Politics Between Language and Society   Capt Mohammed Hassan Al-Tahir    

 

Date: May 23, 2026

 

From examining the Qur’anic text and analyzing discourse through the story of Pharaoh’s people and the Queen of Sheba—whom the text brings together yet the narrative distinguishes—we see Pharaoh belittling his people while the Queen of Sheba elevates the refinement of her council. Today, in the dynamics of political life between authenticity and modernity, we need to analyze these elements through science.

 

Psycholinguistics is a branch that studies the relationship between language and mental processes, namely:

– How language is produced, understood, and stored in the brain.

– Its impact on individual and collective behavior.

 

Sociolinguistics focuses on language as a social tool:

– Used in constructing identity, managing power, and shaping relationships among individuals and groups.

 

From here, we must compare the concepts of impact and scope:

– Impact is the power of language to directly influence political action.

– Scope is the extent to which this impact spreads across society.

 

Especially when the balance of language is disrupted without attempting to reform speech—the true beginning that precedes all action.

 

For example, when a politician says:

“Efforts are directed but not purposeful,” then:

– The psychological impact of this statement plants a sense of vagueness.

– The social scope reveals a loss of trust in achievement.

 

And when he says:

“The disaster is humanitarian,” then:

– The psychological impact softens the crisis by reframing it.

– The social scope redirects public opinion toward empathy rather than anger, since describing the disaster as humanitarian encourages patience and avoids cruelty in speech and action.

 

Analyzing speech through impact and scope shows:

1. Psychological impact: Determines how individuals react to political discourse—whether they are motivated to act or withdraw.

2. Social scope: Determines how widely discourse spreads through media and groups, and how it transforms into tangible political action.

 

Combining both reveals that language is not merely a means of communication, but a tool for shaping political achievement itself. This must be measured through direct and inverse relationships:

 

– Direct relationship: The wider the scope of political discourse and the stronger its impact, the greater the ability to mobilize society toward political action.

– Inverse relationship: When discourse loses clarity or credibility, scope shrinks and impact weakens, turning political achievement into mere promises.

 

This leads us to ask: What are the requirements of positive political action?

For political action to be positive, it must be tied to language and society in a balanced formulation:

– Clear language: Defines the goal and convinces the audience.

– Inclusive social discourse: Creates a broad scope of influence.

– Effective impact: Motivates achievement and transforms words into action.

 

Thus, politics is not merely the management of interests, but a linguistic and social practice. The strength of a politician is measured by his ability to craft discourse that possesses both psychological impact and social scope, elevating society by activating the model of Sheba rather than the model of Pharaoh’s people—who, as the Qur’an depicts, lacked knowledge of the higher assembly when they disputed.