Post by kaconti38 on Nov 15, 2011 20:07:42 GMT -5
Romney and the Rhetoric of Consensus
Words are powerful tools, especially when used correctly. When those in power have a sufficient mastery of language they also have the potential to bring an entire society together. Miller’s The Crucible illustrates this as Hale’s words unite the community against the alleged threat of witchcraft. The Puritan rhetoric of consensus, as preached by Hale, dictated that witchcraft was among them and that it must be stopped. Parris recognized this and utilized the rhetoric of consensus to try and garner support from the community so that he could remain minister, thus retaining his power.
American politicians today still rely heavily on the rhetoric of consensus, although in a less severe way than the Puritans of the 1600’s. Candidates address the public numerous times before the final ballots are submitted, each and every one of them employing the rhetoric of consensus as they vie for popularity among voters. Countless hours are spent writing and revising their speeches to ensure that the wording of every argument is precise, preserving the current voting base but also gaining new supporters. Those who do this successfully are the few who emerge on top and become the governors, senators, or Presidents of the United States.
The integrity of the use of the rhetoric of consensus in today’s society, however, is sometimes called into question. It is often said of campaigns, especially those for the presidency, that the candidates are simply saying what the public wants to hear to get themselves elected. This exact question has been raised recently regarding 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Previously, Romney has stated that he believes man made pollution was an important contributing factor to global warming. This belief, combined with other factors, left him lacking in the support of conservatives, many of who disagree with that view on climate change. Last week Romney seemed to change his stance, saying now that the causes of global warming are unknown. In this instance he, like Parris, jumps on board with the opinion held by the consensus that he needs to gain support of to acquire and retain power. Due to his manipulation of the rhetoric of consensus, that is, saying what conservatives want to hear without alienating his former supporters, Romney has enjoyed an unsurprising rise in the polls. He now finds himself a front runner of the Republican Party, with many people claiming he is the most “presidential” candidate in the field. This manipulation, although often times effective, diminishes the integrity of candidates and American politics as a whole. This is because once said candidate is elected, they often times do not stick to their word, much like how Parris did just enough for the community to maintain control while still fulfilling his own agenda.
In short, the use of the rhetoric of consensus in order to gain power, observable today through Mitt Romney, is a theme that American society today has borrowed directly from the Puritans portrayed by Miller. It is undoubtedly true that the focus of politics in America has changed a great deal since the 1600’s; although each candidate is required to make their religion known, religious issues no longer take center stage on the campaign trail or during debates. However, many aspects of the old America have withstood the test of time and to be sure, the manipulation of the rhetoric of consensus for personal gain, as Romney seems to be doing today, will outlast even this example and continue to spread throughout politics of the future.
(580 words)
theweek.com/bullpen/column/221341/mitt-romney-is-the-only-adult-in-the-room
Words are powerful tools, especially when used correctly. When those in power have a sufficient mastery of language they also have the potential to bring an entire society together. Miller’s The Crucible illustrates this as Hale’s words unite the community against the alleged threat of witchcraft. The Puritan rhetoric of consensus, as preached by Hale, dictated that witchcraft was among them and that it must be stopped. Parris recognized this and utilized the rhetoric of consensus to try and garner support from the community so that he could remain minister, thus retaining his power.
American politicians today still rely heavily on the rhetoric of consensus, although in a less severe way than the Puritans of the 1600’s. Candidates address the public numerous times before the final ballots are submitted, each and every one of them employing the rhetoric of consensus as they vie for popularity among voters. Countless hours are spent writing and revising their speeches to ensure that the wording of every argument is precise, preserving the current voting base but also gaining new supporters. Those who do this successfully are the few who emerge on top and become the governors, senators, or Presidents of the United States.
The integrity of the use of the rhetoric of consensus in today’s society, however, is sometimes called into question. It is often said of campaigns, especially those for the presidency, that the candidates are simply saying what the public wants to hear to get themselves elected. This exact question has been raised recently regarding 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Previously, Romney has stated that he believes man made pollution was an important contributing factor to global warming. This belief, combined with other factors, left him lacking in the support of conservatives, many of who disagree with that view on climate change. Last week Romney seemed to change his stance, saying now that the causes of global warming are unknown. In this instance he, like Parris, jumps on board with the opinion held by the consensus that he needs to gain support of to acquire and retain power. Due to his manipulation of the rhetoric of consensus, that is, saying what conservatives want to hear without alienating his former supporters, Romney has enjoyed an unsurprising rise in the polls. He now finds himself a front runner of the Republican Party, with many people claiming he is the most “presidential” candidate in the field. This manipulation, although often times effective, diminishes the integrity of candidates and American politics as a whole. This is because once said candidate is elected, they often times do not stick to their word, much like how Parris did just enough for the community to maintain control while still fulfilling his own agenda.
In short, the use of the rhetoric of consensus in order to gain power, observable today through Mitt Romney, is a theme that American society today has borrowed directly from the Puritans portrayed by Miller. It is undoubtedly true that the focus of politics in America has changed a great deal since the 1600’s; although each candidate is required to make their religion known, religious issues no longer take center stage on the campaign trail or during debates. However, many aspects of the old America have withstood the test of time and to be sure, the manipulation of the rhetoric of consensus for personal gain, as Romney seems to be doing today, will outlast even this example and continue to spread throughout politics of the future.
(580 words)
theweek.com/bullpen/column/221341/mitt-romney-is-the-only-adult-in-the-room