Hate speech in the Georgian political field

Abstract

Hate speech is a growing global problem, often used in socio-political discussions, and creates a severe problem in the socio-political life of many countries. Despite its significant negative impact, research on hate speech and its prevention remains a thorny problem worldwide. On the one hand, there is no clear understanding of hate speech; on the other hand, the issue of regulating hate speech is related to the issue of freedom of expression.Unfortunately, people get used to such rhetoric and begin to accept it as something ordinary, and the border between free speech and hate speech becomes completely blurred and irrelevant. Politicians actively use hate speech. We are interested in what factors push a politician to use hate speech and what purpose this verbal expression serves. The use of hate speech in modern Georgia is mainly because, in a highly competitive but often unhealthy, hostile, polarized political environment, the need for self-reliance and vertical mobility makes politicians have a relative attitude toward using hate speech. This attitude strengthens the motivation of using hate speech as the politician himself will appear weak in the eyes of both the competitors and the society; The use of hate speech is considered a necessary tool and an effective means to achieve this need/goal. Two qualitative components are integrated into the study. The objective of the first qualitative component was to analyze the use of hate speech in political discourse on the example of women politicians in Georgia. A total of 489 texts were processed and analyzed.According to the results, the use of hate speech by women politicians is purposefully carried out with pragmatic considerations and is focused on the devaluation of the opponent. The purpose of the second qualitative component of the study was to identify the factors of the use of hate speech by politicians and analyze and evaluate motivation. This task was carried out using the in-depth interview method; 20 politicians of different gender, age, and experience from both the government and opposition spectrum were selected. The results echo our assumption that there is a sentiment according to which a politician perceives the use of hate speech as an instrument of demonstrating his strength and, accordingly, the weakness of his opponent. The main factor of such a set/attitude is an unhealthy competitive environment and a polarized political field.We interpreted the data from our research based on Uznadze's Theory of set/Attitude. According to the psychology of set, a need arises in political reality for the satisfaction of which hate speech is one of the unequivocally necessary/facilitating means. In order for hate speech to be carried out, there must be a desire for self-affirmation from the politician's side (the need), a political environment (the object satisfying the need), and verbal aggression (instrumental abilities). Uznadze's Theory of Set/Attitude will be helpful as a theoretical base for studying the psychological nature and mechanism of hate speech.