Abstract
Elections are a competitive arena for candidates from political factions, and this competition is represented in debates. The aim of this article is to analyze the discourse of the televised debates of the 12th and 13th presidential elections. This study, using the Fisk discourse analysis method, aimed to answer the question: What discursive themes did the main candidates (Rouhani, Raisi, Hemmati) of the 12th and 13th elections use in television debates? It analyzed the discourse themes of the debates of the reformist and fundamentalist factions. According to the findings, factional antagonism and conflict were strongly represented in the factions' discourse despite the common ideology of fighting corruption. The common language in the factions' discourse was irony. Despite the representation of the candidates' discourse on fighting corruption and supporting the disadvantaged, factional conflicts were reproduced. Social classes, supporting the disadvantaged, and fighting corruption were the focus of the conflicts. Criticism of the rival faction was the common discourse of the candidates. According to game theory, in the electoral debates of the factions, it is the attempt to win that the aggressive behaviors of the competing candidates for power are represented. The emphasis on “social justice”, “the popular nature of the government”, “the fight against corruption” and “support for the disadvantaged” are the dominant ideology to shape the public discourse. Rouhani and Raisi represented the ruling ideology that achieved hegemony by hiding the existing class conflict.
Keywords: 12th and 13th presidential elections, reproduction of factional conflicts, social classes, fundamentalist faction, reformist faction, hegemony
 
Introduction
The debate is the strongest and highest level of representation of the presidential election candidate competition, where the candidates in this political competition represent factional conflicts. Considering that Iran has the experience of holding election debates in 1997, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2017, and 2018, the representation of factional conflicts is essential for the presidential election candidate competition.
Research Methodology
The research method is discourse analysis using the Fisk model based on the research objective to analyze the presidential candidate debates. The reason for choosing the Fisk model was based on the research objective, which was the analysis of reality and representation. A three-level analysis corresponding to the technical, social, and ideological code, which was presented based on the theory of the Fisk method, was analyzed at three levels of description, interpretation, and explanation.
Discussion & Result
This research used Fisk's discourse analysis method to analyze the discourse of the debates between the reformist and fundamentalist factions. Based on Fisk's model, supporting the disadvantaged and fighting corruption were represented as the axes of the conflicts between the reformist and fundamentalist factions, and the representation of the two poles of empathy and conflict.
The discursive axis of "transparency and the fight against corruption" has been common in the discourse of the fundamentalist and reformist factions. The common language in the discourse of the fundamentalist and reformist factions is irony.
The factional antagonism and conflict were strongly represented in the discourse of Rouhani and Raisi, despite each representing the dominant ideology of the government. Criticism of the rival faction was a common discourse of the candidates.
The discourse association is a perspective of social justice and support for the deprived classes and criticism of Rouhani. Raisi, referring to "the class gap is greater in these years," and "the government's inability to resolve the class gap," represented the discourse of justice. Raisi referred to the first step of the modernization issue, but due to the lack of strong scientific and theoretical support, it remained merely at the level of reference.
By emphasizing the discourse of "hope," Rouhani criticized the government's popular nature, economic-political rents, and the anti-moral approach of the rival faction. In addition to emphasizing the "success of foreign policy and solving problems with the JCPOA, Rouhani defended the discourse of "hope."
Conclusion
According to the findings of this study, interaction with the outside world was represented in the reformist discourse. The ideology of fighting corruption was explained jointly in the fundamentalist and reformist discourse. Despite the representation of the discourse of the candidates of the two factions on fighting corruption and supporting the deprived classes, the factional conflicts of the fundamentalist and reformist discourse were reproduced.
According to game theory, in the electoral debates between the conservative and reformist factions, the effort to win is represented in the zero-sum game, where the aggressive behaviors of the competing candidates are used to represent power. The emphasis on “social justice,” “the government being popular,” “fighting corruption,” and “supporting the disadvantaged” is to gain public approval and shape the public discourse of the ruling ideology. Rouhani and Raisi represent the ruling ideology that achieved hegemony by hiding the existing class conflict.
Is Iran entering a post-hegemonic era that is the result of fluidity, diversity, and dispersion of power?