Historians see FDR's powerful address
to Congress on December 8th 1941 as a turning point in
American history, uniting the country in a patriotic surge of support
for the 'good war'.
This speech is one of the most famous
American discourses and it is considered by politicians and political
experts as a masterwork of leadership communication in crisis.
But...Why?
Let's analyze the structure of the
speech, we will see that a strategic language and a proper attitude
can make the difference.
First of all, we notice that FDR's
speech is significantly similar to an harangue. He
captures the public attention using strong expressions and a powerful
tone of voice. He is a leader, and he has to demonstrate that he is
able to deal with such a difficult situation.
The first part of the speech is an
accusation, it highlights with strong words and direct sentences how
Japan has to be considered as an 'infamous betrayer'. It continues with
the declaration of innocence of the USA and ,again, it goes on with a
chronicle of the tragic event : the President points out that the
USA have been deceived by Japanese Institutions.
President Roosevelt now makes a list of
all the attacks launched by Japanese forces. The use of a 'directory'
is a very useful and immediate strategy used by many politicians or
leaders to capture listeners' attention, and to convey a concept or
an idea in a simple and direct way.
Roosevelt's advocation now has become
judgement. He has to demonstrate that his choices and reactions are
the right answer to Pearl Harbor attacks. He is now 'the father of
the nation', he has to demonstrate his strenght and his power, he
wants his citizens to believe that only with a brave and aggressive
behaviour USA will be victorious.
This short but extremely powerful
speech is a perfect example to see how words can change people's
mind, they can create participation and ideology.
...and that's why we all should be
careful with them!
G.
I liked your choice to analyze such discourse made by President Roosevelt because is very interesting to compare it with the speech made by President Bush when he declared the war on terror. As you pointed out President Roosevelt depicted himself as the father of the nation because Americans needed to be reassured after have been attacked, at the same way bush tried to reassure his populations making its declaration of war, both presented themselves a strong leaders able to take care of theirs population. Roosevelt described Japanese as 'infamous betrayer', Bush described terrorists as “enemies of freedom”. Being attacked the two presidents had to convince people that the only solution was the war, therefore they wanted to make people believe that attacking the enemy would be the only reasonable solution. To create this emotional feeling among the audience they represented the United States of America as the victim of the cruel enemy which destiny had to be its destruction.
RispondiEliminaRoosevelt constructed its speech as a list while Bush structured it’s as a sequence of question and answers; both methods have been very effective. Both had a great capability to conduct people thinking war was the only possibility for the United States.
A speech declaring war, especially if after an attack, has to directly involve people’s feelings and fears. These two speeches are a perfect example of how and with which strategies two American presidents belonging to two different historical periods evoked trough their words such feelings collecting people’s consents.