of thinking]. Moscow: Ideya-Progress.

https://platona.net/load/knigi_po_filosofii/analiticheskaja_filosofija/rassel_b_iskusstvo_myslit_1999/28-1-0-2646

Rating of the countries of the world by the level of democracy. Humanitarian portal: Research. Center for Humanitarian Technologies, 2006–2021. https://gtmarket.ru/ratings/democracy-index

Reich, W. (1997). Funktsii orgazma [Orgasm functions]. Saint Petersburg: Universitetskaya kniga. https://coollib.com/b/108341

Saladdin, A. (2018). Panopticism and totalitarian space. Theory in action, 11(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3798/TIA.1937-0237.1801

Schopenhauer, A. (2016). Eristika ili iskusstvo pobezhdat v sporah [Eristics or the art of winning controversy]. https://booksonline.com.ua/view.php?book=143041

Sheremet M., Leniv Z., Loboda V., Maksymchuk B. (2019) The development level of smart information criterion for specialists’ readiness for inclusion implementation in education. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 72, 273-285. https://journal.iitta.gov.ua/index.php/itlt/article/view/2561

Smith, J., Plummer, S., Hughes, M. M. (2016). Transnational social movements and changing organizational fields in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Global networks-A journal of transnational affairs, 17(1), 3-22.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/glob.12152

Talmon, J. L. (1961). The origin of totalitarian democracy. L.: Mercury Books. https://www.twirpx.com/file/2163155/

Toffler, O. (2002). Shok buduschego [Future Shock]. Moscow: АСТ. http://yanko.lib.ru/books/cultur/toffler-future_shock-ru-l.pdf

Downloads

Published

2022-03-14

How to Cite

Prepotenska, M., Pronoza, I., Naumkina, S., Khlivniuk, T., Marmilova, O., & Patlaichuk, O. (2022). Totalitarian and Democratic Rhetoric as an Indicator of the Relations of Power in the Contemporary Information Society. Postmodern Openings, 13(1 Sup1), 350-376. https://doi.org/10.18662/po/13.1Sup1/431

Issue

Section

Theoretical articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)