Give Me The Presidency Or Give Me Death!

Through various artifacts we've explored in our current unit, we have learned the effectiveness of using dichotomies. Patrick Henry used this tactic of persuasion in his letter he wrote to the president. Throughout this document he associates inaction to war with slavery: "There is no retreat but in submission and slavery." This theme of enslavement is weaved throughout the entirety of his letter as he makes constant references to chains and surrendering to tyrannical hands. This fuels the persuasiveness of his last and most popular line: "Give me liberty or give me death!" The dichotomy is so convincing because it oversimplifies the decision of what the president must do: clearly he will not choose death, and so the only choice is liberty. 

Two hundred and thirty three years later, our politicians continue to use this art of persuasion to win votes. In a recent speech given by Senator John McCain, he outlines his promises to combat "evil" if president. In addressing the recent financial crisis, he states he will do more to aid the victims of "this evil form of 21st-century slavery." To claim that Americans are enslaved in debt might be a bit of a stretch, but was ultimately proven effective in swaying his audience to believe he is the better candidate. McCain saying he'll "combat evil" suggests the imagery of a hero fighting the villain. This lends us a sense of trust for McCain and the comfort of protection, precisely what Americans are looking for in this unsteady time of peril. It's only when we dissect these dichotomies and recognize their far fetched nature that we may realize they are not quite as persuasive as we thought they were. 

Fear Controls, Literally

While flipping through the New York Times a few days ago, I came across an article entitled "Never Mind the Logic; Fear May Have an Edge". It discusses the recent financial crisis and through scientific studies, analyzes the individuals response to fear: "Scientists who have studied the brain function have found that the amygdala, the part of the brain that control fear; responds faster than the parts of the brain that handle cognitive function". This explains the power behind fear's motivational force. Since our ability to analyze a situation is second to the panic that sets in when we are afraid, we often respond foolishly to situations out of fright. This was seen recently, when many terrified Americans hurriedly sold their stocks, for fear they would lose money. This led to a domino effect of incompetence in Wall Street that plunged the market into deeper deficit. 

This proves the importance of using appeals that directly correspond to the individual. For when we are emotionally aroused about our own lives, our abilities to deconstruct an argument are temporarily useless. Therefore, in many arguments, the use of ethos and pathos, which may be aimed to directly effect the individual,  are more effective than logos. 

Consequently, it is critical in these fearful times to take a step back and think pragmatically. Before we are impelled to act out of panic, we must examine the practicality of the situation in order to ensure we are not being controlled by fear. 

Fear Used as Political Ploy

Over the past few weeks, one can not seem to escape talk about how the economy is laying in ruins with the recent financial crisis. Families have become consumed with inescapable fear which is reinforced through the media's stunts. Newspaper and television news shows advertise frightening headlines such as: "a present day Great Depression?" and "Financial crisis: whose to blame?" With modern day technology more advanced and popular than ever, the media has become an authority figure in itself. It is American's primary informational source, and just like physical beings, can and has been ruling through the tactics of fear and suspicion. For example, by the media relating the present day crisis to the Great Depression, many are fearful of their future, and thus pulling out their shares in stocks, which only throws the economy into greater deficit. These horrific headlines and parallels to the 1930's stock market crash draw in more viewers. 

In addition, McCain and Obama are using the financial crisis as a tool for their campaigns. Both candidates tell us their definition of whose to blame and why. Thus, they share the political ploy of making us more afraid of our financial future, and telling us whose to blame for this. This manipulates us into thinking they are the solution to our economic ailment.

We must never underestimated the power fear has on the human race, it consumes the individual, warping their judgement, and making them susceptible and blind to corruption. 

The Future of our Nation: Shaped by Faith or Ignorance?

While reading the handout about F.D.R. and the New Deal for homework, I drew some interesting parallels concerning the average voter in the 1930's to present day voters. As we've been discussing in class, the role of the authority figure is noticeably effected in perilous times. During the election between Hoover and F.D.R. in the Great Depression, Americans were looking for a candidate with fresh hope for the future, and more importantly, solutions: "F.D.R. kept popular attention focused on the need for change, rather than on the tougher and riskier question of what kind of change" (The Great Depression and the New Deal 726). F.D.R.'s popular, though ambiguous, campaign for change appealed to voters then for the same reason as Obama's slogan of "Change we can believe in" attracts present day voters. We crave the instant gratification of a better future, as we should. However an evolving problem in society is the fine line between faith that our choice candidate will deliver in his promises, and the ignorance and lack of understanding of what we are voting for. For example, historian and author Rich Shenkman claims that "Americans are ill-prepared to guide the world's most powerful democracy." Shenkman warrants this claim by saying the majority of citizens are uninformed and getting what little information they have about the candidates from 30 second commercials. Shenkman argues that this is an insufficient basis for deciding how we'll vote for too many are buying into the manipulation of biased media coverage. 

     During perilous times we may be tempted to choose the fast fix as opposed to a longer term plan. However in these uncertain times it is critical that the American voter takes the responsibility of educating themselves about the different candidate's policies so they can make an informed decision. For if we don't, it's hard to have much confidence in our democracy.