Pragmatic and value-based argumentation in the 2015 Israeli elections

David Kleczewski*, Ruth Amossy

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations


A discursive and argumentative analysis of the Israeli 2015 elections reveals how electoral strategies displayed unexpected similarities between rival parties such as the Likud and the Zionist Union, on the one hand, and the Jewish Home and Meretz, on the other hand, in their respective approaches to foreign policy and to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. While the mainstream Right and Left mainly emphasized security motives, used consequence-based arguments, and appealed to fear, the practical reasoning of the two smaller parties (Jewish Home and Meretz) competing with the Likud and the Zionist Union applied a value-based rather than a merely instrumental argumentation. This reconfiguration of the political map enlightens the peculiar dynamics of the 2015 elections.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)772-787
Number of pages16
JournalIsrael Affairs
Issue number3-4
StatePublished - 1 Oct 2016


  • Israeli elections
  • appeal to fear
  • electoral strategies
  • political argumentation
  • pragmatic arguments
  • value-based arguments


Dive into the research topics of 'Pragmatic and value-based argumentation in the 2015 Israeli elections'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this