Rhetoric and the Creation of Hysteria

In case some of you write on or think about the use of rhetoric in political and legal settings, here is a link for a recent article relating to the use of rhetoric and its impact on immigration debates in the hemisphere. Below is the abstract:

"The tenor of debates leading to the need for the so-called "wall" at our southern border, the frustrations relating to them, and the resulting political opportunism are not limited to the United States. Throughout the Western Hemisphere and Europe, political leaders are using similar rhetoric of the immigrant “other” in order to rally the base, deflect criticism, and distract public opinion. This article examines this political phenomenon in the twenty-first century by comparatively evaluating the cases of the United States, the Dominican Republic, Argentina, Brazil, and Chile—five democratic nations in the Western Hemisphere in which immigration became a major issue and immigrants are routinely scapegoated by those in power. In doing so, this article answers the following questions. First, why has immigration become a major campaign and policy issue in these countries since the turn of the century? Second, how and why have these nation-states responded to the perceived ills of immigration by enacting laws and policies designed to curb it and deal with existing immigrants? Third, how have populist politicians exploited xenophobia for political gain and—in doing so—have fueled ultra-nationalism across the hemisphere? And fourth, what has been the role of the United States (as the region’s hegemon) in promoting and/or
abetting these anti-immigration policies?"

 

Comments

[Patrick S. O'Donnell]

Some readers might also find this useful: https://www.academia.edu/36855273/Immigration_and_Refugees_Ethics_Law_and_Politics_A_Select_Bibliography

[A non]

"Rhetoric and the Creation of Hysteria"

Yes, this describes your intentional mischaracterization of your political opponents perfectly. However, do you think these sort of practices make you better suited for work in the media than in the production of (honest, truth-pursuing, rigorous) academic scholarship?

[Ediberto Roman]

Anon,

Love you too big guy. Let's debate again sometime soon.

E

[Enrique Guerra-Pujol]

Tweet version of the paper: "woke" rhetoric > MAGA rhetoric

[Enrique Guerra-Pujol]

Leftists love censorship. Where did my comment go?

[anon]

Ediberto

I know that you threaten to "know who you are" to intimidate anyone whose comments are critical (and "I know what you did last summer" is implied, of course, for horror movie effect), but please, Ediberto, note that "Anon" and "anon" are different.

For my part, I will note that ethno centrism of the leftist race/ethnicity enterprise is, as usual, on stunning display.

With regard to Dominican Republic, Argentina, Brazil, and Chile, the usual anti US posture is adopted: "What has been the role of the United States (as the region’s hegemon) in promoting and/or abetting these anti-immigration policies?"

For some of the countries named, I would think more relevant questions might be: "What has been the legacy of the brutal and ruthless colonial policies of Spain in Central and South America? Did the "governance" of the region by Spain leave the region with a legacy of good governance? To what extent do persons in this region still suffer from the same prejudices that were introduced by the hegemony of Spain in the region?"

And, as for "anti-immigration policies" I would respectfully suggest taking a basic course in world history and getting some basic sense of what is and has been going on in the rest of the world. Perhaps the constant accusatory tone about "the US hegemon" would be put in a more realistic context and understood in the context of a world history that is shared by, shall we say, others: who seem to think themselves incapable of wrong but for the evil ones they choose to demonize.