![Sample our Language & Literature journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5941/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Language-Literature.jpg"})
Abstract
How did UK political elites publicly represent the economy after the Financial Crash? In his budget speeches, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alastair Darling (2007–2010), talked about finance and mortgages much more, and taxation much less, than one would expect by comparing him to other chancellors. With his rhetoric he constructed a vigorous defence of the financial sector and mortgage market, and described limited technical reforms comfortably. But as well as avoiding taxation as a topic, he appeared less comfortable and more inconsistent defending his taxation policies. Refusing to increase corporate or capital-gains taxes, he argued instead that top-percentile earners, banks, and tax evaders should pay more tax. Coming many months before Occupy would encamp at St. Paul’s, these are surprising characterizations of top-earner and financial taxation from an elite orator. I argue that Darling understood the power of anti-elite critique, and so was willing to criticize some limited and select elements of financial activity and taxation in order to protect more fundamental aspects of the financial system, particularly the capital upon which it depends. Via an appropriation of critical language about finance and the Crash, his elite rhetoric defensively protected owned-capital and corporate profit from other claims.
Notes on contributors
Catherine Walsh (author to whom correspondence should be addressed) is a Lecture in Corporate Communications and Public Relations. She researches finance and political elites. She was awarded her PhD from Goldsmiths' College, University of London, in 2014. School of Arts and Cultures, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK. E-mail: [email protected]