After the Japanese attack on the United States Navy base at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the United States declared war on Japan. When Germany and Italy then declared war against the United States, World War II truly became worldwide. In his speech First War Address Before Congress, made on January 6, 1942 President Franklin D. Roosevelt mentions several things: past historical events that led to the present situation, the necessity of war-production, the attempt to justify war, the creation of a negative picture of the enemy and a positive picture of his own people and claims that only total victory over the enemy can end the war, to mention just a few.
War rhetoric as such is part of the actual war, so its creation and development goes back quite a time in history as the human race has always made war upon each other. The first war message of the United States was the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Besides the common features of war rhetoric the Declaration of Independence and later United States´ war messages (up to today′s messages by George W. Bush) also include specific American features. In this term paper I am going to show that by using the techniques of war rhetoric Franklin Delano Roosevelt creates an imaginary two-sided world. To emphasize the importance of this two-sided world-view and for an overview that will serve for the whole term paper I collected and arranged examples from the speech in two charts. After setting up the two sides I will go into further detail and examine this both sides in more detail: the creation of a negative picture of the enemy on the one side and the diminishing of one´s own soldiers` actions by using euphemisms on the other side. The overall aim of war rhetoric is to justify the war and to unite the nation in order to defeat the enemy. This is the point where all the little details again meet and the parts of the speech unite into one basic concept.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. "They" contra "We"
3. Picture of the enemy
3.1. Accusing the enemy of breaking the law
3.2. The enemy as a demon
3.3. The enemy and his nation
4. Euphemism
5. Conclusion
Objectives & Themes
The academic paper examines the rhetorical techniques employed by Franklin D. Roosevelt in his "First War Address Before Congress" to establish a polarized, two-sided worldview. The primary goal is to analyze how the construction of this dichotomy—distinguishing between a demonized enemy and a virtuous, heroic "we"—serves to justify military intervention and unify the nation.
- Construction of a binary "us vs. them" worldview in wartime political rhetoric.
- Dehumanization and criminalization of the enemy through specific linguistic choices.
- The use of religious metaphors to frame war as a conflict between good and evil.
- Strategic differentiation between enemy leadership and the broader population.
- Application of euphemisms to sanitize violent military actions and maintain public support.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2. The enemy as demon
An effective way of describing the enemy in war rhetoric is not only to present it as if it was a criminal but as if it was the most terrifying thing on earth: as if it was the demon itself. "[A]z ellenség maga a gonosz - hogy ne pusztíthasson tovább, öt kell elpusztítani" (Halász 1999: 61).
FDR even contrasts the enemy to God, and in doing so, gives the Second World War a new dimension, as if it was not only a fight between good and evil, but between God and the Devil: "The world is too small to provide adequate living room for both Hitler and God" (540). Here again, Roosevelt indicates that the whole world consists of two parties: "us" and "them", but here this world-view obtaines further meaning. Hitler is the leader of "them" and God is on "our" side. Roosevelt claims that one of the sides has to win, there is no place for both, one has to gain a victory over the other.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the historical context of the speech following the Pearl Harbor attack and introduces the central research premise regarding the binary rhetorical framing of the war.
2. "They" contra "We": Discusses the fundamental division of humanity into "goodies" and "baddies" in presidential war messages, establishing the core contrasting descriptions used by Roosevelt.
3. Picture of the enemy: Explores the systematic negative portrayal of Axis powers as criminals and inhuman entities to create a necessity for urgent counteraction.
3.1. Accusing the enemy of breaking the law: Analyzes the rhetorical strategy of depicting the enemy as an international criminal to justify retaliation and defense of the law.
3.2. The enemy as a demon: Details how Roosevelt elevates the conflict into a cosmic struggle between God and the Devil, framing the war as a holy endeavor.
3.3. The enemy and his nation: Examines the distinction between totalitarian leaders and their oppressed subjects, a strategy intended to minimize the listener’s moral guilt.
4. Euphemism: Analyzes the use of sanitized language to describe American military violence, masking the grim realities of war to maintain public morale.
5. Conclusion: Summarizes the effectiveness of these rhetorical elements in creating a coherent, persuasive justification for total war.
Keywords
War Rhetoric, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Political Discourse, Dichotomy, Euphemism, World War II, Enemy Image, Persuasion, Justification of War, Presidential Speeches, Propaganda, Good and Evil, Metaphor, Rhetorical Analysis, National Unity.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper focuses on the rhetorical strategies utilized by Franklin D. Roosevelt in his "First War Address Before Congress" to justify the United States' entry into World War II.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The themes include the creation of an "us versus them" dichotomy, the criminalization and demonization of the enemy, the role of religious imagery in political speeches, and the strategic use of euphemistic language.
What is the central research question?
The research seeks to demonstrate how Roosevelt employed war rhetoric to construct an imaginary two-sided world that frames the war as an inevitable and virtuous struggle.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author uses a rhetorical analysis approach, examining specific linguistic choices, metaphors, and figures of speech within the text to illustrate how the audience's perception of the enemy and the war is manipulated.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body breaks down the construction of the enemy image through criminal and demonic comparisons, the differentiation between enemy leaders and the common people, and the application of euphemisms to frame US military actions.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include War Rhetoric, Roosevelt, Political Discourse, Dichotomy, Euphemism, and Justification of War.
How does Roosevelt differentiate between the enemy leadership and their people?
He characterizes the leadership as war lords or dictators who suppress their own population, thereby framing the American intervention as a liberation effort rather than an attack on a whole nation.
Why is the "chess game" metaphor significant?
The metaphor depicts the war as a strategic game where Hitler is the opponent, allowing Roosevelt to assert his role as the necessary leader to defeat the enemy, further reinforcing the binary worldview.
How does the usage of religious intertextuality function in the speech?
By quoting the Bible, Roosevelt frames the war as a moral and holy conflict, making it difficult for the public to oppose the war without seeming to oppose "good" and "God."
- Quote paper
- Renate Bagossy (Author), 2003, The two-sided world-view in Roosevelt´s "First War Address Before Congress", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/19477
