Secretary of State John Kerry is the rhetor in this case,
and it is clear that invitational rhetoric was not used to its full potential
because according to "Beyond Persuasion: A Proposal For an Invitational
Rhetoric" by Sonja K. Foss and Cindy L. Griffin "In presenting a
particular perspective, the invitational rhetor does not judge or denigrate
others' perspectives but is open to and tries to appreciate and validate those
perspectives, even if they differ dramatically from the rhetor's own" (Pg
5). Kerry presented his perspective of
Israel's economic position and from what he saw happen in the past and in the
present he is using that knowledge to advise Israel on what they should do so
that the trend would change. It's hard
for Kerry to not sound judgmental about Israel's actions especially since all
the evidence validates his claim, like with Denmark's bank and the fact that
several businesses are pausing their business relations with Israel.
I find that this article is also related to Kenneth Burke's
"Dramatism," because Burke talks about scapegoats to relive guilt and
he mentions that "If order, then guilt; if guilt, then need for
redemption; but any such "payment" is victimage" (Burke 168). So for this article Secretary of State John
Kerry is the scapegoat to relive Israel's guilt of establishing settlements in
the West Bank, where Israel and Palestine are still negotiating who owns which
parts. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
is blaming Secretary of State John Kerry for making Israel look bad to the
world and for economic reasons, but Kerry was just pointing out the evidence as
they are. So Netanyahu has guilt leading
to his need for redemption by victimage, who is Kerry.
Nice work! The story completely relates to this article. Let's hear more about this on Monday!
ReplyDelete