Acceso usuarios
Theo Jung
The ideal of parliamentary debate is often construed in terms of adisimpassioned exchange of arguments. Yet in actual practice,emotions play a key role. As recent studies of French, British, andother parliaments have shown, a closer look at the uses oflaughter in the plenary debates can provide a useful entry pointfor a better understanding of the atmospheric dimension ofdebates. Focusing on the early decades of the German ImperialReichstag, this article considers the varying modes of parliamentaryhumour, laughter and ridicule and their significance in the contextof rhetorical struggles and processes of political in- and exclusion.In comparative dialogue with research on other parliaments, itcontributes to a more precise characterization of the internaldynamics of an institution still very much in flux. Whilecontemporaries made a sharp distinction between exclusionarylaughter and inclusionary mirth (Heiterkeit), a closer look at theplenary interactions shows that while parliamentary laughterperformed many different functions, on the whole, it primarilyconstituted a mechanism of de-escalation. As such, parliamentaryhumour did not stand in opposition to (rational) debate, butplayed a key role in the management of difference and conflictthat the parliament was created to facilitate.
