Читать реферат по английскому: "The Gateway To The Soul Essay Research" Страница 2

(Назад) (Cкачать работу)

Old Policy-Create Empathy to Gain Approval for Justifying a War

How did the President justify a war? It?s simple–gain public support. If the public believes going to war is morally correct (even if they do not know all the facts) the war is universally justified and the President can wash his hands at the expense of public interest. The public makes its determination several ways. In reference to the Gulf crisis, the involvement of the state initiates involvement of the media and the media passes on information to the public and the public makes the decision that justifies of condemns military action. Since the President had already deployed the military he counted on the media to educate the people on the injustice Kuwait had suffered and support his decision to deploy and possibly go to war if need be. Eventually, public thought would be reflected by congressional vote.

Strategy of the State and the Role of the Media

Since information from the media is the central player in this decision it should be examined closely. There are three specific functions of the media during a war. ?Delivering the facts? concept of the media serves three larger purposes for the state. First, the media will be giving information to the people and the people are needed to gain a firm vote in congress. This is not as simple as it appears you must put yourself in the shoes of the President. He has put his political career in jeopardy if he does not gain support (it is election year). If he is forced to withdraw military support after he has deployed US looks like a red-headed step-child in the face of world opinion. So it would follow that large amount of information and many meetings would be conducted before he would take such action based upon information that the public is not privileged to see. The three things he needs from the public in order to gain full support for his actions are: Capture the interest of the voters; promote empathy for Kuwait; and make the public feel that US involvement is necessary to the point of answering polls ect…. The media would ensure that American?s got everything that the White House had to offer including passing on every intercepted electronic impulse that passed from the scene of the potential conflict. Almost every briefing and commentary had at least one thing in common-metaphors.

The Use of Metaphors

The use of metaphors by the state was launched again and again throughout history.

It is nothing new and it serves its purpose well. First, metaphors are a very powerful tool capable of the worst acts imaginable.

?Metaphors can kill. The discourse over whether to go to war in the gulf was a pana-

rama of metaphor. Secretary of State Baker saw Saddam Hussein as ?sitting on our

economic lifeline.? President Bush portrayed him as having a ?stranglehold? on our

economy. General Schwartzkopf characterized the occupation of Kuwait as a ?rape?

that was ongoing.? (Lakoff, 1991)

The Legalists Paradigm-The Bridge to Empathy

It is obvious to see the ?legalistic paradigm? that Walzer discusses in his theory at work here (Walzer, 1977). The idea of course it to gain support of the public and maybe even convince themselves what they are doing is right. Public support is gained by getting them to empathize. Empathy is always bridged by what we hold as common between parties. So the use of metaphors is the bridge that we use to establish that common ground. Metaphors provide us with a view that is not foreign to our understanding and way of life. They assign meaning to our everyday lifestyle by forming together clustered amounts of information and their systems into a short title. For example: when the word rape is mentioned many things come to mind and an emotional response probably accompanies it. When speaking about a war, metaphors are often hurled around like popcorn at a movie theater bulging with teenagers. Metaphors like rape and the like, which threaten by their very nature, cause us to rally and promote action. Metaphors are extremely powerful when used to explain events, especially if reciprocation is in question. According to Lakoff, ?The most natural way to justify a war on moral grounds is to [use a metaphor] (Lakoff, 1991). Many of our current uses of metaphors are a direct result of Carl von Clausewitz view on war.

U.S. Ideology and Foreign Policy

According to, a Prussian General, when the costs of war exceeds the political gains, the war should cease or never be entered. Another one of his points is if at anytime a war would prove beneficial for the state it should be pursued. His ?views on war became dominant in American foreign policy circles during the Vietnam War? (Lakoff, 1991). He has continued to influence us even recently:

?The New York Times, on November 12, 1990, ran a front-page story

announcing that ?a national debate ha[d] begun as to whether the United

States should go to war in the Persian Gulf. The Times described the debate

as defined by Clausewitz?s metaphor on a literal level of understanding and

then the poised the questions: ?What then in the nation?s political objective

in the gulf and what level of sacrifice is it worth???

The emphasis wasn?t directed at the metaphors but at the costs. The influence of metaphors should not be understated. They are an intrinsic element within any strategist?s mind and often

Похожие работы