Category: Rhetoric

This text is on the innovation of rhetoric and the change, revolution, and failures throughout ancient time and modern time. With the use of intellectual material and class books. Rhetoric meaning has drastically changed over time throughout the evolution of society. From the start of rhetoric to today’s modern society the revolution of rhetoric has increased in popularity, becoming a huge part of the educational system. Throughout the text you will see the work contributions from the Sophists, Isocrates, Plato and Aristotle and how their contribution has changed society.

For a simple definition to get your point across rhetoric is defined as the art of persuasion. However it is more than that. Rhetoric is the art of efficient or persuasive speaking or writing which aims to study the competence of the writers or speakers need to notify, persuade, and inspire. There is a vast amount of different definitions and view points in rhetoric. Rhetoric’s definition has changed overtime. In today’s day and age rhetoric has perceived as a way to persuade and deceive. In the ancient times rhetoric was known to be a sharp form of effective communication.

Aristotle who is a renowned Greek Philosopher defined rhetoric as “the power of finding the available arguments suited to a given situation” (1994). This definition was not narrowed. It included everything from how to be a citizen in your community to valuing other people’s opinion. It was a gateway to help create a way for humans to disagree with their opinion and assumptions in a more civic way. Rhetoric issues heuristics, which is a technique for understanding, contemplation, and coming up with arguments for particular situations. An example of this would be Aristotle’s three persuasive audience appeals. Logos, pathos, and ethos are the three persuasive audience appeals. Rhetoric’s three primary modes of persuasion was used by Aristotle. Ethos appealed to writers or speaker using their background or experience to convince you. Logos used logic and reasoning. In this primary mode one would often cite facts and statistics. Pathos was used through emotion and shared moral values. To develope a persuasive writing or speech you can use the five canons of rhetoric which are invention, arrangement, memory, delivery, and style

Rhetor was the Greek term for orator. A rhetor was a citizen who knowledgeable on verbal artistry. Rhetoric then evolved as an essential form of art. Rhetoric helped the orator organize its strategies for persuading.

Rhetoric commenced as civic art in Ancient Greece. The birthplace of rhetoric is in the city state of Anthens. In this democracy every male was put into politics to persuade men to vote for or against a particular case for legislation. Due to this influence, schools began to teach rhetoric. The first group of teachers to teach rhetoric were called the Sophists. Their beliefs were that students should use their time to progress themselves. They did not believe in what is correct or incorrect. For the Greeks however, being a sophist was defined as being a manipulated man. The sophists central focus was on logos also known as discourse. The word “sophistry” was known for having negative implications in ancient Greece. However, the Greece Sophists were respected but highly criticized.

Then came the Isocrates. Isocrates was similar to the sophists. He taught public speaking. Isocrates worked to differentiate himself from the Sophists. He believed in the practice of speaking publicly about important questions that would improve an audience knowledge. His work became the first school in Anthens. Unfortunately, Isocrates did not leave any manuals but his speeches became models of the oratory and keys to the schools educational system. Due to the influence he had on Cicero and Quintilian the entire Western World educational system changed.

Plato is one of the most well known philosopher. He distinguished the difference between true and false rhetoric in his dialogues. His predominantly most popular dialogues, which we have studied in class are Gorgias and Phaedrus. In these dialogues, Plato claims that the sophists art is rhetoric. He believes that sophists appeal only to what seems possible. Therefore not advancing their students education. Plato’s rhetoric is actually dialectic. His definition of rhetoric is the art of enchanting the soul by discourse. Aristotle was a student of Plato. His definition of rhetoric is Rhetoric is ‘the faculty of discovering in any particular case all of the available means of persuasion.’ He wrote The Art of Rhetoric. Aristotle says that “rhetoric is the counterpart of dialectic” in his first sentence. The art of rhetoric follows and is fundamentally patterned after the art of dialectic. Both are arts of discourse creation. For Plato and Aristotle, dialectic involves persuasion. Aristotle once said “There are, then, these three means of effecting persuasion. The man who is command of them must, it is clear, be able (1) to reason logically, (2) to understand human character and goodness in their various forms, and (3) to understand the emotions-that is, to name them and” Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric. Aristotle emphasizes the logical aspect of rhetoric as the art of discovering all available means of persuasion. Which is supported by logical, ethical, and emotional proofs. There are some forms of logos, ethos (Aristotle`s theory), and pathos presented. Aristotle classifies three steps of rhetoric, invention, style and arrangement. He also emphasized enthymematic reasoning as vital to the process of rhetorical invention. This is persuasive because the audience is able to provide the missing idea. therefore they are more likely to be persuaded by the message.

Plato and Aristotle judged Sophists for relying only on their emotions to persuade an audience. However, despite the criticism the Sophists made a major impact on developing the study and teaching of rhetoric. Even though Aristotle criticized the Sophists he did acknowledge that they could be a useful tool. Aristotle said in the Art of Rhetoric “What makes a man a ‘sophist’ is not his faculty, but his moral purpose. (1355 17)”

For the Romans, oration became an important part of society. Cicero was the chief of Roman Rhetoricians and is famously known for being an orator. He is considered one of the most significant rhetoricians of all time. His work “Rhetorica ad hernnium” is an extensive reference on the use of rhetoric. It is considered the most significant work on rhetoric and is still used today. In the Middle Ages and Renaissance it attained major publication as an advanced school book on rhetoric. The rediscovery of Cicero`s speeches provoked the cultural innovations known as the Renaissance.

From the Romans to the Middle Ages, rhetoric was taught as liberal art with logic and grammar. It was also known as eloquent persuasion. Which became a pillar of the educated students and became the courtiers preferred mode of speech. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire the study of rhetoric became the central study of verbal arts. However, the study of verbal arts declines and failed for several centuries. During this time rhetoric came second to the study of logic. Rhetoric was studied in medieval universities. Furthermore, rhetoric did not regain its popularity until the Renaissance, however other forms of writing did help the progression of rhetorical thought. In the sixteenth century one influential figure in the rebirth of classical rhetoric was Erasmus who wrote Copia: Foundations of the Abundant Style. This book became the top text used for this topic. During this same period a movement began that changed the schools curriculum which led to rhetoric losing its place. However, in the eighteenth century rhetoric came back around.

In the ending of the seventeenth century, traditional rhetoric came close to becoming a genres in history, poetry and literary criticism. Before the end of the seventeenth century, rhetoric failed and came under attack by adherents of new science. This new type of science claimed that rhetoric was concealed the truth and encouraged the use of embellishment instead of direct language. Furthermore, a more profound and direct influence on rhetoric at the beginning of the seventeenth century was Francis Bacon`s theory of psychology. However, it wasn’t until the middle of the eighteenth century that the epistemological theory of rhetoric arose. Which focused on mental faculties to persuade the elocution movement. This type focused on delivery and lasted through the nineteenth century.

Rhetoric today is not quite the rhetoric Aristotle had intended. In modern society rhetoric has taken a turn. Rhetoric now is thought of a form of political language. According to the “Encyclopdia of Rhetoirc,” this definition had many shifts some of which being the shift from argument to language, from the consumer to the speaker, from something symbolic to something oral (Solane, 2006). Recently the definitions of rhetoric has slowly been emerging in the educational system and into society. Rhetoric has increased in popularity.

The evolution of rhetoric shows how drastically society had changed over time. In the ancient times, rhetoric recognized that disagreeing amongst one another was natural because everyone has different opinions and thought process. Rhetoric back then offered a way to deal with disagreements in a polite way. Today however, rhetoric is given a frowned upon name because of its associations with disagreement. In today’s world “disagreement” has a negative connotation in society. In modern time now, it is used as a means to go against disagreement.

Reference

1. Herrick, J. A. (2018). The history and theory of rhetoric: an introduction (6th). New York; London: Routledge Taylor et Francis Group.
2. Eidenmuller, M. E. (n.d.). Scholarly Definitions of Rhetoric.
3. McKay, K. (2018, November 3). Classical Rhetoric: A Brief History.
4. Noll, M. A. (2016). In the beginning was the word: the Bible in American public life, 1492-1783. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Mckeon, R. (1942). Rhetoric in the Middle Ages. Speculum, 17(1), 1–32. doi: 10.2307/2856603
6. Nordquist, R. (2019, March 16). Bacon, Locke, Campbell, and Blair Pioneered Enlightenment Rhetoric.
7. Bhusari, A., & Bhusari, A. (2017, September 2). Akanksha Bhusari’s RCL Blog.

Dwight Eisenhower was the 34th president of the United States, he served two terms as a Republican president from 1952-1960. During his first term as president, he looked into fixing relations with the Korean peninsula and ending the Korean War. Also, during his first term, he worked hard to achieve peace with the soviet union and strengthening NATO. During his second term as president, he continued to work against communist aggression. Overall, as president, he was a very well received president. Dwight as a person was a hard worker, very religious and was the supreme commander of the Army during the second world war. The world at the time of his presidency was very tense and war-ridden. The speech was meant for the people of the United States and Dwight D. Eisenhower used ethos, pathos, logos, and other literary devices to convey his message of, strength, growth, and peace during his time of presidency.

Mr. Eisenhower used pathos to convey his message of strength, growth, and peace during his time of presidency. The first time he uses this is at the beginning of his speech when he addresses the new president and like many other presidents wish him good luck. Specifically, Mr. Eisenhower said, “Like every other — Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all (AmericanRhetoric).” This appeals to the audience’s sense of emotion because he is being fair and wish for a great presidency for John F. Kendey (met museum) which the audience interpreted as a feeling of higher emotions. Another time he uses pathos in his address is when he talks about the free government of the United States and the basic principles our country was founded on. While talking about this he said, “ To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension, or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt, both at home and abroad. (American Rhetoric).” He appeals to our emotions because he is talking about our beliefs which make people think about fairness and equality due to that being what this country was founded on. He also uses words like strive, unworthy and arrogance to convey logos because those words have connotations of feelings. One of the last times Mr. Eisenhower uses pathos in his address is when he is talking about war and the destruction it causes. He said, “As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war, as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years, I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight (American Rhetoric).” This ties to our emotions because he uses words like sadness, painfully and destroys which makes the audience think about quite negative things.

Mr.Eisenhower also uses logos to convey his message of strength, growth, and peace during his farewell address. While he is talking about global threats that the united states face and the peace the united states keeps he says, “ To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment. (American Rhetoric). This is logos because it lends itself to rational reasoning by him explaining not to use emotion to make crazy decisions and he is thinking in a bipartisan way to keep increasing the quality of life for Americans. Another time he uses logos in his address was when he was talking about keeping peace and our military. He said, “ A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction (American Rhetoric). His statement backs the ideals of logos because he is using an authoritative voice during the speech at this time and he is also using reasoning because if we have a large strong military we will likely to maintain peace. Finally, Mr.Eisenhower uses logos in his speech when talking about scientific advances. He said, “ Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite (American Rhetoric). This conveys logos because he is thinking that there are two sides to everything so you have to look at the positive and the negatives which are logical reasoning.

Mr. Eisenhower also uses Ethos quite frequently to convey his message of strength and growth during his presidency. He uses this quite frequently because he was just president so he is very authoritative and competent. First, he uses ethos when talking about presidential relationships with Congress. He said, “ our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the nation. My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and finally to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years (American Rhetoric). This is a perfect example to ethos because he is showing trustworthiness, credibility, and reliability when he says that he is been a part of a highly accredited government agency for eight years. He also uses ethos during his speech when he introduces himself. He said, “ Three days from now, after a half-century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in a traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor ( American Rhetoric).” This is another clear example of ethos because he gives us his credibility which is serving our country for half a century. Next, he uses ethos when talking about merging new things that came about during his presidency with past things. He said, “ It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system — ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society (American rhetoric).” This is ethos because he is being competent and fair by saying it’s everyone’s responsibility to evolve with the everchanging times. Finally, he uses ethos when closing his speech. He said, “ You and I, my fellow citizens, need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nations’ great goals (American Rhetoric).” This is ethos because he is talking as a credible person who really understands what the principles of the nation are.

Mr. Eisenhower also uses Anaphora in his address to convey his message of strength, growth, and peace during his presidency. “Anaphora in writing or speech is the deliberate repetition of the first part of the sentence in order to achieve an artistic effect (literarydevices.net).” He uses this throughout the whole address especially when he said, ‘It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system–ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.’ He also said, ‘Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time.’ He is using Anaphora because Eisenhower repeats the words ‘balance’ and ‘peace’ throughout the entirety of his speech to make his opinions and desires clear (Prezi).

Mr. Eisenhower used logos, Pathos, Ethos, and Anaphora during his address to convey his message of strength, power, and hope during his presidency. These devices help convey the message because they create just the right amount of emotional, logical and competent appeal. This is very important in speeches because it leaves no stones unturned meaning everything the audience looks for is answered. Mr. Eisenhower clearly has more ethos in his speech because it being his Farewell address means that he was just a present and usually a president is very competent. The speech was received very well and created a sense of peace during a very volatile time in American. Because of Mr. Eisenhower’s use logos, pathos, ethos, and Anaphora his farewell address was very successful and has become one of the greatest speeches of all time.

Works cited

1. “Anaphora – Examples, and Definition of Anaphora.” Literary Devices, Literary Devices, 1 Nov. 2018, literarydevices.net/anaphora/.
2. ‘Dwight D. Eisenhower.’ Britannica Academic, Encyclopædia Britannica, 12 Oct. 2018. academic-eb-xaaa.orc.scoolaid.net/levels/collegiate/article/Dwight-D-Eisenhower/32159. Accessed 20 Dec. 2018.
3. Eidenmuller, Michael E. Top 100 Speeches of the 20th Century – American Rhetoric, www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/dwightdeisenhowerfarewell.html.
4. Flood, Brittany. “Farewell Address by Dwight D. Eisenhower.” Prezi.com, 8 Jan. 2014, prezi.com/ow-7cexntjrl/farewell-address-by-dwight-d-eisenhower/.

When asking oneself what exactly a “rhetorical situation” is, what tends to come to your curious mind? I didn`t know either. But an easier way to understand, and grasp the concept is to first look at rhetorical analysis. A simplistic way of putting it is by giving an example, first impressions. Have you ever walked into any of your classes the very first day of classes and as you look at your professor, you analyze them from head to toe and make an unconscious judgment as to whether they`ll be “cool” and “lenient” or “mean” and “tough”? I know I have, countless times. It has been previously argued by Laura Bolin Carrol in her article “Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Step Toward Rhetorical Analysis,” that this is normal and quite common. Instead of writing your own questions to ask yourself about that professor, you made a somewhat accurate decision about them. By doing so, you`ve made a snap judgment, thus meaning you`ve analyzed. When looking at a rhetorical situation, the rhetorical analysis that you make without noticing comes together when applying this to outside texts. I will do so by analyzing the Face It Foundation by identifying the exigence, audience, and constraints stated as the three parts to a rhetorical situation by Lloyd F. Bitzer, and apply through using artistic proofs, particularly ethos.

Those elements begin to intermingle and determine which type of argument will serve be the most efficient way to attract a specific audience, and under certain circumstances. As Aristotle also described it, the rhetorical situation. When researching organizations and their rhetorical situation. The Face It Foundation caught my eye. Granted I lost my cousin in August of 2015 who suffer from depression and committed suicide. The Face It Foundation is an organization that was founded in 2009 with the goal of helping men understand and overcome mental illnesses and reduce suicide rates amongst men. Through support groups, one-on-one peer support, outreach events, public education, and training for health professionals in mental health; this foundation appeals to ethos as its persuasive tool. In analyzing the Face It Foundation’s approach, it becomes evident that their persuasive strategies extend beyond ethos alone that effectively convey their message and resonate with their target audience.

The exigence in this organization is the lack of knowledge our nation has when it comes to men`s mental health in contrast to women`s mental health. The organization was founded by two men who have experienced first-hand this lack of knowledge. Reaching out to an audience of men who either have or know someone who has a mental illness shows their dedication to the cause that they are advocating for it. The main message that the Face It Foundation sends is that men who are battling mental illnesses are not alone and do not have to battle it by their lonely.

The audience that this organization can influence by disclosure is those who have loved ones, or who are mentally ill themselves. By including success stories on their website, Face It allows men to read and see that they are not the only ones who can be affected by mental illnesses and learn to cope and not let it determine where they end up in life. By offering support groups from mental health professionals and peer support, Face It, helps to break down the illusion of aloneness. In an informal setting that feels more like a hangout than a therapy session, the support from those who understand and not anyone who is being “paid to hear your problems” allows these men to become comfortable and want to put an end to these gender roles and norms that were placed upon them from the beginning of time.

Bitzer stated that “standard sources of constraints include beliefs, attitudes, documents, facts, traditions, images, interests, motives, and likes, “The constraints that the Face It Foundation places are these many success stories, peer support, continuity, free-of-charge services, and reassurance. Knowing that by placing these many stories, it allows the author to gain the power to try and constrain the decisions and actions that these men and families make. Having peer support allows the waned audience to know that there are many other men who have and are going through the same adjustments to their mental health disorders and there is no need to be ashamed in any fashion. Having continuity helps bring an abundance of light to their organization because of the credibility that it also brings. Being a credible organization would be able to draw the attention of men worldwide and hopefully enlighten those who are not mentally ill in any sort, to want to go out and further their education on this silent crisis instead of continuing the cycle of ignorance.

A recent study by Crespo et al. (2014) found that education reduces the likeliness of certain mental disorders and improves memory. Also, using information from European countries, it was found that additional seeking of knowledge has positive effects on the mental health of men, which is the goal. Those who are mentally ill are typically based in a box that they cannot escape from. These stereotypes and labels are so discriminatory that they define the person and deny them individuality. The consequences of these discriminatory comments and slurs can typically stigmatize people further, leading to self-stigmatization; internalizing these negative stereotypes makes them scared to seek the needed medical attention and even their sense of belongingness.

In conclusion, Bitzer`s contribution to the rhetorical situation has proven to be effective through many organizations and how they appeal to the outside world. Having provided the three main components; exigence, audience, and constraints allowed him to brand an active host of change, utilitarian and very compelling. To support his initial claims that rhetoric is situational, Bitzer would go into a voice seen as a primitive language that sprung from tangible needs within that specific situation text. The Face It Foundation took notes from Bitzer when making the content withheld on their organization`s website by using those main three components of the rhetorical situation by clearly stating and identifying its exigence, audience, and constraints. Also, using the artistic roofs that as students we have analyzed, used, and identified; in the Face It Foundation specifically, their usage of ethos.

Works Cited

1. Speaking Engagements. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.faceitfoundation.org/supportofferings/speaking-engagements/.
2. Education: Mental Health America. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.mhanational.org/education.
3. Mental Health Stigma | Articles. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.bap.org.uk/articles/mentalhealth-stigma/
4. Sutton, G. (2013). Rhetorical Analysis: Lloyd F. Bitzer’s The Rhetorical Situation. Munich, Germany: GRIN Verlag.
5. Carroll, Laura. “Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps toward Rhetorical Analysis.” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing. Lowe, Charles and Pavel Zemliansky. Parlor Press 45-58. Print.

The act of persuasion is an ancient and delicate balance of art and science. Persuasion, in simple terms, is to coax someone through subtle techniques in order to change their beliefs, intentions or decisions. To persuade someone is to convince them to act, think or believe in a certain way that you think is best. Persuasion is not only universal disregarding all forms of gender, age, linguistic and cultural barriers, but also omnipresent. Examples of persuasion can be seen from an infant trying to express their needs to its caretaker to a presidential candidate persuading the citizens during an election campaign. The need for persuasion and it’s indisputable power were so promising that it evolved into a set of principles of applicable theology known as rhetoric.

Rhetoric, also known as the art of persuasion, is defined as ‘the principles of training communicators—those seeking to persuade or inform.’ (Britannica). The origin of rhetoric dates back to 2500 years ago in Ancient Greece where this conscientious art was of paramount importance and was closely linked to the public, private and political lives of the people- both powerful and ordinary. Rhetoric emerged at a time where philosophy and politics were deeply intertwined and soon became the linchpin of classical education. It was not only considered as an effective tool but also a necessary skill that needed to be studied and taught by the wealthy and the powerful to be used in courts and public speaking to sway the common people.

Rhetoric soon manifested itself into various forms of literature such as poetry, speeches, plays, etc. Perhaps, one the earliest and most significant treatise of the fundamental doctrines of rhetorics was Aristotle’s Ars Rhetorica which explains persuading techniques in comprehensive detail. At the very beginning of his treatise, Aristotle states that rhetoric and dialectic (logic) share a connection, in the sense that they are both within the awareness of all men and do not require any special knowledge to grasp its principles and functions. It is interesting to point out that, throughout his books, Aristotle seemed to always address the ‘men’ of his period. This was because it was generally the men that dominated the political and legal spheres of life and bore the privilege of making important decisions that affected the general public such as having the right to vote.

Nonetheless, Ars Rhetoria was and continues to be an important compilation and classification of the art of persuasion. Moreover, it is divided into three books delving into matters about the methods of persuasion, in-depth analysis of each of the aforementioned methods and lexis and presentation. In his books, he identifies three main techniques of persuasion that still prove to be the leading strategies: logos, pathos, and ethos. Logos is a technique dealing with matters based on reason and sound judgment. It demands evidence over emotions, information over insight and appeals to the ethics of knowledge, integrity and, reliability. In other words, the power of logos is in its speech itself, devoid of any external influence on the content of the argument. Moreover, it assumes that its audiences have a good intellectual capability and moral capacity to be able to come to a logical conclusion if they were to be presented with all the facts and reasons clearly and impartially. This can be achieved through analogies, examples, enthymeme and, syllogism. Analogies and examples are similarities drawn from real-life situations while enthymeme and syllogism are based on apparent facts that are globally accepted.

Aristotle further solidifies the previously mentioned connection between rhetoric and dialectic by claiming that example and enthymeme is the rhetorical version of dialectic’s induction and syllogism. Examples of logos are found in literature such as Shakespeare’s Othello and in present-day circumstances like a business organization improving its quality and quantity based statistics, data and modern research. Pathos, however, appeals to human emotions and sentimentality. This strategy requires an acute awareness of the audience’s emotional intelligence so that various techniques can be deployed to skillfully manipulate them into a desired emotional state. It aims to influence the listeners emotionally, often giving little importance to, or completely disregarding factual evidence.

Aristotle also explains when and how to spark the desired emotions by paying attention to factors like the emotional state of the audience, specific people and circumstances that trigger these emotional responses. Literary examples include Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice while modern-day examples include advertisements that appeal to emotions of pity and love such as orphanages and adoption centers encouraging people to adopt children. Ethos draws its persuasive quality from the charisma or the character of the speaker. When the public holds a good opinion of the speaker in terms of honor, integrity, prestige, and position, they are more willing to listen and easily persuaded by the speaker’s judgment.

Literary examples include Harper Lee’s To Kill A Mocking Bird while modern-day use of the strategy includes involvement of professionals and experts with a credible background by scientific or historical documentaries to endorse the authenticity of their information. Persuasive types and strategies have evolved over the years, branching into wider and more nuanced forms such as repetition, cause, and effect, comparing and contrasting, imagery, antithesis, rhetorical question, anacoluthon, chiasmus, metaphor, hyperbole, metonymy and much more.

In addition to the strategies, Aristotle also lays out three different types of persuasive speeches and the appropriate time to use them namely: forensic, epideictic and deliberative. Forensic speeches seek to blame or defend a case and are mainly seen in courtrooms. This kind of speech deals with past behaviors and actions. Epideictic rhetoric is ceremonial, often involving a display of oratory skill with the intent to raise someone’s honor through excessive praise or tarnish it through exaggerated criticism and the best time to use it is at the present. Deliberative speaks of the future and involves the speaker either persuading the public or dissuading them with a goal in mind. It is, therefore, evident that along with strategies and techniques, one often has to be aware of the kind of language and type of oratory is in accordance with the situation and time.

American instrumentalist Frank Zappa once said, “Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible”. Zappa is stating that if a person does not stray off the beaten path, there will never be progression. Progress is a movement towards an improved state, and it is a necessary component of development. In his TED Talk, ‘Is the World Getting Better or Worse? A Look at the Numbers’, Steven Pinker uses various rhetorical appeals such as pathos, logos, and ethos to persuade the audience that the world is making progress.

Pinker uses the rhetorical appeal of pathos to capitalize on the emotions of the audience. Throughout his speech, Pinker employs humor to grab the audience’s attention and relate to them. An example of this is in the introduction of his speech when he mentions how 2016 was called the “Worst. Year. Ever.” because of things like shootings, inequality, and pollution. He then followed it by saying “Until 2017 claimed that record”, making the audience laugh and lifting the mood. By being humorous, he gains the sympathy of the audience in a way. Pinker further resonates with the audience when he states that he has found that “intellectuals hate progress”, which causes them to laugh once again, increasing the audience’s positive feedback and laughter. He is also self-deprecating when speaking on this matter because he is a high-level intellectual, connecting himself back to the audience. On the contrary, he also recounts various facts and statistics in his presentation.

Furthermore, Pinker also incorporates the rhetorical device logos in his speech. Logos is used to convince the audience by utilizing logic or reason. For example, one such fact is that 90% of the world’s population under the age of 25 can read and write, which differs from 30 years ago. To further explain how the world has progressed, graphs, figures, and images are used throughout his argument. He speaks about the world today versus 30 years ago, comparing the numbers of wars, autocracies, extreme poverty, and nuclear arms and how numbers have decreased, showing the betterment of the world. Moreover, Pinker reveals that in 86% of the world’s countries, happiness has increased in the past number of years. This is not because of faith or optimism but is just a fact of human history. Additionally, he uses accredited sources for the visual aids that he provides in his informational slides such as ‘Our World in Data’, based on Lopez and Holle; NOAA. This graph is exhibiting the number of lightning strike deaths in the United States from 1900 to 2015, showing a massive decline in numbers. Pinker uses logos prominently because numbers hold power, and he is using truth to fight misconceptions, and although he uses official sources, he can also be considered trustworthy in his own work.

Lastly, Pinker uses ethos to persuade the audience the world is progressing. Ethos is used to persuade the audience of the author’s character, and Pinker bolsters credibility for many reasons. Firstly, he is currently a Johnstone Professor of Psychology at Harvard University and has also taught at Stanford and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Secondly, he has written several books throughout his career, his most recent one being ‘Enlightenment Now’. In this book, Pinker describes how the values of the Enlightenment, science, reason, humanism, and progress keep improving our world, making it a better place every day, despite the negative news. However, some individuals were outraged by the book and his views on progress. Thirdly, he is an acclaimed individual by being an elected member of the National Academy of Sciences, a two-time Pulitzer Prize finalist, a recipient of several honorary doctorates, and Time’s ‘100 Most Influential People in the World Today’. He also frequently writes for The New York Times, The Guardian, and other publications. Likewise, Pinker’s command of language also makes him a credible source to be speaking on this topic. Throughout his address, he uses an extensive vocabulary to enhance his speech while also making sure to say it in a way that everyday people will understand. One example is when Pinker says, “Most academics and pundits would rather have their surgery with anesthesia than without”. He uses words that most people would know and synonyms of those words.

Steven Pinker includes rhetorical appeals – pathos, logos, and ethos – in order to engage his listeners in a way that will allow his message to be both memorable and meaningful. By engaging with their emotions with the use of pathos, supporting and strengthening his claims with logos, and building his personal credibility with ethos, Pinker ensures that his listeners are engrossed in the significance of his ideas. The incorporation of his rhetorical appeals confirms that his listeners will leave having fully contemplated the information he presented with an understanding of the deeper meanings and importance that Pinker hoped to convey.

Works Cited

1. Pinker, Steven. ‘Is the World Getting Better or Worse? A Look at the Numbers’. TED, Apr. 2018, http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_is_the_world_getting_better_or_worse_a_look_at_the_numbers?language=en Accessed 10 September 2019.
2. Zappa, Frank. ‘Frank Zappa Quotes’ (Author of ‘The Real Frank Zappa Book’). Goodreads, 2019, www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/22302.Frank_Zappa Accessed 10 September 2019.

According to the literature, the genre of letter writing is non-fiction, narrative, and deliberative. In the letters rhetorically realism is expressed. The purpose of rhetorical analysis in letters is to express the literary realism in the writing that it has an impact on society. It also depicts and reflects the trends in society. The context of the body of the letter is contrary because the Linda situation is based on Young Adult and Women’s Fiction whereas Arm Farewell is based on Literary Realism. One letter shows the negative side because it starts with stress whereas the other letter shows the positive side that starts with happiness and gratification. Bitzer’s model is employed for analysis and pragmatic and rhetorical implications are drawn. Rhetorically, the message expressed is to be courageous, fearless, and self-defeating, while it seems a step forward for women who have had abortions to be able to disassociate shame from their actions, the message may be perceived as negative to someone. A Farewell to Arms focuses on several contradictory themes: war and love, fear and courage, redefining gender roles, and falling in love with each other.

The rhetorical criticism is why Linda wants to go for an abortion. The explicit argument is that abortion is racist based. In racist ideology, this is a direct result of historical colonial ideas that dehumanized blacks on account of their ‘inability to have rational thought’. These arguments have been justifications for slavery, discrimination, and general oppression.

This above argument fails to address what truly plagues minority communities. America has stories in the past with eugenics and genocide; there is no conspiracy to make black Americans get abortions. Rather abortions are the result of major socio-economic problems that cause people to be unable to care for the child they are bearing. If you want to end abortions focus on fixing the major economic issues which plague minority communities including but not limited to health care, food, education, work, policing, wealth inequality, gentrification, etc. Planned Parenthood is dedicated to “the revolutionary idea that women should have the information and care they need to live strong, healthy lives and fulfill their dreams, no ceilings, and no limits. Pro-abortion doesn’t exist because it is not a hobby though it is a serious medical procedure. People get abortions because they have real reasons to get an abortion. Most “pro-life” indicates that one cares for the social condition of children who are born. Unless you are willing to increase the support given to children, don’t call yourself “pro-life”, call what you are “pro-birth” If someone believes that abortion is murder, talk of the reproductive freedom of the mother is not going to carry much weight, nobody has the right to murder another person. Supporters of abortion rights don’t say “No, this is one case where murder is completely justified”. Rather, they say Fetus is not a person, so abortion is not murder.

The letter interacts with the second artifact in a way that the minority communities use to suffer from abortion likewise America gets weakened and loses greatness when they confuse their patriotism with tribal rivalries. As the artifact is based on real human life scenarios through which rhetorical analysis shows that literary art is based on realism? The differences lie where the lady wants to go for abortion so she is killing humanity whereas the war hero spent his complete life saving the lives of Americans and he worked for humanity. The second artifact is full of devotion to the country and the patriotism that has made him so satisfied and happy at the end of his life whereas the lady in her teenage if gets an abortion will get deep into dissatisfaction as well as put into stress that will have an impact on her health. He lived his life and ended it with pride whereas the lady in the teenage is filled with fear and low self-esteem. Rhetorical Criticism is when the writer’s point is to highlight the societal concerns that have an impact on the somehow positively or negatively. One rhetoric is based on fear while the other is based on love. So both the letters are moving contrary. The rhetorical situation here is that the war hero spent his whole life away from his family and he feels satisfied that he is blessed that what he has got owes back to his country whereas the friend of the lady is trying to make her realize and show her the optimistic side of life that conceiving a baby is valuable gift. The constraints are that the lady has the life fullest to live and a baby’s responsibility might hold her back from enjoying her life whereas the war hero also served the country as a responsible civilian. In the end, the rhetorical analysis depends on spreading love and fear, selflessness, devotion, patriotism, self-esteem, and humanity. The sacrifices made by the war heroes make them save humanity and the message the writer wants to give here is to live for others selflessly without fear and with love. The war hero’s selfless sacrifices make them the hero in the eyes of everyone and the writers want to convey that violence should be ended based on tribal rivalries and save humanity that will give you superiority hereafter. Child destruction is the crime of killing an unborn but viable fetus; that is a child ‘capable of being born alive’ before it has a separate existence. Both war and abortion involve the taking of human life and both lead to destruction but in the case of war, it is justified for the protection of the country and the innocent civilians. A rhetorical situation is that instead of killing the innocent for no reason it is better to ‘live for something rather than dying for nothing’.

Persuasion is the art of influencing people’s attitudes and behaviors either through speech or action. In today’s world, persuasion is everywhere and any individual can easily come into contact with it daily. For example, a mother cajoling her child to wake up for school, a CEO executive urging his colleagues to concentrate on an important meeting, or a son convincing his father to buy him a new car. Most of the time persuasion is seen as advantageous and there are fruitful results for both sides, however sometimes, instead of a gentle coax in a certain direction, individuals use brute force and manipulation to get what they want. One of the most important uses of persuasion is paralanguage. Paralanguage is not what is said, but rather how it is said, it includes components of non-verbal communication such as the volume and speed of voice, intonation, tone, pronunciation, facial expression, and so on. Occasionally, paralanguage can be more effective in persuasion than the language itself, however, the language in persuasion is the focal point of this essay (Cook 2012, p.226-7).

Rhetoric is the art of persuasive speaking and it can be traced back to, at least, the fourth century BC, when it is first believed to have begun in the civilization of ancient Greece and ancient Rome. There it was used to teach individuals how to formulate and carry out a compelling and plausible case for themselves, even in everyday conversation. The Greeks and Romans did not regard the art of rhetoric as a trait that anyone can be born with or receive through genetics, which is why they believed that it should be taught. The famous philosopher Aristotle saw rhetoric as a very helpful way of understanding the truth for the audience, therefore he wrote; The Art of Rhetoric, in the fourth century BC (Cook, 2012, p.232-6). While scholar Brian Vickers (1998), among other scholars, argued that the enthusiastic demand for studying rhetoric in the early centuries first occurred because of the emergence of democracy in Athens. Democracy for the Athenian men, who had to be able to persuade the rest of the country, to vote against or for, any kind of legislation (McKay and McKay, 2018). Hence, it can be understood that rhetoric and democracy have a connection. Although classical rhetoric has been around for centuries and there have been a few changes, it remains basically the same in modern times.

To be a successful orator, there are certain important rhetoric styles and strategies that should be used wherever possible. One of the styles is the rhetorical question, which is a question asked without the expectation of a reply, to emphasize a point or just for effect. Moreover, sometimes the author or speaker who asked the rhetorical question would answer it themselves (Literary Devices, 2019). Another style would be the rhetorical triplet, which is three continuous, parallel sentences that are added to intensify the upcoming climax (Cook, 2012, p.235). Aristotle’s ‘The Art of Rhetoric’, which was mentioned above, contains three strategies used in persuasion. Logos, the first strategy, is persuasion based on logic and reasoning, it gives individuals a chance to arrive at a decision using their intellect. For example, students research each university before making an intellectual judgment on which one is the best, moreover, individuals also use statistical facts, graphs, data charts, and so on to reach smart conclusions. The second strategy, pathos, is persuasion based on emotional and psychological sensibilities, it is directed mainly to the senses and therefore appeals to the passion and empathy of individuals. For instance, individuals raising money for the ability to provide clean water to people who are otherwise unable to access it would share stories of the pain and suffering said people are going through because individuals will only contribute if they understand and sympathize with the situation. Finally, the last strategy, ethos, is persuasion based on the integrity and credibility of the author or speaker, who they are as a person, what they are saying, and how they say it, are all factors that are taken into consideration. For example, when a school is looking to employ a new teacher, they will be persuaded to hire the teacher with the most qualifications and experience, however, if the students of that school were to choose their teacher, they would choose someone fun, kind and most importantly, someone they can trust. Both groups are analyzing the new teacher based on who he or she is, but each is persuaded by different kinds of credentials.

Abstract

In this paper, we try to look at Trump’s type of leadership in taking travel ban policies. The travel ban itself is a controversial policy where there is an inconsistency between Trump’s campaign and the policies he applies now. In this paper, we also examine the reason Trump chose that decision and took another view regarding the existence of immigrants. Immigrants who are considered a problem for America turned out to have an important role in the American economy.

Introduction

The travel ban policy is one of the policies that matter in 2017. The policy was introduced by President Donald Trump after the inauguration. The policy contains a ban on entering the United States for Iran, Libya, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, North Korea, and Venezuela. However, the focus of this paper is to focus more on entry restrictions for Iran, Libya, Yemen, Syria, and Somalia.

The entry ban policy is intended for immigrants, with the aim of warding off people who are considered dangerous to the United States. Apparently, the plan to enact a ban on entry into the United States was announced by Trump during his campaign period where the focus was on residents from Muslim countries. Then after being sworn in, Trump realized it by submitting a ban on entry policy (Ban 1.0 Travel Policy) to the Supreme Court but was refused. After that, Trump revamped the blacklist of immigrants, and Iraq was excluded from the list of countries banned from entering the United States.

Then, the Ban Travel policy was formalized by the Supreme Court. However, a few moments after the enactment of the travel ban policy reaped a lot of criticism from various parties. However, Trump seems to be closing his ears on that, because according to Trump, travel tires are the highest level of security. Then, in September 2017, Trump issued a new form of travel tire, namely Ban 3.0 Travel where there was an additional list of countries subject to US entry bans, namely North Korea and Venezuela.

Historically, the United States was a ‘state-nation’ where initially the United States was inhabited by immigrants who came from other countries, this was what made public anger about Donald Trump’s policies. The travel ban policy can be said to be related to the fundamental reasons of US policy, namely security above all due to the 9/11 incident in 2001. Therefore, Trump argues that the travel ban policy is reasonable because it is part of the United States’ efforts to suppress terrorist networks that try to threaten US national security, plus Trump really echoes America’s First.

Theoretical framework

Realism is a perspective found in the study of International Relations. The most realistic approach deals with war and security where it also relates to power and the military in it. The realism approach develops and bases the idea that ‘man is evil’. According to Hobbes, human has 3 factors to dispute. There is a nature of competition, afraid, and will of prosperity (Fukuyama, 2011). The main actor in the realism approach is the state as an individual who will not cooperate with other actors without any specific goals and the state will always try to increase its power. Realism is present as a mainstream approach to international relations due to the imperfection of idealist approaches. The basic views or assumptions from the perspective of realism include:

1. Pessimistic about the nature of humans who tend to do good. This perspective believes that humans are selfish, evil, ambitious to rule, cause war, and difficult to work together.
2. Being skeptical (not caring) about the progress of international politics and domestic politics.
3. Believing that the international system is anarchic in nature where there is no supreme power over the state and conflictual relationships. Conflict can only be resolved by war.
4. Concerning national interests and upholding national security.

Realists place national security as a priority or main focus in the perspective of realism. In the realist view, military security and strategic issues belong to the high politics category. Whereas the economy and social issues according to realists are only ordinary things and are classified as low politics. Based on the realist perspective there are 3S principles in it. First, only countries can help themselves, this is called self-help. Then the second is statism, namely the state tries to maintain the status quo and the third, survival is how the state survives in an international system of anarchy.

Realism focuses its analysis on power and autonomy in international interactions and there is no harmony between countries so the concept of self-help here is very important for a country. As the main actor, the state is obliged to defend its national interests. Countries in this context are assumed to be single and rational entities. The point is that in the state order, differences in views are resolved to produce one vote. While the state is considered rational because the state has been able to calculate how to achieve its interests to the maximum extent possible. Because Statism shows that the state will remain the basic unit in making policy loyalty because it involves competition for security and a strong identity and shows who the country is in the eyes of the world (Ken Booth, 2014).

Realists also usually focus their attention on the potential conflicts that exist between state actors in order to pay attention to or maintain international stability, anticipate the possibility of failure to safeguard stability, take into account the benefits of coercive action as a way to resolve disputes and provide protection against violations region. Therefore, power is a key concept in this regard. The normative basis of realism is national security and state survival. All countries must pursue their own national interests and no other government can be expected by countries other than their own.

Analysis

United States Global Policy regarding travel tires is a controversial policy. Trump’s discrepancy occurred during the campaign period with his policy when he served as the 45th American President. Judging from the individual sources aspect, President Trump’s leadership is included in the active-positive category where Trump’s orientation is the result. There are several presidents besides Trump who are active-positive types of leadership too. They are Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter. But Trump is different, he is far more focused on results than the previous president and the slogan of his ambition is ‘Make America Great Again’.

A psychological journal published online by St. Johns University explained that Trump is an ambitious, brave, and impulsive person (Immelman, 2017). This is true and we can review the policies that Trump issued up to now. Almost all of its policies are unpredictable and many are opposed by the international community. Starting from the transfer of the Israeli capital from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem, the trade war with China, the Mexican wall formation, and other policies.

Difference between Trump and Bush Policy

Then there are significant differences between Trump’s and President Bush’s policies in seeing crime in America, especially regarding terrorism. Trump saw specifically, immigrants who came to America were carriers of problems. They are terrorists, homeless, job seekers in America, drug carriers, criminal criminals, and other troublemakers. Whereas during the Bush administration, terrorists came from any country but there were many framing who stated that they were from the Middle East.

Bush also declared that the terrorists were threats and challenges to national security as well as world security. With this, Bush directs all of his policies in driving away acts of terrorism such as diplomacy, intelligence, financial influence, law enforcement, and everything that is considered a weapon of terrorism (Dina Yulianti, 2017). This shows how bush protectionism has been carried out at that time and is considered to be very capable to dispel activities that are considered terrorism.

Whereas in the era of the trump government, it was seen that those who harmed the security of the United States were more valued by immigrants who entered illegally and were very detrimental to national interests. The reason is that immigrants have a great impact on the stability and security of the economy of the United States, which has declined. For this reason, Trump wants to increase domestic prosperity by providing policies that reduce the presence of refugees or immigrants.

Explanation of Tire Travel Policy with 4P

The United States has a very significant foreign policy direction to obtain or achieve its national interests. American foreign policy can be seen as Power, Peace, Prosperity, and Principle. Of the 4 American interests in its foreign policy, the travel ban policy was issued in order to achieve the prosperity of the United States. Prosperity, in this case, is seen in the United States economy to increase export markets, foreign investment, and international economic benefits. In this policy also, it can be seen through two approaches, namely liberalism and radicalism.

Liberalism sees that prosperity foreign policy is encouraged to strengthen domestic profits in order to increase national prosperity and benefits for the domestic such as a favorable trade balance, strong economic growth, and healthy macro growth. Whereas the theory of radicalism shows the class economy more to capitalists like the United States who have large banks and multinational companies. In this case, prosperity is used to encourage the strength of the economy of the United States and show the importance of prosperity policy in managing national interests that refer to foreign policy (Shodhganga, 1994).

Tire travel is Donald Trump’s policy when viewed through prosperity glasses with a realism perspective. That means that America places the highest priority on national interests in the economy and the prosperity of the American people through the provision of government jobs specifically for its citizens and the protection of the American government in domestic industries. Because immigrants are looking for financial and income sources in the United States and thus can reduce employment in the country. Immigrants are a threat and immigrants are considered rational economic agents who try to do the best from their resources (George Borjas, 2014). Thus the increase in the economic prosperity of domestic citizens can be supported by the travel policy of the tire according to the declared prosperity.

Factors and Reasons for the Ban Travel Policy

Donald Trump as President of the United States carried out his campaign in 2015 concerning the United States’ national security which needs to be improved again given that there are many terror incidents that afflict national security. The president of the republic party stretcher put America First as its main priority in the national security strategy. The shooting or attacks that occurred in the United States added to the list of terror in the country included the shooting of the Boston Marathon, shootings at Fort Lauderdale airports, Chattanooga shootings, and San Bernardino shootings that took place from 2013-2017 (BBC News, 2017).

In Donald Trump’s tweet, emphasizing ‘We need the travel tire as an extra level of safety’, this is also one of the main factors in the Ban Travel policy. This policy has a path until it is passed by the Supreme Court or the Supreme Court. In the US foreign policy-making system, the role of governmental sources is very much needed because it can affect the outcome of the policy. Therefore the decision of the Supreme Court was considered very influential for the results of the policy to be implemented, even though the policy came from individual sources or the president directly.

In January 2017, also called Ban Travel 1.0, there were many criticisms of the rejection of Ban Travel including judges and prosecutors working in government, countries included in Ban Travel were Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. But this was rejected by the Supreme Court and tried again with Ban 2.0 Travel by providing relief to exclude Iraq from countries that were temporarily blocked. In June 2017 the policy was ratified by the Supreme Court and only allowed foreigners from these countries to visit relatives with the relationship of parents, spouses, children, daughter-in-law, or siblings in the United States.

In September 2017 it was called Travel Ban 3.0 from the seven countries, plus Venezuela with restrictions on certain government officials and North Korea in delaying entry as immigrants and not as immigrants. Donald Trump hereby assumes that his policies are similar to those of his predecessor Barack Obama, who banned visas for refugees from Iraq. This executive decision has drawn a wave of protests from US citizens who sees this as a Controversial Issue and Islamophobia.

Pros and Cons of Ban Travel Policy

Every policy issued must have its own pros and cons of the policy, especially the travel ban policy issued by Donald Trump. Trump, a Republican politician, received support from his Republican counterpart. One of them is the Senate from Illinois that the United States should have to protect dangerous people who try to come to this country, not categorize people based on their beliefs, background, or country.

Whereas from the opposition, the Democratic Party stood upright against the travel ban and stated that travel tires were not something to be proud of from the United States, but became something immoral and dangerous. the travel ban is the same as discriminating against Muslims and this is out of the United States Constitution. However, Trump still believes that he has the authority and responsibility to protect Americans because the context is about terror and keeping our country safe.

Critical review

The travel ban policy does not come from the proposal of an American security agency but directly from the American president. When this policy was publicly announced, there was chaos and protests in American society. Many immigrants and refugees who have obtained permission to America must be temporarily detained at the airport. Then Trump set the rules for refugees and the refugees stopped coming to America for four months. Trump’s policy is also followed by another policy, namely, zero tolerance. Like Trump’s previous policies, zero tolerance is controversial as well because in practice there is a separation between parents and children. But overall, Trump managed to reduce immigrants even though his immigration system was not ready at first.

Cons of Trump’s policy, a study by the American Immigration Council opposes the correlation between immigrants and an increase in unemployment. Immigrants who come to America do not significantly increase unemployment in America because they come to take on new roles. These immigrants have different specifications and skills than the original workers. Even the abilities possessed by genuine workers are more qualified because of their better English skills. This means that foreign workers and genuine workers actually walk side by side and fill each other.

Plus workplaces, housing, and education levels between foreign workers and native workers are also different. Trump misjudged the increase in immigrants to America and immediately increased unemployment. On the contrary, immigrants support the American economy through taxes. This was also supported by the University of Saint Louis Jack Strauss’s research on the 2010 census describing cities where the level of immigrants was high and the unemployment rate was lower (American Immigration Council, 2013).

Keep in mind, immigrants who do not meet the requirements of the American Constitution do not receive benefits from the government. The American government only bears the costs of the education of immigrants who come but in the end, the profits from the investment will return to America. Then responding to Trump’s statement that cornered immigrants as a source of problems, it turned out that with immigrants the American workforce did not shrink and the economy grew increasingly American. Trump is also wrong in perceiving that immigrants who are not citizens will benefit America. Precisely if the immigrants are American citizens, their health will be guaranteed and will increase the productivity of the American economy.

Conclusion

The travel ban policy is a policy that aims to secure American prosperity from immigrants. Immigrants to Trump are a threat because they are carriers of problems in America. In line with realism to achieve prosperity, the state must fight in anarchy (survival) and no country helps other countries (self-help).

But there will be a discrepancy between when Trump campaigns and after Trump becomes president. Trump previously declared that he would impose Muslim travel tires and after this travel ban, he stated that his policy was not a Muslim travel ban but to secure America. Then this inconsistency can be answered through individual sources where psychologically, Trump has a tendency to be inconsistent, brave, and results-oriented. In fact, it is not uncommon for Trump to blunder and take significant policy differences from the previous president.

Trump is also considered wrong in assessing immigrants as a source of problems in America. Precisely immigrants in America help the American economy and do not cause an increase in unemployment in America. Trump misinterpreted immigrants as a source of threat and in this case, individual sources were considered very influential in foreign policymaking.

Bibliography

Books:

1. Bigo, D. 2008. The Emergence of a Consensus: Global Terrorism, Global Insecurity, and Global Security. In A.C. d’Appollonia & Reich S. (Eds.), Immigration, Integration, and Security: America and Europein
2. Comparative Perspective (pp. 67-94). Pittsburgh PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
3. Burcihill, Scott, Linklater, Andrew. 2005. “Theories of International Relations”. 3rd Edition. Palgrave Macmillan. Pp.29-53
4. Booth, Ken. 2014. International Relations All That Matters. Great Britain: Hodder & Stoughton.
5. Borjas, George. J. 2014. Immigration Economics. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
6. Fukuyama, F. (2011). The Origins Of Political Order From Prehuman Times to The French Revolution. D&M Publisher: United States of America. Pp 26-48

Journals:

1. Immelman, A. (2017, January). The leadership style of U.S. President Donald J. Trump (Working Paper No. 1.2). Collegeville and St. Joseph, MN: St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict, Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics. Retrieved from Digital Commons website: http://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/psychology_pubs/
2. Yulianti, Dina. 2017. “Perang Global Melawan Terorisme dalam Perspektif Sekuritisasi”. Jurnal ICMES, 1(2), pp.207-229.

Internet Sources:

1. American Immigration Council. 2013. ‘The Economic Blame Game: Immigration and Unemployment’. Accessed on May 7, 2019, from https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/
2. Goodman, Jack. 2017. ‘Why does Trump forbid citizens of seven countries from entering the United States?’. Published by bbc.com on January 31, 2017. Accessed on April 19, 2019, from https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/dunia-38808189.
3. Griffiths, James., Angela & Emily Smith. 2018. ‘What is like in the 7 countries on Trump’s travel ban list’. Published by edition.cnn.com on June 27, 2018. Accessed on April 19, 2019, from: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/27/politics/trump-travel-ban-countries-intl/index .html.
4. Hamedy, Saba. 2018. ‘Everything you need to know about the travel ban: A timeline’. Published by edition.cnn.com on June 26, 2018. Accessed on April 19, 2019, from https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/26/politics/timeline-travel-ban/index.html.
5. Klein, B. (2018). ‘Trump ruling travel calls’ a tremendous victory ‘.’ CNN. Accessed on April 21, 2019, from https://edition.cnn.com/2018
6. Realdonaldtrump. 2017. Twitter status is real McDonald’s. Published by twitter.com on June 3, 2017. Retrieved April 19, 2019, from https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/871143765473406976.
7. Siddiqui, S. (2018). Trump travel ban: what does the supreme court ruling mean? The Guardian. Accessed on April 21, 2019, from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018
8. Shodhganga Research Paper. 1994. American Foreign Policy: Bases and Dynamics Needs of Foreign Policy Today. Accessed on April 21, 2019, from http: //shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/55330/10/10_chapter%202. pdf

Fans have been speculating about Charlie Rose’s net worth since he got sacked by PBS and CBS News over allegations of sexual misconduct. Charlie who has earned the status of a fan favorite thanks to the way he exudes both charm and charisma on the set of The Charlie Rose Show has this rare gift of people skills right from his formative years. His talent came to fore after he was employed by BBC (New York) upon the completion of his university degree, there he was charged with the responsibility of taking charge of certain duties on a freelance basis. The famous television personality’s quick wit as well as zeal to be successful earned him several other shows which include the likes of People and Politics, A Conversation with Jimmy Carter, and of course Bill Moyers Journal which gave him the portfolio of an executive producer. In no time at all, Charlie was employed by KXAS-TV to function as a program manager for one of their shows that later laid the foundation for the advent of The Charlie Rose Show.

Charlie Rose appeared along with Scott Pelley on CBS This Morning and was also featured on CBS Evening News. His talk shows were quite spirited, earning him several awards and accolades. The TV host wears a hat with many feathers which includes some high-profile interviews with big names like Bill Gates, Donald Trump, Barack Obama, Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, and several others. He takes the credit for firing an optimistically heated discussion that sparked between the leaders of Fox and NBC which engendered a reciprocated decline in ad hominem attacks witnessed between Bill O’Reilly and Keith Olbermann on their individual programs. For this write-up, we will explore Charlie Rose’s net worth since his dismissal from PBS and CBS News.

According to reports from celebritynetworth.com, Charlie Rose’s net worth is recorded in excess of $23 million. The television personality’s heydays in the media boosted his wealth to a great extent with an annual of income over $2.5 million which is a culmination of all his earnings from different endeavors.

Given his massive wealth, Charlie Rose is not without investments, especially in the real estate sector. He is known for leaving a lavish lifestyle with several luxurious possessions. His investments in property alone are worth millions of dollars. Apart from sprawling houses and extensive apartments, the TV host is the proud owner of a soybean farm located very close to North Carolina. The farm called Grass Creek Farm spans over 525 acres and comes in handy as a getaway estate for Charlie and his family. His permanent residence is quite luxurious measuring over 5,500 square feet, in addition to a beach house that is always handy in Long Island. The list of Charlie Rose’s landed properties does not end there; there is also this beautiful apartment in New York’s Central Park.

As is the norm for people of great wealth, Charlie Rose’s net worth qualifies him to be part of any prestigious club, and the former CBS host lives up to expectations by joining the coveted Long Island Deepdale Country Club

We would be hundred percent right to surmise that Charlie Rose owes all the digits of his net worth to his 45-year-long career in the media. It was when his spouse landed a lucrative job with BBC that Charlie leveraged the opportunity to earn employment from them on a freelance basis. The ambitious media personality wasted no time in ascending the ladder of success with accolades like the 1976 Peabody Award boosting his image.

Between 1984 to 1990, Charlie Rose functioned as a host for CBS News Nightwatch. However, his big break came with the advent of his own show which quickly gained popularity as The Charlie Rose Show, spanning from 1991 till he was hit by several sexual misconduct accusations from eight different women.

According to trusted sources, Charlie Rose’s net worth got a huge boost from his gig on The Morning with CBS which made him richer by $8 million. Five years down the line, he added additional shows to his portfolio which made him even more affluent.

Important to note that even before he joined CBS as a talk show host, Charlie Rose was an employee of a New York-based bank while holding down a job as a freelancer for BBC. We also need to factor in his weekend gig with WPIX-TV as a reporter.

The essay “Waste” by Wendell Berry, written in 1989, is a powerful and insightful essay in which Berry claims that we are all part of the waste problem; however, some of us are more guilty than others. Manufacturers and businesses have more blame to carry than the average consumer. Through a growing dependence on industries, like the food industry, we significantly hurt the economic system and have caused the source of unemployment. Although Berry makes significant appeals to logos in “Waste,” his appeals to ethos and pathos are what he primarily uses to create his persuasive argument.

Berry uses four principle appeals to the ethos at the beginning of his essay to create a persona and bolster his credibility. He appeals to three personal pieces of evidence and one impersonal one. In his first line, he starts by saying that he is a “country person” (Berry 126). This comment begins to set up a framework for the reader to understand Berry’s persona that will be filled in throughout his essay. By conveying that he is a country person, Berry is implying to the reader that he cares for the land that he lives on and is part of its larger story. He emphasizes this concept when he identifies himself as a farmer who must go out and clear his fields of garbage washed up from the flooded river before he can plant his crops (Berry 126). He continues this idea by placing himself “on the Kentucky River about ten miles from where it makes its entrance into Ohio” (Berry 126). Since he lives there and deals with the pollutants, he is to be trusted that this is a serious issue. Berry also expands his credibility when he shows the irony between the old Iroquois word for the Ohio River (Oyo, which means “beautiful river”) and what it is today (Berry 126). This illustrates that he is knowledgeable through his grasp of language, but more importantly, he also uses it to create a persona that connects him to the land to create the effect that he is stepping back into the past to show the discontinuity between what was reality then and what is now.

Not only does Berry use personal, informal examples to establish his persona, but he also uses statistics in a narrative to support his credibility to speak on the issue of waste. He writes, “In our county, we now have a ‘sanitary landfill’ which daily receives, in addition to our local production, fifty to sixty large truckloads of garbage from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York” (Berry 126). This statistic inside his narrative impresses on his readers the depth of the problem. Trash from localities up to 700 miles away has no better place to go than the middle of Kentucky. The final resting place of the trash is entirely disconnected from the people that created it. From the responsible perspective that Berry is writing from, this system of disposal that affects others first is clearly not the way that human stewardship of the earth is supposed to be.

From appealing to ethos to strengthen his persona and credibility, Berry moves to call his readers to react emotionally through an appeal to pathos. Berry makes use of descriptive lists, identity markers, and colorful language to appeal to pathos to build up emotions in his audience. Berry’s use of descriptive lists is very effective at using the imagery of everyday life to evoke a negative response in his readers. The first instance of this method happens on page 126 where Berry writes,

Moreover, a close inspection of our countryside would reveal, strewn over it from one end to the other, thousands of derelict and worthless automobiles, house trailers, refrigerators, stoves, freezers, washing machines, and dryers; as well as thousands of unregulated dumps in hollows and sink holes, on streambanks and roadsides, filled not only with ‘disposable’ containers but also with broken toasters, television sets, toys of all kinds, furniture, lamps, stereos, radios, scales, coffee makers, mixers, blenders, corn poppers, hair dryers, and microwave ovens. (Berry 126)

By using this common language, Berry is accentuating the wastefulness of our current society. He concludes the previous paragraph with a vital line of the essay: “Much of our waste problem is to be accounted for by the intentional flimsiness and unrepairability of the labor-savers and gadgets that we have become addicted to” (Berry 127). By using a series of common images- perhaps a river, an abandoned lot, or some other place- Berry compels us to remember a time when we saw such brokenness and waste in our own lives. Berry employs the emotions caused by these images to break down some of the barriers and begin to get his readers invested in what he is saying.

Not only does Berry use descriptive lists to connect with his audience through pathos, but he also uses identity markers. Berry connects with his audience personally by identifying with them. On page 127, he refers to himself and the audience as “we Americans, all of us…” (Berry 127). Throughout history and in modern American culture today, there is a profound sense of pride that comes when someone identifies with the United States of America. By identifying something that Berry and his audience have in common, He is uniting everyone on a common ground only to strengthen the effectiveness of his use of colorful language when it comes. He also appeals to the emotional state of victimhood as a kind of identity marker. He writes, “We are all unwilling victims, perhaps; and some of us even are unwilling perpetrators, but we must count ourselves guilty nonetheless” (Berry 127). Victimhood is a powerful emotional state, and humans tend to be very prone to its way of thinking. It can bind very different people together against a person, thing, or system. However, Berry is more nuanced than the stereotype of an environmentalist. He concedes that Americans are not only the victims but also the perpetrators (Berry 127). This apparent contradiction broadens Berry’s argument and keeps the essay away from purely blaming systems out of their control. It also helps make his audience feel responsible for the present situation. If they were just passive victims, there would be nothing they could really do, but being perpetrators, they have the power to do something about the state they are in.

Berry utilizes severe contrast and colorful language to unsettle his audience and persuade them to listen. He writes, “The truth is that we Americans, all of us, have become a kind of human trash, living our lives in the midst of a ubiquitous damned mess of which we are at once the victims and the perpetrators” (Berry 127). The effect of this contrast jars the reader. The vocabulary that Berry uses here is very aggressive, especially when compared to what he has already written in his essay. By stating that all Americans “have become a kind of human trash,” Berry is offending the very core of our patriotic sensibilities (Berry 127). He also uses the contrast of a presupposed image. For Americans, America is the place of beauty. They treasure the song, “America the Beautiful.” For their exceptional land of “spacious skies and amber waves of grain” that they live to be described as a “ubiquitous damned mess” is shocking in the extreme (Berry 127). Another place that Berry uses colorful language to induce emotion is when he writes, “There is no sense and no sanity in objecting to the desecration of the flag while tolerating and justifying and encouraging as a daily business the desecration of the country for which it stands” (Berry 127). Once again Berry appeals to pathos through the identity marker of being patriotic in order to show them something that they are seriously overlooking. By jolting his readers through the use of colorful language, Berry motivates them to pay attention to what he is saying by causing them to feel a sense of shame in order to transition to the true core of his argument.

Berry does make an appeal to logos in his essay; however, in comparison to his earlier arguments, it is a weak one. He follows the basic form of an argument, similar to the pattern of Stasis Theory. In Stasis Theory the author moves through statements of fact, definitions, and evaluations of the issue, argues for a primary cause for the issue, and concludes with a policy that would offer a solution to the issue. In “Waste,” Berry logically moves through a statement of the problem, an examination of its extent, a definition of what the waste is, the cause of the waste, and then an implied way of how the issue can be fixed. One issue that this essay has is that there does appear to be a jump between Berry’s evaluation of the issue and his conclusion of the cause. However, if the essay is read slowly multiple times, it is possible to begin to grasp what Berry is getting at. This is a serious flaw, however, and one that many that are persuaded by his appeals to ethos and pathos will find difficult to understand.

Throughout “Waste,” Wendell Berry appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos in order to formulate his argument. Unfortunately, his appeals to logos are not as strong on the surface as they could be. If Berry were able to expand what he means from the bottom of page 127 to the end, which really holds the powerful implications of his argument, then his argument would be much more persuasive to a broader and newer audience. People who have read Berry before and recognize some of his attitudes and themes might be more persuaded than a new audience. Nevertheless, through his four appeals to ethos to establish a persona and strengthen his credibility, and because of his appeals to the pathos of descriptive lists, identity markers, and colorful language, Berry constructs a well-crafted and persuasive argument.