Proving,Pleasing and Persuading? Rhetoric in Contemporary British Politics

Expressions of disaffection with politics are often connected with criticism of the ways in which contemporary politicians speak and communicate. In this article I show how political speech is in part a product of the way in which a society organises and arranges communication institutionally, technologically and aesthetically. The art of rhetoric is most fundamentally concerned with how, in the midst of political dispute and contestation, political arguments may be made persuasive through their connection with the ‘common sense’ of audiences. This process enables a people to reflect on its beliefs and values and to assess their adequacy in particular circumstances. Decline in this art may be attributed to social and technological change but also, and above all, to the dominance of ideologies hostile to the concepts of ‘common sense’ and ‘common good’, and which privilege the arts of behaviour change and choice management over those of argument, debate and persuasion.     

A FIELD EXPERIMENT ON INSURANCE FRAUD IN AUTO BODY REPAIR*

This article focuses on a particular form of white-collar crime–insurance fraud in auto body repair. Through the use of an experimental design, whether repair estimates were related to insurance coverage was investigated for a statewide representative sample of auto body repair shops in Massachusetts. The auto body repair estimates were significantly higher with insurance coverage than without, regardless of type of car, extent of damage, sex of driver, and location of shop. The implication of the findings is that the automobile insurance industry is very susceptible to fraudulent or illegal practices that take unfair advantage of consumers and insurance companies.     

International Peacekeeping: The Disputants' View

International disputants often have reservations about inviting a peacekeeping body to help them contain or settle their conflict. Either or both sides might worry about certain international consequences of this course. Thus, one side might want to refrain from implying that an international issue really exists; both disputants might be concerned that a peacekeeping body could interfere with their freedom of action; and also that it could furnish critical reports about their behaviour. Then, too, there are certain adverse international possibilities which are special to potential host states. They might be conscious that having a peacekeeping body on their soil could give an impression of weakness or doubtful probity, and also of being less than fully sovereign. There are, additionally, certain domestic complications which might ensue for a host state. It could be concerned about the relations of the peacekeepers with its people, about the presence of such a group becoming a controversial political issue, and about the danger of a peacekeeping force ignoring the ground rules of peacekeeping and behaving in a manner which threatened the government's interests.