Search

This article articulates the concept of "conspiratorial narratives"—defined as stories which integrate a large range of events and archetypal characters from past and present in a single teleological explanation for the alleged suffering of a given social group—and argues that this particular linguistic construct is a key marker of extremist language. Using three different cases to illustrate our theoretical contribution (Nazi propaganda, Rwandan genocidaires' radio, IS' messaging), we show that paying attention to conspiratorial narratives leads us to significantly revise classic accounts of violent actors' language, and provides a better understanding of the link between that language and violence itself—more precisely, why violence happens, how much violence is directed to whom, and when it occurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerical arguments are increasingly present in security communication and are widely assumed to possess a distinct capacity to make an argument convincing, thereby contributing to the dynamics of securitization. Yet, does the inclusion of numbers really enhance the strength of rhetorical attempts to convince an audience that something or someone is a security problem? We examine this question by developing an experimental design that connects cognitive theories of information processing with theories of security and risk communication. Contrary to a widely shared view, our results suggest that numbers do not have a direct, unambiguous, or unconditional impact on the strength of security rhetoric. Quantitative information only enhances direct attempts to securitize issues under very specific circumstances and, even in these cases, has ambiguous effects. Factors such as the legitimacy of the individual who makes the argument may play an important role in determining the impact of numbers in security communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]