Mr. Bush's rhetorical style--its impact in Britain and Europe

Submitted by Elizabeth S. (United States), Jan 15, 2003 at 12:43

Mr. Bush's rhetoric (when it is comprehensible, that is) seems to appeal to a certain kind of mentality--which I might characterize as black-and-white-thinking, fervent-rather-than-reasoned, and largely unintellectual if not downright anti-intellectual.

Fine. If Mr. Bush's polls reflect popularity via his rhetorical approach, then I suppose he has little reason to change.

Except that such rhetoric has never gone over well in Britain and Europe, as far as I can remember in my lifetime. I was at Cambridge during Mr. Reagan's tenure, and well remember having to explain, ad nauseam, that no--not all Americans were as simple-minded as Mr. Reagan's spoutings would suggest, and that no, not every U.S. citizen preferred a diet of jelly beans and an evening of John Wayne-style Westerns to something a bit more. . . substantial and realistic.

I can only imagine what these same Cambridge colleagues think of Mr. Bush's even stupider-sounding, reactionary and dunerheaded spoutings. I . . . am too frightened to inquire of them.

I may be simplistic, but I think that we often alienate British and European friendliness with our steady diet of black-and-white, anti-intellectual American policy language. I can imagine that, had Mr. Bush said that "Because America has been maimed by a form of extremism that threatens all of the the civilized world, America feels compelled at this point in history to adopt vigorous strategies of countering extremism, including force if necessary," he might have reached a wider and a longer-lasting friendly reception in Britain and Europe than he did by spouting red-necked-style mutterings and threats--and mis-prounouncing many of those.

For what it's worth.

Elizabeth

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".