Cold War Rhetoric

Cold War Rhetoric is the first book in over twenty years to bring a sustained rhetorical critique to bear on central texts of the Cold War. The rhetorical texts that are the subject of this book include speeches by Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy, the Murrow- McCarthy confrontation on CBS, the speeches and writings of peace advocates, and the recurring theme of unAmericanism as it has been expressed in various media throughout the Cold War years. Each of the authors brings to his texts a particular approach to rhetorical criticism—strategic, metaphorical, or ideological. Each provides an introductory chapter on methodology that explains the assumptions and strengths of their particular approach.

Rhetoric and history intersected dramatically during the Cold War, which was, above all else, a war of words. This volume, which combines the work of historians and communication scholars, examines the public discourse in Cold War America from a number of perspectives including how rhetoric shaped history and policies and how rhetorical images invited interpretations of history. The book opens with Norman Graebner's wideranging analysis of the rhetorical background of the Cold War. Frank Costigliola then parses Stalin's speech of February, 1946, an address that many in the West took as a declaration of war by the USSR. The development of NSC68 in 1950, often referred to as America's "blueprint" for fighting the Cold War, is the subject of Robert P. Newman's review. Shawn J. ParryGiles and J. Michael Hogan then focus on American propaganda responses to the perceived Soviet threat. H. W. Brands, Randall B. Woods, and Rachel L. Holloway examine the effects of liberal ideology and rhetoric on domestic and foreign policy decisions. Robert J. McMahon and Robert L. Ivie raise the issue of what it has meant to be the "leader of the Free World" and what the task of postCold War rhetoric will be in this regard. Scholars concerned with the role of words in public life and in the study of history will find challenging material in this interdisciplinary volume. Historians, speech communication scholars, and political scientists with an interest in the Cold War will similarly find grist for further milling.

"This book explores the rhetorical history of the United States, focusing on the World War II and Cold War eras

This volume examines crucial moments in the rhetoric of the Cold War, beginning with an exploration of American neutrality and the debate over entering World War II. Other topics include the long-distance debate carried on over international radio between Hitler and Franklin D. Roosevelt; understanding and interpreting World War II propaganda; domestic radio following the war and the use of Abraham Lincoln narratives as vehicles for American propaganda; the influence of foreign policy agents Dean Acheson, Paul Nitze, and George Kennan; and the rhetoric of former presidents John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. Ultimately, this volume offers a broad-based look at the rhetoric framing the Cold War and in doing so offers insight into the political climate of today.

Rhetoric, Lynn Boyd Hinds and Theodore Windt argue, is central to shaping both political consciousness and political culture. In this important new contribution to Praeger's Series in Political Communication, they examine how the rhetoric of the early Cold War years was used to create and develop a national and international reality. The pervasive political view of events, motives, actions, and policy was largely created in the years between 1945 and 1950 and grew from a pre-existing set of rhetorical beliefs as well as from the political speeches and pronouncements of the time. Hinds and Windt focus their study on American rhetoric applied to Soviet-American relations, centering essentially on Europe. They offer a brief outline of the theoretical principles used in their analysis, and follow with a look at certain images of the USSR selected for use by American politicians. In subsequent chapters, the authors trace developments from the end of World War II to Winston Churchill's Iron Curtain speech, thoroughly explore the British leader's address and its effect in dividing the world into two warring camps, analyze the writing and presentation of the 1947 Truman Doctrine and its suggestion of two ways of life, and detail the Truman Loyalty Program and the 1947 House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings in Hollywood. The remaining chapters discuss George Marshall's address originating the European Recovery Act, George Kennan's Sources of Soviet Conduct, contemporary critics, and such proofs as the Korean War, which showed the rhetoric to be correct. This work will be an important reference tool for courses in political communication, American history, political science, and presidential studies, and a useful addition to library collections.

Jason A. Edwards explores the various rhetorical choices and strategies employed by former President Bill Clinton to discuss foreign policy issues in a new, post-Cold War era. Edwards argues that each American president has situated himself within the same foreign policy paradigm, drawing upon the same set of ideas and utilizing the same basic vernacular to discuss foreign policy. He describes how former presidents-and President Clinton, in particular-made modifications to this paradigm, leaving a rhetorical signature that tells us as much about the nature of their presidency as it does about the international environment they faced. With the end of the Cold War came the end of a relatively stable international order. This end sparked intense debates about the new direction of American foreign policy. As Bill Clinton took office, he developed a new lexicon of words in order to discuss America's changing role in the world and other major international issues of the time without being able to fall into Cold War-era rhetoric. By examining the nuances and unique contributions President Clinton made to American foreign policy rhetoric, Edwards shows how his distinct rhetorical signature will influence future administrations.

Kuypers combines rhetorical theory and framing analysis in an examination of the interaction of the press and the president during international crisis situations in the post-Cold War world. Three crises are examined: Bosnia, Haiti, and the North Korean nuclear capability issue. Kuypers effectively demonstrates the changed nature of presidential crisis rhetoric since the end of the Cold War. Kuypers employs a new historical/critical approach to analyze both the press and the Clinton administration's handling of three international crisis situations. Using case studies of Bosnia, Haiti, and the alleged North Korean nuclear buildup in 1993, he examines contemporary presidential crisis communication and the agenda-setting and agenda-extension functions of the press. The importance of this study lies in its timeliness; President Clinton is the first atomic-age president not to have the Cold War meta-narrative to use in legitimating international crises. Prior studies in presidential crisis rhetoric found that the president received broad and consistent support during times of crisis. Kuypers found that the press often advanced an oppositional frame to that used by the Clinton administration. The press frames were found to limit the options of the President, even when the press supported a particular presidential strategy. This is a major study that will be of interest to scholars and researchers of the press, the modern presidency, and American foreign policy.