NASTY POLITICS
The Causes and Consequences of Violent Rhetoric
Oleh Lyashko's Facebook page (December 2015) Donald Trump's Twitter feed (July 2017)
Preliminary Draft of the Analysis (click here)
Book Prospectus (click here)
Summary of the Argument
Why do politicians endorse violence against domestic political opponents? Which politicians choose to ‘get nasty,’ and when is the public receptive to these appeals? What are the effects of violent rhetoric on democracy? These questions are puzzling, because survey data suggests the public reacts negatively to the use of violent rhetoric and incivility in politics. So why do politicians still use it? I study this question looking at the behavior of voters and politicians in the U.S., Ukraine, and Israel. The central argument of my book is that politicians use violent rhetoric because it draws outsized media and voter attention, and it signals to voters their toughness on policy positions. People with more aggressive personalities, and who like tough leaders, may actually be attracted to this kind of violent rhetoric. As a result certain politicians are willing to pay the reputational cost for using violent rhetoric in exchange for greater attention and coverage, as well as coalescing core supporters. And what about its effect on democracy? Violent rhetoric can be a cynical ploy for politicians to grab headlines, breeding contempt for democracy in the process. Or it can be a legitimate way for politicians to draw attention to injustices. The difficulty for the public, and for democracy, is how to distinguish between the two.
Chapter List
Chapter 1 An Introduction to Nasty Politics
Chapter 2 A History of Threats and Insults in U.S. and Ukrainian Politics
Chapter 3 Why Politicians Use Violent Rhetoric?
Chapter 4 How Does the Public Respond to Violent Rhetoric?
Chapter 5 Which Politicians Get Nasty and When?
Chapter 6 What do the Experts Think About Violent Rhetoric?
Chapter 7 Profiles in Nastiness: Oleh Lyashko and Donald Trump
Chapter 8 Violent Rhetoric and the Pandemic Summer
Chapter 9 Violent Rhetoric and Its Implications for Democracy
Book Prospectus (click here)
Summary of the Argument
Why do politicians endorse violence against domestic political opponents? Which politicians choose to ‘get nasty,’ and when is the public receptive to these appeals? What are the effects of violent rhetoric on democracy? These questions are puzzling, because survey data suggests the public reacts negatively to the use of violent rhetoric and incivility in politics. So why do politicians still use it? I study this question looking at the behavior of voters and politicians in the U.S., Ukraine, and Israel. The central argument of my book is that politicians use violent rhetoric because it draws outsized media and voter attention, and it signals to voters their toughness on policy positions. People with more aggressive personalities, and who like tough leaders, may actually be attracted to this kind of violent rhetoric. As a result certain politicians are willing to pay the reputational cost for using violent rhetoric in exchange for greater attention and coverage, as well as coalescing core supporters. And what about its effect on democracy? Violent rhetoric can be a cynical ploy for politicians to grab headlines, breeding contempt for democracy in the process. Or it can be a legitimate way for politicians to draw attention to injustices. The difficulty for the public, and for democracy, is how to distinguish between the two.
Chapter List
Chapter 1 An Introduction to Nasty Politics
Chapter 2 A History of Threats and Insults in U.S. and Ukrainian Politics
Chapter 3 Why Politicians Use Violent Rhetoric?
Chapter 4 How Does the Public Respond to Violent Rhetoric?
Chapter 5 Which Politicians Get Nasty and When?
Chapter 6 What do the Experts Think About Violent Rhetoric?
Chapter 7 Profiles in Nastiness: Oleh Lyashko and Donald Trump
Chapter 8 Violent Rhetoric and the Pandemic Summer
Chapter 9 Violent Rhetoric and Its Implications for Democracy