How does the symbolic violence of political language find expression in the process of metropolization and what dominant rhetorical forms does it take? We have drawn on the results of recent studies of public policy in the urban regions of Naples, Toronto, Montreal, Lyon, Strasburg and Grenoble to call into question the nature of the political narratives used in the metropolitan development of these major urban regions. We draw the conclusion from these studies that the political élites involved (elected representatives, administrative officials and associated experts) are experiencing trouble in finding a credible and legitimate form of discourse at the inter-communal level when they try to formulate and justify their priorities for public action at this governmental level in matters concerning territorial planning and development and the promotion of social cohesion. In their different ways of promoting the metropolitan area, one observes a serious failure to convey meaning in their use of political rhetoric devoid of emotion, as also in their professional explanations which fail to galvanize and captivate the public because of their lack of expressive eloquence. To understand how these failings in political narrative illustrate but also explain the ineffective, uncertain and tentative governability of urban institutions, this paper sets out to integrate into a cognitive approach to public policy the effects of context and of territoriality, by calling upon different analytical traditions (includind Cultural Studies and Narrative Policy Analysis). This combinative approach leads us to emphasize in conclusion that the transcoding processes of conveying the local common good can seriously hinder the emergence of a working political order at the metropolitan level.