Hate Speech in The Creation of Socio Political Dominance in Kenyan Parliamentary Debates.”

Abstract

Speech can vary in meaning and implication. It is generally intended to be communicative but it can sometimes fail to do so. Speech can become something more than a vehicle for the communication of propositional knowledge. Speakers can manipulate language to evoke the emotions of recipients, hence becoming “damaging speech” as opposed to speech that does not evoke negative emotions. What is said or written can have devastating effects on an individual and the society at large. There are aspects of text that should be incorporated for it to be considered acceptable. The objective of the study was: To identify and discuss hate speech as a linguistic strategy used by parliamentarians in the creation of socio-political dominance. The study also analysed language used in debates in the national assembly by identifying hate speech as a linguistic strategy. Descriptive research design was used. Sample texts were studied using Foucauldian Discourse Analysis theory. This theory looked at how the society is moulded by language that shows various power relationships. Qualitative data was collected using a guiding card to identify utterances that had the potential of being classified as hate speech. The study identified language that created dominance and discussed hate speech as a strategy used in the utterances. It analyses hate speech in the debates as captured in the Hansard. The research found that hate speech was used by speakers to create dominance in the debates.