The art of rhetoric: persuasive strategies in Biden's inauguration speech: a critical discourse analysis

The paper situates political speech as a powerful medium for shaping public perception, advancing ideologies, and exercising power. Drawing on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), particularly Fairclough’s framework, the study emphasizes how language in political discourse reveals hidden connections between dominance, discrimination, power, and control. The authors highlight the persuasive nature of political communication and the inaugural speech as a key genre that seeks unity and sets a new administration’s tone. In view of limited CDA research specifically on President Joe Biden’s 2021 inaugural address, the study’s purpose is to investigate the main linguistic persuasive strategies employed in that speech and to elucidate the underlying ideologies and communicative tactics in context. The study is significant for understanding the interplay between language, ideology, and sociocultural practices, and for informing teaching and analysis of political discourse.

The literature review underscores the reciprocal relationship between language and sociocultural practices in CDA, noting language’s role in constructing social identity, relations, and knowledge. Prior studies on Biden’s 2021 inaugural address identified presuppositions (lexical, existential, factive) and ideologies involving immigrants, healthcare, racism, democracy, and climate change (Renaldo & Arifin, 2021); thematic emphases on liberalism, democracy, unity via word counts and discourse features (Prasetio & Prawesti, 2021); rhetorical strategies linking ideology and power (Pramadya & Rahmanhadi, 2021); persuasive devices such as rule of three, historical and biblical references foregrounding unity and tolerance (Amir, 2021); and linguistic devices emphasizing unity, with confident and reconciliatory tone leveraging religion and history (Bani-Khaled & Azzam, 2021). Despite abundant CDA research on political speeches, targeted analyses of Biden’s inauguration speech remain relatively scarce; hence, this study complements existing work by focusing on additional persuasive and rhetorical dimensions within Fairclough’s CDA.

The study analyzes President Joe Biden’s 2021 inaugural address (Biden, 2021) using Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis framework across three levels: text analysis, discursive practices, and social practices. The analysis operationalizes: (a) macro-structure (thematic) with attention to intertextuality; (b) micro-structure through syntactic analysis of cohesion (reference, conjunctions, lexical cohesion via repetition, synonymy, contrast/juxtaposition); (c) stylistic analysis focusing on lexical choices signaling emphasis; and (d) rhetorical-persuasion analysis. Persuasive strategies were identified following Obeng (1997) and interpreted via Fairclough (1992). Quantitative counts were conducted for frequent tokens (e.g., key words, pronouns, modal verbs, conjunctions, reference items) to support qualitative insights.

- Ideology and overarching themes: Biden’s discourse constructs an inclusive, citizen-centered ideology foregrounding unity, democracy, equality, and freedom. He frames his victory as belonging to the American people and stresses a duty to unify the nation beyond partisan and demographic divides. - Creativity and thematic emphasis: Creative expressions highlight key issues: the Capitol attack, racial injustice, women’s rights progress, and reengagement with allies. He references historical events (e.g., 1913 suffrage march) to underscore progress culminating in Vice President Kamala Harris’s swearing-in. - Indirectness: Sensitive political topics are handled obliquely to avoid alienating opponents (e.g., referring to “lies” without naming Trump or specific Republicans), aligning with politeness and strategic ambiguity. - Figurative language: Extensive use of conceptual metaphors/metonymies to frame problems and solutions (e.g., lowering the temperature; politics as a raging fire; dark winter; unity as a path forward; crises personified as foes; democracy as precious and fragile; America as a story of decency and dignity). These devices connect logos and pathos to promote ideologies and aid comprehension of abstract issues. - Intertextuality: Religious and historical references enhance credibility and resonance: Psalm 30:5; Abraham Lincoln’s 1863 statement; lines from the American anthem. These links situate the speech within national traditions and moral frameworks. - Lexical choices and themes: Key terms are repeated to foreground priorities. Democracy appears 11 times; unity/uniting 11 times. Emphasis on being a president for all Americans and ending the “uncivil war” (red vs. blue, urban vs. rural, conservative vs. liberal) supports the unity agenda. - Cohesion and contrast: High frequency of reference and conjunctions supports textual cohesion: reference items counted at 140; conjunctions include “and” (97), “but” (16), “so” (8). Lexical cohesion via repetition, synonymy (e.g., victory/triumph; repair/restore/heal/build), and contrast/juxtaposition (e.g., truth vs. lies; light vs. darkness; unity vs. division) enhances clarity and persuasive force. - Modality: Modal verbs indicate commitments and possibilities: “will” (30), “can” (16), “may” (5), “must” (10). The distribution reflects a balanced stance combining promises, obligations, and feasible paths forward. - Pronoun reference and identity: Pronoun use underscores collective identity and shared agency: “we” (89) dominates over “I” (32), reinforcing unity and communal responsibility.

The findings demonstrate that Biden’s inaugural address strategically mobilizes linguistic and rhetorical resources—creativity, indirectness, intertextuality, figurative language, cohesive structuring, modality, and referential choices—to advance a unifying and democratic ideology. By emphasizing democracy’s precious yet fragile nature, repeating unity as a guiding value, and deploying inclusive pronouns, the speech directly addresses the study’s research aim of identifying persuasive strategies and their ideological implications. Indirect critique allows outreach to political opponents while maintaining a reconciliatory tone. Intertextual nods to scripture, Lincoln, and national songs embed the speech within shared cultural narratives, bolstering credibility and moral appeal. Cohesive devices and contrast sharpen key distinctions (truth vs. lies; unity vs. division), facilitating comprehension and reinforcing arguments. Modality balances promises and possibilities, signaling resolve tempered with realism. Collectively, these strategies align with Fairclough’s view of discourse as social practice, showing how language constructs meanings, legitimizes policy aims, and seeks to mobilize national solidarity in a context of crisis and polarization.

The study shows that President Biden’s 2021 inaugural address deploys a suite of persuasive linguistic strategies—creativity, metaphor, contrast, indirectness, reference, and intertextuality—to articulate an ideology centered on democracy, unity, equality, and freedom. Lexical emphasis (e.g., democracy and unity), cohesive structuring, balanced modality, and inclusive pronoun use support a unifying, citizen-focused vision. The paper contributes by integrating qualitative CDA with quantitative lexical counts to elucidate how rhetorical devices construct meaning and garner consent for political aims. Future research is recommended to examine persuasive strategies across other political leaders and contexts, compare cross-cultural inaugural addresses, and expand corpus-based approaches to quantify rhetorical device usage and its reception effects.