The Fantasy of Making America Great Again Through Immigration Reform.

Making America great again is a fantasy for many. Through promises of doing such, Donald Trump won the election and reigned into presidency. One way Trump promises “we the people,” of making our nation great again, is by his immigration reform plan.
After reading online at donaldjtrump.com and analyzing his plan on fixing the immigration problem our country faces, I’ve come to the realization that this article beautifully portrays and reflects chapter five in our book covering fantasy-theme criticism.
“Fantasizing or dramatizing occurs when individuals find some aspect of a message that catches/focuses their attention until they imaginatively participate in the images and actions stimulated by the message.” Within this article the aspect that catches the audience’s attention is making America great again and creating more jobs for true citizens. The article also fantasizes that the three core principles of real immigration reform are:
1) A nation without borders is not a nation
2) A nation without laws is not a nation
3) A nation that does not serve its own citizens is not a nation.
These three fantasized principles are viewed dramatically different amongst our nation’s people. For the a great amount of the citizens who identify with conservative views, these three principals get them fired up and feel passion towards Trumps beliefs in what will benefit our country and play as a part of motivation in what they believe to be positive change. On the other hand, the other liberal half of the country fearfully views these three core principals as hostile approaches that lead to racism, anti-Semitism and hate. Even to the extent where they refer to it as history repeating itself as it was in Nazi Germany.
Just like the fantasy-theme criticism theory states, the article then prior to catching the audience attention and gaining support from the conservatives, discusses actions that need to take place in order to receive the fantasied message. The article breaks it down into three main acts.
The first act is to make Mexico pay for the wall. This step helps shield the fear of Trumps followers in having to lose money in his plans by forcing “who’s really responsible” to pay up. At the meantime liberals feel it will help loose positive relations with Mexico.
The following act is to defend the laws and constitution of the United States Within this action, the article entails for movements such as; tripling the number of ICE officers, nationwide e-verify, mandatory return of all criminal aliens, establishing detention-not catch-and-release, defunding of sanctuary cities, enhancing penalties for overstaying a visa, cooperating with local gang task forces, and ending birthright citizenship. These steps all help the conservatives see the map to greatness and defending our countries laws and constitution, while scaring the liberals of discriminatory threats.
The Trump administrations final act is focused around putting American workers first. In perusing such the Trump administration suggest actions of; increasing prevailing wage for H-1Bs, requirement of hiring American workers first, end welfare abuse, creating jobs programs for inner city youth, creating refugee programs for American children, and Immigration moderation. For the conservatives that view only themselves as true citizens, this is positive. On the other hand for the liberals who believe anyone should have the right of citizenship this is seen to be movements of negligence.
Our country is a lot like a newly expired chicken breast, while propaganda like above is a lot like seasoning. Half would think it’s best to solve the problem with “seasoning” (these immigration reform actions). While the other half think view the “seasoning” as a form of brainwashing and masking of the problem that can lead our country into becoming ill. Either way our country is not looking to tasty.

An Analysis of the Rhetoric Presented in the Language of Articles after a Terrorist Attack

For my paper the artifact I have selected is articles published by Fox News that report on terrorist attacks facilitated in America. My analysis will specifically be focused on the rhetorical language that is used in articles that are published immediately after an act of terrorism occurs in the United States. By focusing specifically on these articles it will allow me to analyze what feelings Fox News is attempting to evoke in their audience after an act of terrorism is perpetrated. My analysis of rhetorical language will hopefully lead to insights about the news station’s implicit motivations.  

Because my analysis is heavily focused on language and motivation I decided I would use the Fantasy Theme Criticism method. The Fantasy Theme Criticism method focuses on how messages are utilized to focus the audience’s attention until they imaginatively participate in the images and actions stimulated by the message. Fantasy Theme Criticism also explains how messages embedded with symbols are used to create the audience’s reality through convergence and Rhetorical Vision. By analyzing the symbols used in this specific artifact I can understand the Fantasy Theme’s that are attempting to be communicated. These Fantasy Themes will then provide insight into Fox News’ Rhetorical Vision and motivation.

I have a variety of reasons why I think this method with work the most effectively for my analysis. The first reason I chose this method is because it can work very well for analyzing the symbols found in language. Analyzing rhetorical language will be a key component in my study. Language is especially important in this study because the language used after an attack has occurred on American soil can be particularly powerful and laden with symbolism.

Another reason I selected this method is because of the types of Fantasy Themes that are developed during times of crisis are vastly different from themes created during non-crisis situations. Themes created during times of crisis often times operate so effectively because they evoke fear within their audience. Also during crisis situations the hero vs. villain type of narrative is frequently developed by fantasy theme. By analyzing this type of narrative I could possibly discover new insights about how rhetorical language is used to paint specific people and specific demographics of people as heroes and villains.

The final reason I selected the Fantasy Theme Criticism method for my analysis is that Fantasy Theme Criticism is heavily based on the concept of convergence. The concept of convergence plays an interesting role after a crisis occurs in the United States. Often time’s media outlets attempt to communicate that American’s need to come together as one after a terrorist attack is facilitated. The language used to develop as sense of solidarity as a nation is associated directly with the concept of convergence.

In conclusion I feel like the Fantasy Theme Criticism method will work effectively to analyze my artifact. I’m confident that my analysis of rhetorical language used in crisis situations will provide additional insights into rhetorical theory.  

The article “Trump Makes Promises He’ll Never Be Able to Keep” was featured on MSNBC’s website. The article discusses how the author Steve Benen believes that Donald Trump’s claims regarding health care are impossible because the president has set unreasonably high benchmarks. The negative context is established right from the beginning of the article and is further developed during its duration. The title of the article is even utilized in creating the negative context being communicated by the article. The author’s choice of the words “Promise” and “Never” are used to evoke a strong emotional response from the audience. The word “Never” evokes a strong emotional response because it implies impossibility. The word “Promise” also induces a strong response because the symbolic value of a promise is important to people. By using these words together Steve Benen is making an attempt to persuade the audience that the president has lied to his constituents. Steve Benen continues to develop this context and creates the larger symbolic message by utilizing terms like “unrealistic”, “will never” and “irrational” throughout the article.

The larger symbolic message I believe that Steve Benen is attempting to communicate is that Donald Trump and also the Republican Party are incompetent group that lack trustworthiness. This symbolic messages is communicated through the context and a variety of other ways. Steve Benen communicates the Republican Party’s incompetence by stating “There is no scenario in which Republicans can create a system with universal coverage and lower deductibles”. This statement is then followed by “In other words, if GOP policymakers wanted to move “Obamacare” to the left, then maybe it could achieve these goals”. This sequence of statements implies that the GOP is incompetent enough to believe the impossible is achievable. Another implication of the statements is that the GOP is also too incompetent to realize that if they utilized the current democratic healthcare system in place they could potentially reach their goals. The lack of trustworthiness is symbolically derived when Steve Benen comments “the (republican) party is led by an incoming president who’s publicly making promises he’ll never be able to keep.”. This statement attacks the trustworthiness and credibility of Donald Trump, by saying he makes promises he can’t keep. This statement implies that Donald Trump lies publically to his constituents by making promises he can’t keep.

This message would resonate a lot differently depending on the audience. The audience that this message would be most effective on is Democrats and other groups that dislike Donald Trump. This message would be effective to these groups because the audience is able to identify with the statements made by Steven Benen. On the other hand those who empathize and support Donald Trump would be unable to identify with the symbolic message Steve Benen is making an attempt to communicate. The audience has a direct relationship to the means that were chosen to communicate the message. The article was posted on MSNBC’s homepage. MSNBC is a network that is known to cater to liberals. By posting the article on a liberal news source there’s a greater chance for the message to identify with the audience. If the same article was posted on a website like Fox News for example there’d be less of a chance for the message to identify with the audience. 

Article:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trump-makes-health-care-promises-hell-never-be-able-keep