The Politicization of Linguistic Representations of Age: On the Argumentative Relevance of Age in (Municipal) Political Citizen Participation Formats

2.1 Political Participation

Political communication formats that enable citizen participation form the foundation of this article’s research. Based on these data from parliamentary debates (see section 4), we assume that in the context of political participation, (municipal) political decisions are primarily made through social interaction and oral textual communication processes such as speeches and statements (see section 2.4 on first-order popularization in this context). With reference to the formats considered in the analysis (see section 5), Heinelt et al. (2022: 51–52) initially distinguish between different degrees of citizen involvement. Heinelt et al. (2022: 51–52) define ‘representative democracy’ as a format in which political representatives make important decisions on behalf of citizens. However, apart from the election of representatives, citizens have no direct recourse to participate in political decision-making processes. Examples of such formats would be parliamentary debates or committees such as the city council (see section 4).

‘Participatory democracy’ formats (cf. Heinelt et al. 2022: 51–52) on the other hand, offer citizens the opportunity to participate in political debates and important social decision-making processes actively and directly. A citizens‘ assembly would be an example of such a participatory format.

Fundamentally, political participation can be viewed from two academic perspectives: a normative and an empirical one. The normative view traditionally comes from law and understands participation^[3] as a set of criteria the fulfillment of which confirms existing opportunities for participation. Normative participation follows predetermined processes. Wichard Woyke (2021: 749) defines (normative) ‘participation’ as

jene Verhaltensweisen von Bürger/innen [i.O.], die als Gruppe oder allein freiwillig Einfluss auf politische Entscheidungen auf verschiedenen Ebenen des politischen Systems (Kommune, Land, Bund und Europa) ausüben wollen.

[those behaviors of citizens who, as a group or individually, voluntarily want to exert influence on political decisions at various levels of the political system (local, state, federal and European).]

In the social sciences, the empirical focus on participation is not on the “target” (see section 1), but on the “actual” state of participation opportunities, i. e., how participation presents itself to citizens and how they experience or help to shape it.

2.2 Political Communication

Participation formats enable mayors, party members and citizens to get involved in (municipal) political communication. In this context and with reference to the brief definition by Knobloch and Vogel (2022), we understand political communication in a broader sense as a format that

überall dort statt[findet], wo Menschen als Teil von sozialen Gruppen mit unterschiedlichen Bedürfnissen und Interessen aufeinandertreffen und über das einzelne Individuum hinaus geltende Regeln des Zusammenlebens aushandeln. In diesem weiten Verständnis zählt zur Politischen Kommunikation alles, was mithilfe sprachlicher und anderer Zeichen gewaltfrei zur Steuerung von Gesellschaften beiträgt: die Entwicklung, Verteilung, Legitimierung und Durchsetzung von gesellschaftlichen Ordnungsvorstellungen (‚wie wollen wir zusammen leben‘) sowie die Organisation von Mehr- und Minderheiten (Mobilisierung von ‚Freund‘ und ‚Feind‘).

[takes place wherever people come together as part of social groups with different needs and interests and negotiate rules for living together that go beyond the individual. In this broad understanding, political communication includes anything that contributes to the non-violent control of societies with the help of language and other signs: the development, distribution, legitimization, and enforcement of social concepts of order (‘how do we want to live together’) as well as the organization of majorities and minorities (mobilization of ‘friend’ and ‘foe’).]

Linguistic action in a political sense thus takes place if this action is intended to obtain public approval (cf. Girnth 2015: 1, with reference to Lübbe 1975: 107; Knobloch and Vogel 2022). The people involved do not have to be politicians (cf. Hausendorf 2012: 46). Such actions can be undertaken by all members of a society and relate to various subject areas, as politics can “alle Bereiche gesellschaftlichen Lebens durchdringen” [permeate all areas of social life] (Girnth 2015: 2). With reference to Luhmann (1997: 316–318), Hausendorf (2012: 49–50) emphasized that political communication always implies communication of power and is also related to the fact that the political permeates everyday life. On the part of political actors who are not public officials, such communication of power can find expression in influencing public opinion or in “‘Anprangern [...]‘ von Missständen” [airing grievances] (Hausendorf 2012: 60).

The aspect of the public sphere plays a particular role in political staging: political communication is geared towards symbolic dialog with the masses, especially on the part of larger institutions (cf. Girnth 2015: 40; Knobloch and Vogel 2022). Macrostructurally, citizens and politicians can, among other things, voice concerns or questions in the form of contributions to plenary debates, which can be followed both by the members of the public present at the meeting or, if technically feasible, broadcast to an even wider audience (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 512–214). Burkhardt (2017: 514–516) notes, particularly regarding the public nature of the speeches prepared in text form in front of a parliament, for example, that it is more about persuasion than finding solutions. Parliamentary speech

operiert [...] mit zwei grundlegenden sprachlichen Handlungsweisen, die auf die Positivierung des eigenen Standpunktes (Qualifikation) und auf die Negativierung des gegnerischen Standpunktes (Disqualifikation) zielen und dabei die Identität der eigenen politischen Absicht mit dem Gemeinwohl behaupten. (Kalivoda 1986: 19, zit. nach Burkhardt 2017: 515)

[operates [...] on two fundamental linguistic modes of action, which aim at the valorisation of one's own standpoint (qualification) and the negation of the opponent's standpoint (disqualification) and thereby asserts the identity of one's own political intention with the common good.] (Kalivoda 1986: 19, quoted in Burkhardt 2017: 515)

In general, those involved follow the guiding principle outlined above of using communicative means to draw attention to certain topics and generate support for one's own cause (cf. Knobloch and Vogel 2022). These communicative means are placed within the framework of speeches and statements, for which there is usually a fixed time within the (parliamentary) agenda (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 513). The president (or mayor) is responsible for leading or moderating the debates based on the agenda (Burkhardt 2017: 513).

2.3 Politicization

One instrument that is used in the context of (municipal) political communication as described in the previous section is ‘politicization’. For example, representations relating to older age are used by participants as linguistic acts to underpin arguments or – more commonly – to emotionalize them. Such actions also always express a position towards the reference object and the common good (see also Girnth 2015: 66 on the attitude components in political communication).

To be able to identify acts of politicization in the analyses in section 5, we would first like to discuss the term ‘politicize’. For example, the Cambridge Dictionary (2023) defines it as follows: “to make something or someone political, or more involved in or conscious of political matters”. This also means something that does not belong in the political sphere can still be used for political argumentative purposes.

The depictions of old age in our data are not primarily intended to raise political awareness of old age itself, but rather to fulfil the pragmatic purpose of supporting arguments and emotionalization (see section 5). This is also in line with Hausendorf’s (2012: 60) view of the politicization of communication: “In dem Maße, in dem diese Positionierung [zu einer kollektiv bindenden Entscheidung] kommunikativ an Gewicht gewinnt, kann man von einer Politisierung der Kommunikation sprechen.” [To the extent that this positioning [on a collectively binding decision] gains communicative weight, one can speak of a politicization of communication.]

In relation to the contexts described above, another perspective is that of Poferl (1999), who sees politicization as a process through which “[sich] politisch relevante Themen in die Sozial- und Alltagssphäre hinein [diffundieren]” [politically relevant topics [diffuse] into the social and everyday sphere]. However, this blending of politics and everyday life can only take place if political (normative) issues are questioned or negotiated at a private level and later be brought into politics by individual agents (cf. Poferl 1999: 23).

2.4 Popularization

Since this article focuses on contexts in which citizens or their representatives put forward their concerns at the local political level, the concept of popularization already mentioned in section 1 also plays a role. Following Döring et al. (2021: 4 who in turn refers to Hecken 2006: 85), we understand ‘popular’ as “was bei vielen Beachtung findet [emphasis in original]” [what is considered by many]. Popularization should be differentiated into first-order and second-order popularization processes.

Popularization of the first order refers to “Verfügbarmachen von Wissen und Werten” [making knowledge and values available] (Döring et al. 2021: 12) by experts for non-experts, i. e. by an elite for the masses. Transferred to (municipal) political formats, all participation offerings provided by political authorities for citizens represent a popularization of the first order (cf. also Breitkopf and Börner 2023: 3).

A second-order popularization is achieved with processes “die Populäres herstellen, indem sie seine Beachtung durch viele feststellen und ausstellen” [that produce the popular by establishing and exhibiting its meaning through many] (Döring et al. 2021: 13). In the (municipal) political context, second-order popularization processes include for example that they receive a large amount of attention (cf. Döring et al. 2021: 13). This can be specified both numerically and qualitatively.

In the broadest sense, second-order popularization refers to the usage of this opportunity for participation, for example by citizens raising problems or expressing wishes on behalf of a community, as in the case of the community Question Time during city council meetings.

Such above-mentioned orders of popularization can come under pressure when something has (become) popular, “das bislang keine Beachtung gefunden hat und auch keine Beachtung finden sollte“ [which has not yet received any attention and should not receive any attention] (Döring et al. 2021: 9). Populism does not necessarily have to be accompanied by riots, but it can, as the examples discussed below (in particular in sections 5.2 and 5.3) illustrate, manifest in the fact that one's own position is linked to intentions for the common good and the intentions of the opposing position are disqualified by deficits in contributing to the public good (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 515).

3.1 Concepts of Age

The term ‘age’ is conceptualized in many different ways in the everyday parlance. The four key concepts highlighted by Fiehler and Thimm (2003: 8–9) serve as the theoretical basis for the analyses conducted in section 5: age as a ‘chronological-numerical quantity’, as a ‘biological’, as a ‘social’ and as an ‘interactive-communicative phenomenon’.

Fiehler and Thimm (2003: 8) understand ‘chronological-numerical quantity’ to be the traditional categorization of age in lived calendar years. In the everyday social system, the chronological age is also used to (pre-)structure retirement at the end of employment (see Fiehler and Thimm 2003: 8; Kade 2009: 13; Heufers 2015: 39–41).

In comparison, the physical condition in which people find themselves when they retire, for example, cannot be determined by the number of calendar years lived. In order to be able to determine this, age must be construed as a ‘biological phenomenon’ (Fiehler and Thimm 2003: 8). Visible ageing is accompanied by physical changes that can be referred to interactively (cf. Coupland et al. 1991: 61–62; Fiehler and Thimm 2003: 8; Hrncal and Hofius 2023: 129–133).

Furthermore, the number of years of life cannot be used to define the extent to which people (can) participate in social life. To describe the extent of participation in social life, Fiehler and Thimm (2003: 8) refer to the concept of age as a ‘social phenomenon’. They call ‘old age’ the phase in which elderly people become more and more socially isolated and dependent on the help of others (cf. Fiehler and Thimm 2003: 8; cf. also Hrncal and Hofius 2023) due to, for example, physical restrictions leading for example to a loss in mobility.

In addition to factors such as the number of years of life, physical changes and social participation, age can also be negotiated ‘interactively and communicatively’ (Fiehler and Thimm 2003: 8). Here, the interactants can individually and subjectively define who or what is considered young or old in the respective conversational context (cf. Fiehler and Thimm 2003: 8), so that different representations of age can also become communicatively relevant.

3.2 Images of Age in Communication

Especially in communication situations in which political issues of social coexistence are discussed, sooner or later topics of old age are also brought up and these are often closely linked to certain ideas about or images of old age. According to the definition by Fiehler and Fitzner (2012: 293–294), images of old age are social constructions that contain the following components:

1. Vorstellungen und Überzeugungen, wie alte Menschen sind und welche Eigenschaften sie haben [ideas and beliefs about what elderly people are like and what characteristics they have]

2. Einstellungen zu und Bewertungen von Eigenschaften und Handlungen alter Menschen [attitudes towards and assessments of characteristics and actions of older people]

3. normative Vorstellungen und Überzeugungen, wie alte Menschen sein sollen [normative ideas and beliefs about how old people should be] (Fiehler and Fitzner 2012: 293)

This can be in reference to all elderly people, a specific group of elderly people or individuals who represent a group of or all elderly people (cf. Fiehler and Fitzner 2012: 293). Insofar as older and old people are portrayed as a separate group in communication, age is to be understood as a social category^[4] (cf. Thimm 2000: 212). In terms of content, depictions of age can emphasize both positive and negative attributes of old age, while they are directly tied to their abbreviated representations (cf. Fiehler and Fitzner 2012: 293; see also Fiehler and Fitzner 2012: 302–316 on age designations and their contexts in daily newspapers; Krüger 2016: 256–261 on the portrayal of older people as accident victims, as child-like and in need of help).

5.1 Reference to the Care of Elderly Relatives for Emotional Argument Support

The speaker FN^[8] in the following excerpt of a speech, taken from a city council meeting, is a woman of the “Generation Mitte”, a term which is used to describe individuals between 30 and 59 years of age in Germany, and who is not a member of the city council. She presents her concerns about the municipal infrastructure for the elderly to the mayor and representatives during a citizens’ Q&A session. According to Heinelt et al. (2022: 51–52), the format of the city council meeting is an example of representative democracy. In this respect, the citizens’ Q&A session represents a participatory element whereby participation is limited to selected citizens with specific concerns. It should also be noted that the citizen has no influence on a political decision-making process, but rather criticizes the negative consequences of a previous political decision.

In her speech, which lasts longer than the permitted ten minutes per person, she refers to the stressful traffic situation in her residential area. This situation was caused by a diversion due to several years of construction work on the main traffic axis via the narrow streets in her residential area. At the time of the speech, this was due to continue for another four years. In her speech, the woman begins by referring to previous attempts by residents to enter solution-oriented discussions with the city about this issue. According to her, however, the complaints of the residents had been “rejected” by the city, which is already a potential face threatening act directed to the mayor and the city administration. In addition, FN presents arguments against and negative experiences with the traffic situation. She also presents proposals for solutions that were developed at a residents’ get-together. These include the proposal to relieve the traffic situation in the residential area with the help of traffic lights or to block the traffic route for trucks or similar large vehicles with the help of sandstone bollards at both ends of the road.

The following section forms the final part of her speech, which follows the presentation of the proposed solutions:

Excerpt (1): “a family member and a caregiver”

282 FN: °hh mein VAter;

my father

283 simon PRANK;

simon prank

284 aus SIMstadt-

from simstadt

285 =ortsteil HOLZwies;

district holzwies

286 HAT früher-

was in former times

287 im gemeinderat HOLZwies et cetera mitgewirkt;

a member of the local council holzwies et cetera

288 und HEUte,

and today

289 im beTAGten alter;

at an advanced age

290 braucht *+!ER! *

+

he needs

fn: *Blick ans Plenum *

*view to the plenum *

+offene Hand von Höhe linker Schulter zur

rechten, geöffnete Handfläche, Daumen nach oben

gerichtet, fließende Bewegung+

+ open hand from the height of the left shoulder to the right, open palm, thumb pointing upwards directed, flowing movement

+

291 IHre hilfe;

your help

292 (- -) die suche nach neuen PRAxen und therapeuten;

the search for new medical practices and therapists

293 die KEIne umleitung von neun kilometern-

who do not require a nine-kilometer detour

294 für HAUSbesuche benötigen,

for home visits

295 kann beSONders,

can especially

296 im HÖheren;

in older

297 lebensALter der patienten-

age of the patients

298 keine Lösung sein;

not be a solution

299 BM: frau NEUmann-

mrs neumann

300 ich würde GERne-

I would like

301 [herrn weber JETZT gelegenheit,

to give mr weber the opportunity now

FN: [+ich habe noch EInen satz,

I have one more sentence

] +

fn: +dreht den Kopf zur linken Seite und deutet mit

offener Handfläche auf ihr Manuskript+

+ turns her head to the left and points with open palm to her manuscript

+

302 BM: zur antwort GEben;]

to answer

303 FN: ich habe noch einen SATZ;

I have one more sentence

304 allein HEUte fahre ich-

today alone I'm driving

305 als pflegende ANgehörige,

as a family member and a caregiver

306 dreiMAL die-

three times the

307 LANge umleitung;

long detour

308 und WÜRde-

and would

309 diese ZEIT lieber-

rather give this time

310 meinem VAter zugutekommen lassen;

to my father

311 °hhh aus UNserer sicht-

from our point of view

312 wäre die POLlerregelung;

the bollard solution

313 Oder die ampel;

or the traffic lights

314 MACHbare varianten;

would be feasible options

315 um den anwohNERN-

for the residents

316 gewerbeTREIbenden-

businesses

317 und PRAxen;

and practices

318 NORmalität-

319 für die NÄCHSten vier jahre;

320 zu erMÖGlichen;

to enable normality for the next four years

The transcript begins with the citizen FN naming her father, whom she simultaneously places in an intra-familial and intergenerational relationship to herself through this role designation (“my father / simon prank”, lines 282/283) (cf. Fiehler 2013: 69 on communication constellations in old age). Immediately afterwards, she categorizes him not only as a resident of the district affected by the detour (cf. lines 284/285), but also as a person belonging to the third phase of life (“at an advanced age”, line 289). In this context, FN refers to her father's past achievements for the community (“was in former times / member of the local council holzwies et cetera“, lines 286/287). With the reference to the earlier activity, she also prepares the following plea (“he needs / your help”, lines 290/291).

FN underlines the plea with a hand gesture inviting the plenum (cf. line 290) (cf. also Streeck 2007: 160–161 on the gesture of the ‘offering hand’). She had previously explained that all discussions and proposed solutions had been rejected by the city. The emphasis on the father’s previous work for the municipality combined with the (expressive) plea or request for help to the city council members and mayor serves the purpose of putting the situation into a new perspective (cf. Girnth 2015: 46 and 66 on the attitude components mentioned in section 2.3). Marking the father’s old age as noteworthy also serves the same purpose. During the speech, the speaker further embellishes the age representations to further her line of argumentation.

The previously verbalized request for help is followed by various reasons, all of which are placed in a causal context with the father’s “advanced age” (line 289). The noun phrase (“the search for new medical practices and therapists”, line 292) is a reference to the consequences of the biological degradation process as a consequence of ageing (“in older / age of the patients”, lines 296/297). At the same time, she uses the adjective “new” (line 292) to draw attention to the fact that the detour or construction site situation leads to restrictions in the accessibility of care facilities (cf. lines 293/294). With the modal verb “can” (line 295) and the repeated reference to the social component of age, which this time is generalized by the noun “patients” (line 297), she underlines the urgency of easily accessible healthcare. The negation at the end of the sentence (“not be a solution”, line 298) expresses her protest regarding the detour regulations. Thematically, FN refers at this point to social phenomena (health care and the ageing process) (cf. Krüger 2016: 256–260), which she opposes to the current political decision (detour) (cf. Poferl 1999: 23 on politicization). In this sequence, she highlights deficits in political decisions which, according to her, are at the expense of the common good (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 515). This insinuation is also a threat to the face of the mayor and city administration.

After a brief restructuring interruption by the mayor (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 520 on the authoritative measures of the presidency), FN continues with an emotionalizing reference to the family constellation (“and would / rather give this time / to my father”, lines 308–310) to reemphasize the previous complaints about the stressful detour situation (“today alone I’m driving / as caring family member / three times the / long detour”, lines 304–307). Here she presents herself as a family member of the middle generation whose job it is to look after relatives of the older generation (cf. Krüger 2016: 256–257 on traditional care services for family members). According to her statement, she finds it difficult to fulfill this value claim due to the decisions made by the city administration so far (redirection measures).

The conclusion of her speech is a recommendation for action to the city council (cf. lines 311–314). The pronoun “our” (line 311) refers to an exchange between the citizens and residents, whose opinion FN communicates on their behalf. In the subsequent final subordinate clause, she names the people whose interests she represents: “the residents / businesses / and practices” (lines 315–317). At this point, FN legitimizes her position in the quantitative exhibition of affected groups. Furthermore, in a subordinate clause, she emphasizes the concrete, in her view, long-term benefits (cf. lines 318–320).

Following FN’s contribution, the moderating mayor hands over the right to speak to the building mayor to respond to FN’s request (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 520 on debate-organizing moderation). In his answer, the mayor first points out that it is not possible to change the situation immediately, but that he is willing to look at the situation on site and work out a solution together with the citizens. This concession can be seen as an accommodation^[9].

It can be observed in this section that the reference to an elderly person is used to emphasize the aim of the speech, namely a change in the detour situation. To depict the physical limitations of the older person, negative stereotypes of the ageing process are sometimes used (including the need for help, loneliness, or restricted mobility), which are generally accepted and therefore popular.

By emphasizing ethical demands such as the accessibility of care facilities and personal values such as the care of older people by family members, the end of the speech is given an intensifying emotionalization, which is used as an instrument to achieve the goal. In this respect, a politicization of age can also be seen here, in that the social phenomenon serves as an argument against a political decision.

By emphasizing in her speech that vulnerable groups – illustrated here by the example of her own father – were not (sufficiently) considered in political decisions, she draws attention to deficits that are potentially face-threatening for mayors and city administrations. Due to the obligation of the city officials to react to the request, the speech also has an initially minimal but direct effect on political decision making (and the chance of second-order popularization), especially since FN suggests that many people pay attention to it, which is marked by the explicit naming and plural pronouns (“our”, line 311).

5.2 Ageism as an Instrument of Counter-Speech

Just as in the example analyzed above, the following excerpt is also globally about a change of perspective regarding an issue and agreement with one’s own perspective. To this purpose, age is used here to emphasize the argumentation. What distinguishes the following speech from the previous one is its cynical and exaggerated form.

The excerpt again stems from a city council meeting. In contrast to the first example, however, speaker JG^[10] is a member^[11] of the city council. JG occupies a political position within the format of representative democracy (cf. Heinelt et al. 2022: 51–52). The excerpt is preceded by a proposal from another party concerning measures to improve road safety. Among other things, the proposal suggested educational measures for cyclists.

In his speech, speaker JG raises objections to mandatory education for cyclists. He supports his objection in the first part of the speech with statistical arguments: On the basis of these facts, he states that the blame for accidents lies primarily with drivers, not with cyclists. He uses this argument to justify his amendment, in which he calls for better educational measures for car drivers. The following excerpt is an addendum to his plea and represents the final part of his entire speech:

Excerpt (2): “your most important voter group”

116 JG: FALLS euch-

117 °h die ei::gentlich für JEden-

118 aus eigener naTURbeobatu (.) beobachtung-

119 LEICHT verifizierbaren argumente noch !NICHT!

überzeugen,

if you are not yet convinced by these arguments, which

are actually easy for anyone to verify through their own

observations of nature

120 °h dann vielleicht DAS,

then perhaps this

121 (- -) zuMEIST erwischt es je:ne-

mostly it catches those

122 die zu la:ngsam oder zu BLÖD sind;

who are too slow or too stupid

123 °h also KINder jugendliche-

such as children adolescents

124 und allen voRAN eure wichtigste wählergrup!PE!,

and above all your most important voter group

125 °hh die über fünfunSECHZIG jährigen.

the over sixty-five-year-olds

126 zum LERnen zu !ALT!-

too old to learn

127 zum AUSweichen zu langsam,

too slow to move out of the way

128 °h den erfaus (.) heRAUSforderungen-

129 des verk_der verKEHRSteilnahme-

130 KAUM noch geWACHsen,

barely able to cope with the challenges of traffic

131 °h überLASST ihr sie-

132 mit (.) EUrem vorschlag-

133 ihrem SCHICKsal-

you leave them to their fate with your proposal

134 (- -)

135 JG: JA-

yes

136 (- -)

137 JG: opfert sie auf dem SCHLACHTfeld strasse;

sacrifice them on the battlefield of the street

The addendum verbalized in this section ties in directly with the previous statements, which JG makes explicit (cf. lines 116–119). In this announcement section, JG also emphasizes that he also considers the following contribution as an argument for his amendment (cf. line 120).

In his addendum, he again refers to road traffic accidents. However, he no longer emphasizes the people responsible, but instead focuses on the victims. He first introduces this thematic turnaround with an attribution of inadequacy, without naming the reference objects precisely at this point (“mostly it catches those / who are too slow or too stupid”, lines 121/122). In terms of language, JG uses (extremely) devaluating adjective phrases for this, which also imply exclusivity. In the following sentence, he names the (vulnerable) groups of people he is referring to (“such as children adolescents / and above all your most important voter group / the over sixty-five-year-olds”, lines 123–125). It should be emphasized at this point that he only categorizes the latter group of people using a calendar age limit. The number of years he mentions is the socio-economic threshold at which retirement^[12] is likely (see section 3.1). In his speech, he not only equates the group of older adults with children (cf. Krüger 2016: 260–261, 271–278 on elderly people as political target group), but also describes them as inadequate per se, which (both) falls under age-discriminatory^[13] practices. At the same time, he places the group of people in a social context with the party (“your most important voter group”, line 124), whose application he is arguing against. This part of the speech shows how ageism is instrumentalized to devalue groups of people and parties and weaken their arguments.

In addition to the focus through which he marks old age as popular, he subsequently ascribes negative stereotype attributes to this group (“too old to learn / too slow to move out of the way / barely able to cope with the challenges of traffic”, lines 126–130). Here he exaggerates common social patterns and prejudices against the elderly. Building on this, he stylizes the group of senior citizens as victims if the other party’s proposal is implemented (“you leave them to their fate with your proposal”, lines 131–133). This description is withdrawn in the following sentence (“yes”, line 135) and then metaphorically intensified (“sacrifice them on the battlefield of the street”, line 137). This last statement reflects the observation that senior citizens are also more frequently assigned to the broader topic of accidents in the media (see section 3.2).

The speaker – in his function as a political representative – discredits not only the group of retirees who are portrayed as inadequate and stylized as victims, but also the party whose motion he is proposing to amend (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 515). On the one hand, he uses negative portrayals of age to disqualify the opposing position and also insinuates, with the help of the victim portrayal, that the opposing position has not taken the common good into account (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 515). On the other hand, his discriminatory actions also threaten the mayor's face, as this does not correspond to the norms of behavior in the plenum.

5.3 Positioning Against Ageism to Emphasize the Personal Social Attitude

The third data example, which is also from a city council meeting, contains two transcripts that relate to each other. Both excerpts are parts of a debate on the expansion of the local transport network and related questions about parking facilities. In contrast to example 5.1, only political representatives are involved in this debate (cf. Heinelt et al. 2022: 51–52). In his statement, to which members of other parties in the city council later respond, speaker JG expresses a similarly cynical view of the transport proposals under discussion as in example 5.2.

In his speech, JG presents three arguments against an existing motion. With the last argument, JG advocates for the expansion of cycle paths instead of roads so that, according to his reasoning, fewer people use cars as a means of transportation. The section selected here forms the thematic conclusion of his final argument before he moves on to the devaluation of various parties.

Excerpt (3a): “calcified senior citizens“

132 JG: °h !N:ICHT! dass wir uns MISSverstehen- °h

not that we are misunderstanding each other

133 p: (1.2)

134 JG: !ICH! finde autofahren AUCH ziemlich geil-

I actually think driving a car is pretty cool too

135 (-) genauso wie RAUchen,

just like smoking

136 BIERtrinken,

drinking beer

137 POpeln,

picking my nose

138 und verKALKte senioren ärgern?

and annoying calcified senior citizens

139 °h aber (.) WENN mans übertreibt-

but if you overdo it

140 sind es einfach schlechte ANgewohnheiten;

it's just bad habits

141 (-) und (.) unsere geSELLschaft?

and our society

142 hat das autofahren zu einer sehr überTRIEbenen

angewohnheit gemacht,

has turned driving into an excessive habit

143 °h (.) die allen SCHA:det,=h°

that harms everyone

JG introduces the end of the argument with an apparent relativization (cf. line 132) by colloquially confessing that he likes to drive a car, too (cf. line 134). This confession takes on a cynical character not only through the connection with the “car fetish” that he ascribed to the other party at the beginning of his speech, but also through the subsequent list of his habits that are considered harmful (cf. lines 135–140). The list of various socially negative actions includes an insulting age discrimination^[14] (“annoying calcified senior citizens”, line 138) (cf. Krüger 2016: 260), which is listed by the speaker as only one of many points in his list but provokes an emotional reaction from other city council members (see example 3b).

JG intensifies the age discrimination in the further course of his speech by relativizing the socially negatively evaluated actions (cf. lines 139/140). With the generic term used for this (“habits”, line 140), JG again builds a bridge to the issue of traffic, with which he concludes his argument (cf. lines 140–142) and at the same time associates driving with negative effects on the common good (cf. line 143) (cf. Burkhard 2019: 515).

Excerpt (3b): „role models“

401 AF: also ich muss mich ganz EHRlisch-

402 ä:h (.) kurz BREMsen?

so I honestly have to u:h slow myself down for a moment

403 ich bin FASsungslos-

I’m stunned.

404 °h äh ich WEISS-

uh I know

405 (.) ä:h mein SOHN und auch meine schwiegertochter-

406 sind BEIde-

407 °h lehreRIN,

408 beziehungsweise LEHrer,

u:h my son and my daughter-in-law are both a (female) teacher and a (male)

teacher respectively

409 °hh sie fordern teilweise auch ihre SCHÜler auf,

they also ask/challenge their (male) students,

410 ihre SCHÜlerinnen auf,

their (female) students

411 °h stadtratSITzungen:-

412 ä:h (.) zu SEhen,

to watch u:h city council meetings

413 °h werten diese teilweise auch im UNterricht (.) aus,

sometimes analyse them in class

414 °hh und bisHER dacht ich immer-

and until now I always thought

415 dass WIR-

that we

416 als stadtRÄte,

as city councilors

417 °h VORbilder sind,

are role models

418 für (.) uns_re JUgend,

for our youths

419 °h ä:h ich HOFfe ganz einfach auch-

u:h I simply hope

420 (.) dass-

that

421 p: (0.5)

422 AF: wenn WIR-

when we

423 nischt mehr kandiDIEren-

no longer run for office

424 °hh ä:h (-) gute kluge junge menschen NACHrücken,

u:h good, bright young people will succeed us

425 °hh und (.) nach SO einer-

and after such a

426 (.) °h nach so einem VORtrag,

after such a lecture

427 FRAge ich misch eigentlisch-

I actually wonder

428 °h welches BEIspiel,

what kind of example

429 (.) WIR unsren jungen-

430 (.) MENschen-

431 mit auf den WEG geben;

are we setting our young people along the way

432 °h ich bin entSETZT,

I am horrified

433 °h WEder sind-

434 (.) ältere leute verKACKT,

neither are older people fucked up

435 °h noch MÖCHte isch-

436 (-) äh beGRIFfe hier,

437 die ich hier vorn geSEHN habe,

438 °h ÜRgendwo:?

439 °h in einem KONsens-

440 im unterricht beHANdeln müssen,

nor do I want to have to deal with concepts here

which I have witnessed here in this meeting anywhere in a consensus in class

441 °h und ich erWARte ganz einfach von ihnen,

and I simply expect you

442 dass sie sich hier entSCHULdigen-

443 [°h für DAS (.) was sie hier gesagt haben;]

to apologize for what you have said here

At a later point in the discussion in connection with the transport applications, a member of the party addressed by JG takes to the podium to make a rebuking statement in which AF positions herself against discrimination and argues for the role model function of political actors for society (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 515; Hausendorf 2012: 60). She begins her statement with expressive descriptions of her inner rejection of the previous speaker's contribution (cf. lines 401–403). She justifies her attitude with the accessibility of the meeting via broadcast and the subsequent public nature of the city council meetings (“to watch u:h city council meetings”, line 412), which she thus assumes have a potential for popularity (cf. Döring et al. 2021: 13), as she says that the meetings are also watched and analyzed by students (“sometimes analyse them in class”, line 413). She links the argument of the possibility of this being watched by the public to an appeal to the role model function of the city council members (cf. lines 416–417). She identifies this behavior as something that breaks with the city council serving as role models (cf. line 414), which in her subsequent speech she links to the previous speaker's contribution (cf. line 426) and the passing on of values to younger generations (cf. line 422–424). She links the break she marks, which was caused by JG's non-compliant speech, with a rhetorical question about the social contribution of the current city council members (“what kind of example / are we setting our young people along the way”, lines 428–431) (cf. Burkhardt 2017: 515), which she then evaluates negatively with an expressive (“I am horrified”, line 432). As part of her assessment, she makes specific reference to the age discrimination expressed by JG (“annoying calcified senior citizens”, line 138), quoting the wording^[15] she misheard (“older people fucked up”, line 434).

Nonetheless, ageism, which was framed as a side issue in JG's speech, is the only direct quote in AF's statement, which results in ageism being highlighted. AF uses the reference to ageism to position herself as someone concerned with common good and social responsibility. This becomes particularly clear when she relates the (public) rejection of ageism (cf. line 434) to the analysis of the city council meetings in school lessons (cf. lines 435–440), which she had previously used to appeal to the social responsibility of the city councilors. AF ends her short statement with a directive demanding an apology from the previous speaker, JG, for the insults.

What is remarkable about the sample transcripts is AF's verbalized concern that something negative (the age discrimination in this case) could receive attention through the livestream: The discriminatory remarks, which in her view do not deserve attention (cf. Döring et al. 2021: 9). AF makes it clear that she perceived the previous speaker's comments as face-threatening (cf. line 441–443) and shares her fear that the role model function of the city council as a whole (“we”, line 429) could be weakened as a result of such discriminatory language.

Just like the previous examples, this one also shows how references to older age are placed in an argumentative context with the common good to strengthen one's own position and/or positively emphasize one's own social attitude.