{"title":"“自由帝国”:重新评估美国总统的外交政策修辞","authors":"A. Prasch, Mary E. Stuckey","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2128202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Empire is central to US foreign policy aims but is rarely taken directly into account in studies of American presidential foreign policy rhetoric. We argue here that in doing such studies, analytic attention should be paid to questions of empire as foundational to the development of the United States and to articulations of the American nation. We examine two historical and two heuristic categories used to understand US presidential foreign policy discourse and argue for refocusing analysis by placing questions of whiteness, empire, and colonialism at the core of those categories.","PeriodicalId":51545,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“An Empire for Liberty”: Reassessing US Presidential Foreign Policy Rhetoric\",\"authors\":\"A. Prasch, Mary E. Stuckey\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00335630.2022.2128202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Empire is central to US foreign policy aims but is rarely taken directly into account in studies of American presidential foreign policy rhetoric. We argue here that in doing such studies, analytic attention should be paid to questions of empire as foundational to the development of the United States and to articulations of the American nation. We examine two historical and two heuristic categories used to understand US presidential foreign policy discourse and argue for refocusing analysis by placing questions of whiteness, empire, and colonialism at the core of those categories.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51545,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Speech\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Speech\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2128202\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2022.2128202","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
“An Empire for Liberty”: Reassessing US Presidential Foreign Policy Rhetoric
ABSTRACT Empire is central to US foreign policy aims but is rarely taken directly into account in studies of American presidential foreign policy rhetoric. We argue here that in doing such studies, analytic attention should be paid to questions of empire as foundational to the development of the United States and to articulations of the American nation. We examine two historical and two heuristic categories used to understand US presidential foreign policy discourse and argue for refocusing analysis by placing questions of whiteness, empire, and colonialism at the core of those categories.
期刊介绍:
The Quarterly Journal of Speech (QJS) publishes articles and book reviews of interest to those who take a rhetorical perspective on the texts, discourses, and cultural practices by which public beliefs and identities are constituted, empowered, and enacted. Rhetorical scholarship now cuts across many different intellectual, disciplinary, and political vectors, and QJS seeks to honor and address the interanimating effects of such differences. No single project, whether modern or postmodern in its orientation, or local, national, or global in its scope, can suffice as the sole locus of rhetorical practice, knowledge and understanding.