Language, Capital, and Symbolic Power in the Construction of Political Legitimacy during the 2024 Kediri Election Debate

Abstract

Political debates in local elections are not only spaces for presenting programs but also arenas where candidates establish and challenge political legitimacy. This study examines how different forms of capital are presented and contested through language in the 2024 Kediri regency election debates. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of capital and Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis, the study analyzes two official debate recordings held on 1 and 14 November 2024. The recordings were transcribed verbatim and analyzed through transitivity, modality, and presupposition, with attention to evaluation and quantification. The findings show that the incumbent reproduced political and bureaucratic resources through references to government experience, institutional connections, and previous achievements. The challenger, meanwhile, gave political meaning to business experience, organisational involvement, and community connections. These resources were also contested through claims about conflict of interest and responsibility for government projects. The study shows that capital does not automatically become political legitimacy; its meaning is shaped through discourse. The study contributes to research on political debates by linking capital positions with the linguistic construction of local electoral legitimacy. The study is limited by its focus on two debates and the absence of audience-reception data.