Book Review: Richard Shorten,The Ideology of Political Reactionaries

In the early 21st century, there has been a spectacular resurgence on the political Right in Europe and the United States, which should prompt close re-engagement with theories of the political Right from political scientists. Conservatism has been a major area of inquiry in the study of ideology so far throughout the Western political history. Theories of reactionary ideology are few and far between (Lilla, 2016). Even fewer such theories can be mobilized specifically to better interpret the new forces on the political Right on the grounds that they have taken ‘abortive units’ of analysis ‘for reactionary ideology, respectively: dispositions; social interests; and concepts’ (Shorten, 2019: 407). Given the interpretive deficiencies of the extant theories, a niche for re-formulating reaction should be identified at the forefront of modern political ideology study. Against this backdrop, inspired by Albert O. Hirschman’s precedent, The Ideology of Political Reactionaries, authored by Richard Shorten, comes just in time with the intent of presenting a theory of reactionary ideology from the novel perspective of rhetoric.

As a recent addition to Routledge’s innovations in political theory, the book offers a distinctive lens on the beliefs reactionaries articulate and communicate at different times and places. Drawing on diversified disciplines, it is dedicated to uncovering what reactionary ideology is and how it functions in political discourse by integrating rhetorical analysis to reaction, which ‘affords communication special priority’ to ‘enrich the study of ideology’ (Shorten, 2019: 411). At the heart of the book is the comparative discourse analysis of a broad range of pamphlets from various spatiotemporal settings, through which ‘political reactionaries standardly choose to communicate’ (p. 21), with a focus on examining recurrent performances of rhetorical appeals – logos, ethos, and pathos. In doing so, Shorten succeeds in bringing out the ideological content of reaction and its reproduction across distinct eras, whereby rhetorical analysis proves far better able to accommodate reactionary contradictoriness in their political thought and expression, making an innovative and valuable contribution to ideology studies and rhetorical inquiry.

The book commences with an introduction in which a critique of the existing approaches to reactionary politics, in combination with an enlightening reflection on rhetoric, is laid out analytically as groundwork for further, in-depth discourse analysis in accordance with the reactionary diatribe model. In what follows, all chapters are organized into three thematic parts, each concentrating on exploring one rhetorical pillar: Part I to indignation, Part II to decadence, and Part III to conspiracy. Every chapter consists of textual reconstruction in greater part, succeeded by an interpretive argument, intended to resolve some persistent puzzles of ideologies and rhetoric.

Part I (Chapters 1 and 2) launches into an exploration of the pathos in reactionary ideology, which Shorten contends revolves principally around indignation. In incisive expositions of the selected writings, Shorten justifiably demonstrates the presence of all three reactionary themes with an emphasis on explicating the archetypal anatomy of the indignation claim. Initially, Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France and Joseph de Maistre’s Considerations on France, are surveyed in detail. It is suggested that reactionary communication features ‘we’ as the subject of indignation claims. In light of victimhood, the ‘we’ is aroused to predominantly anger together with shared self-pity by virtue of emotional language across the texts. On further textual analyses, anger in both texts ebbs and flows in intensity over a long duration of time, but interestingly softens ‘respectively, to forgiveness and mournfulness’ (p. 103) in the epilogues. In tandem with duration and intensity, texture, as the most vital feature of indignation claim, is characteristically modifiable with the help of figurative language and some effective devices such as antithesis and synecdoche to enhance the potency of indignation. In the context of America, Chapter 2 presents an insightful decoding of reactionary indignation in Sarah Palin’s and Donald Trump’s texts, which serves as a good case in point for the reproduction of reactionary ideology in different eras.

Part II (Chapters 3 and 4) turns to elaborate on the rendition of decadence in the writings of Adolf Hitler and Eric Zemmour with expanded attention on reactionary argumentation in textual interpretation. Rather, unlike indignation, it persuades with distinctive appeals to logos. Examining Hitler’s Mein Kampf in Chapter 3, Shorten suggests that reactionary appeals to logos largely rest on the large-scale ‘declensionist narratives’ (p. 134) resembling a diagnostic structure. Decadence in this text, is recognizably symptomized in virtue of dramatizing the broken present: Germany’s illness and decay by personification, which amounts to a fine exemplification of the rendering of decadence appeals in three variables of ‘weight’, ‘range’, and most of all, ‘complexion’ (p. 127). In this respect, Mein Kampf is characterized by decadence appeals which are heavy, syphilitic, and primarily concerned with Jewry. It is notable, however, that decadence appeal entails the narrative fallacy, which is not the obstacle to communicative success. As an apt illustration of decadence diagnosis, nevertheless, Le Suicide francais in Chapter 4 moves the focus on to censure the moment of political advocacy to achieve balance of coverage with a special interest on reactionary nostalgia in its postscript. By zooming in on reactionary advocacy, differences are detected in the strength of prescription: contrary to Hitler’s hyper-active prescription, Le Suicide francais concludes with a prognostic one.

With indignation and decadence appeals pinpointed, Chapters 5, 6, and 7 offer, as a whole, a prime example of how reactionary conspiracy allegations function. Contextualized in different countries, three representative texts of the 1950s and the present are thoroughly analyzed, demonstrating that appeal to conspiracy, as a persistent and indispensable maneuver in reactionary communication, is in close relation to the presentation of the self. The first analysis centers upon Joseph McCarthy’s The fight for America (Chapter 5), and brings into view the ‘reactionary conspiracy-alleger’s “virtuous circle”’ (p. 170), which is found to make for success in reactionary conspiracy. In the communication of character, the ‘virtuous circle’ builds from the reactionary speaker’s whistleblowing, which on one hand boosts trust in the speaker, and amplifies confidence in the conspiracy allegation on the other hand, shedding light on how it is that reactionary ‘leadership’ is performed. This element is further explored and thereby confirmed in Breivik and Farage’s discourses. However, close scrutiny of conspiracy appeals in these two cases also suggests a new element-sensory analogies for this rhetorical anatomy, which is to say, analogies of sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell, arise as an easy option for whistleblowers to ‘foster states of un-deception’ (p. 210) in an audience. Additionally, as opposed to McCarthyite conspiracy, Breivik strongly leans on whistleblowing-by-proxy to unmask conspiracy allegations. Notably, a distinctive rhetorical continuity observed in Farage’s case is a persistence of ‘conspiracy-lite’ (p. 223), in sharp contrast to the frenzy performance of conspiracy appeals in previous examples. It is impressive that the conscious inclusion of Breivik’s 2083 in non-print format convincingly signals the adaptability of reactionary seam for the digital age. Finally, the book is brought to a brief conclusion by summarizing the theory of reactionary ideology which, beyond the three essential rhetorical appeals-indignation, decadence, and conspiracy, expands to encompass three transposable rhetorical styles: ‘bombast, brutalism and camp’ (p. 253).

On the whole, The Ideology of Political Reactionaries opens a new door to political theory research in a variegated and complex political field. First and foremost, it is a cross-disciplinary endeavor to map reactionary ideology, thus setting a new agenda for contemporary ideology study. It is telling that the intensive case study expositions lend empirical credibility to the original incorporation of rhetoric into political ideology study, which not only represents a broader perspective in researching political ideology, but also addresses, to some extent, common misconceptions concerning reaction in the context of ideological taxonomy by teasing out the relationship between reaction and the Right. Besides, in each section the juxtaposition of historical and contemporary exemplars is instructive so that it affords to explain the success, continuities as well as context-specific variations of reactionary ideology in varied eras and settings. Nonetheless, it seems a pity to find that alongside the Islamic world, Russia is debatably excluded from coverage, which raises the suspicion of being cherry-picking the evidence, given the pronounced expression of reactionary themes in the regime rhetoric of Vladimir Putin and the political theorizing of Dugin (2012; Matthews, 2016: 22). A broader geographic coverage beyond the North Atlantic would have been helpful in presenting a vivid panorama of reactionary ideology. As for the discourses sampled, since Shorten deals only with written diatribes, further applications of the valuable approach into other genres are expected. Still, it is disappointing that the two canons of memory and delivery are downplayed or neglected to the point of undermining, to some extent, its proposal that ‘reaction is an aggregate of rhetorical features’, which in their inextricable link ‘might provide an “ideology” with a sufficient internal pattern’ (p. 15).

Overall, this book deserves a place in the realm of political ideology studies inasmuch as it is a preliminary but invaluable application of rhetorical analysis to reaction, which sparks new research possibilities in the academia. To students and scholars of political science, history, and communication studies, as well as those who are concerned about current ideological trends, the book ought to be of particular interest and great value.