In the political world, language is a key in influencing the ideas of people and the support from the people. This is one thing that political leaders have used so well in political leadership for instance, President Barrack Obama’s 2013 State of Union speech in the congress. He starts by making an appeal by going through the history of America and congratulating the American people for the economic efforts, they have made over the years. He starts, “Fifty years ago, John F. Kennedy declared to this Chamber that the Constitution makes us not rivals of power but partners for progress.” This is a bid to win the support of the Democrats, the Republicans as well as the Independents. Notably, what he is going to ask of them is a wanting situation and that is why he has to remind them of the stand of the US Congress. This is in accordance with the idea of Murray Edelman that while on the path to coerce or intimidate the resistance to the ideas of a politician, the key tactic leaders use is by legitimizing their actions and encouraging the opponents to support or remain quasi. He notes that it is the language of the historic event of a nation that evoke the emotional feeling they intend in their opponents; and that is why Obama had to quote John F. Kennedy (Bandow 44).
The writer however disapproves this move of the US president by explaining that even though the use of this language might seems to create an edge; it poses a challenge rather than solving the problem. Mr. Obama is in this case challenging the Congress to approve tax increases among the one percent richest Americans. He knows that this is not the best idea for the Congress as he says, “(Americans) But they do expect us to put the nation’s interests before parties. They do expect us to forge reasonable compromises where we can.” One can note from this statement that he expects the Republicans to take a different stance from the Democrats. The challenge here is that as much as the president is approving for increased tax on the wealthy, the other Congressmen argue that he can use budget cuts in the health and education sector as well. This, according to the president is tricky in that it will lead to a further increase in unemployment rates and cause a stalled growth of the middle-aged economic ability.
Murray also states the political leadership is always characterized by use of a language full of promises. Mr. Obama asserts the correctness of this by stating that the economy of the US improving over the years. Soldiers are returning from what and Americans are increasingly buying American cars. This is in an effort to woo the Americans to view his idea as on which will make them continue enjoying these benefits.
In his campaigns, Governor Mitt Romney was so consistent in alluding that the US president was among those types of people that instilled false and unrealistic hopes in people. In retaliation in the speech, Obama says that it is the reckless cuts in income. He notes that as much as tax reforms may not be easy, the alternative, which the opposition was suggesting, will even be worse. This plays in line with Murray Edelman’s observation that language that language helps to establish who is an enemy and who is an ally. The use of negative language against an opponent is a therefore a way of depicting their inequalities in resources, power and also status. The subjects of negative language therefore gain sympathy from the onlookers and the neutral supporters (Edelman 76).
Even though Barrack Obama may never have read ‘The Symbolic Uses of Politics’, he substantiates a lot of the observations made by the author in political leadership.
Work Cited
Bandow, Doug. "Obama's SOTU: A Campaign Speech That Erodes the Power of the Citizenry." (2013).
Edelman, Murray. The symbolic uses of politics. University of Illinois Press, 1985.
