Page 185 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 185
the political discourse on croatia’s eu accession 185
Our analysis supports the claim that the choice of words in the speech-
es of both Europhobes and Europhiles is ideologically motivated in a
way that is consistent with the differences characteristic of right wing
and left wing parties. According to the Lexicon of Basic Political Terms
(Prpić, 1994) the dominant feature of left-wing parties is liberalism.
Prpić (1994) defines liberalism as a political philosophy which takes free-
dom to be the main criterion for the evaluation of social institutions.
Key terms of liberalism are freedom, individualism, equality, social jus-
tice, and democracy. On the other hand, a dominant feature of the right is
conservatism, for which terms such as legality, sovereignty, and national-
ism are key. Since Europhobes are represented by right wing parties and
conservative civil organizations, the expressive value of words is man-
ifested through terms such as national identity, national consciousness,
national treason, independence, national interests etc. The main charac-
teristic of Europhobes’ value of words is aggressiveness, and an anticipa-
tion of “bad” consequences manifested through strong words like death,
tears, grave, slavery, humiliation, danger etc. Europhiles likewise antici-
pate the future, but expect stability, better life, investments, better educa-
tion and a higher standard of living.
The main difference between Europhobes and Europhiles, as traced
through the choice of words and the choice of metaphors, is that Euro-
philes are turning towards the future, while Europhobes are expressing
their attitudes (implicitly and explicitly) by turning to the past (in par-
ticular to Croatia’s history). For Europhiles, a new age is coming, and
Croatia is given a new opportunity; for Europhobes, Croatia is about to
enter Euroslavia (i.e., is to be enslaved by the EU) and is thus looking
for a new master. Such differences are at times even more explicit. Euro-
philes say: vote for the future; Europhobes emphasize: we have to turn to
history to learn how to preserve our national identity. Interestingly, Euro-
philes use terms such as family, children and grandchildren more often,
which again evidences their orientation to the future, while Europhobes
remember the casualties of the past war, and the generals in prison.
Table 1: List of expressive words
Europhobes Europhiles
By entering Euroslavia Croatia will lose Signing the most important document
independence (D. Srb, HSP) in Croatian history (I. Josipović, president)
Our analysis supports the claim that the choice of words in the speech-
es of both Europhobes and Europhiles is ideologically motivated in a
way that is consistent with the differences characteristic of right wing
and left wing parties. According to the Lexicon of Basic Political Terms
(Prpić, 1994) the dominant feature of left-wing parties is liberalism.
Prpić (1994) defines liberalism as a political philosophy which takes free-
dom to be the main criterion for the evaluation of social institutions.
Key terms of liberalism are freedom, individualism, equality, social jus-
tice, and democracy. On the other hand, a dominant feature of the right is
conservatism, for which terms such as legality, sovereignty, and national-
ism are key. Since Europhobes are represented by right wing parties and
conservative civil organizations, the expressive value of words is man-
ifested through terms such as national identity, national consciousness,
national treason, independence, national interests etc. The main charac-
teristic of Europhobes’ value of words is aggressiveness, and an anticipa-
tion of “bad” consequences manifested through strong words like death,
tears, grave, slavery, humiliation, danger etc. Europhiles likewise antici-
pate the future, but expect stability, better life, investments, better educa-
tion and a higher standard of living.
The main difference between Europhobes and Europhiles, as traced
through the choice of words and the choice of metaphors, is that Euro-
philes are turning towards the future, while Europhobes are expressing
their attitudes (implicitly and explicitly) by turning to the past (in par-
ticular to Croatia’s history). For Europhiles, a new age is coming, and
Croatia is given a new opportunity; for Europhobes, Croatia is about to
enter Euroslavia (i.e., is to be enslaved by the EU) and is thus looking
for a new master. Such differences are at times even more explicit. Euro-
philes say: vote for the future; Europhobes emphasize: we have to turn to
history to learn how to preserve our national identity. Interestingly, Euro-
philes use terms such as family, children and grandchildren more often,
which again evidences their orientation to the future, while Europhobes
remember the casualties of the past war, and the generals in prison.
Table 1: List of expressive words
Europhobes Europhiles
By entering Euroslavia Croatia will lose Signing the most important document
independence (D. Srb, HSP) in Croatian history (I. Josipović, president)
