Course name: PERSUASION; HIST, THRY & PRCT
Course Number: ENGL 3080
Instructor: Topping, Beth A.
Semester: Fall 2021
Introduction to Visual Rhetorical Argument
For my visual persuasion argument, I wanted to draw a clear similarity to Trump and Hitler’s use of images and phrases to create a sense of community among their audience. Analyzing how citizens of any country can be swindle by a Svengali type political figure with evil intentions. The assignments guideline urged students to explore two references of past and modern visual mediums as they correlate to the rhetoric of its creator. Both parties understand that the key to creating popularity is to target the unseen, the left behind, or supposedly disenfranchised under the semblance of opportunity and heroism. Taking visual persuasion in a literal stance it’s understood that both men were great presenters at rallies and conferences; learning that charm and ease was the best way to suggest power and knowledge.
My choice in comparing both political figures lie in desire for individuals to examine how history can repeat itself; just as it was Hitler’s plan to divide the country and create chaos, it’s clear that Trump’s ambitions were similar. Through Trump’s campaign and presidency there has been a sharp divide between American citizens likely in the last 50 years. We must always read against the grain to keep our mind open to rhetoric that spreads lies and hatred.
The strong qualities of my argument piece are the writings abilities to draw the visual images as similar yet allowing them to remain separate entities to express my concerns of repeating history. My understanding of rhetoric outside of written word continued to expand as I researched both parties. As mentioned in my piece the ability to read against the grain is evidently important but developing the skill of seeing against the grain is important as well. Given the opportunity I would expand this piece in a larger research paper examining other aspects of rhetorical evidence from both parties. Furthermore, I would draw closer similarities in Hitler’s uniforms as they relate to Trump’s red hat as a status symbol among citizens.
Short Argument: Visual
It’s no secret that slogans and catchy phrases have embedded themselves into our culture. This is understood from well-known phrases such as “Nike – Just Do It.” or “Can You Hear Me Now?” – Verizon Wireless”. While advertisement is known for this specialty it has long weaved its way into our political system and campaigns. The last five years of American politics we have heard the recurring slogan, “Make America Great Again” coined by former president Donald Trump. This phrase proudly expressed across a red hat began to form a huge component of the party’s morals and political leaning; as well as allowing individuals to further identify each other.
However, we must examine the phrase/visual persuasion (the hat) from a historical perspective of its originality and long-standing ideology. The question remains where has society heard similar phrases from under the guise of a good rhetorician and performer engaging with the political sphere? During Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, he understood the force of imagery in words through rhetorical force, solidifying Hitler as the empowerment for the “disenfranchised” youth of Germany. A common image that was often plastered throughout Europe was a picture of hungry and tired young working-class Germans with the slogan “Mjölnir [Hans Schweitzer], “Our Last Hope—Hitler,” 1932”. Comparing this with the “Make America Great Again: 2016” quote; both phrases correlate the political candidate to the savior needed to save their country from the destruction of “others”.
Despite both political campaigns running during different historical periods the similarity is within reach of the other. Though for some the comparability is nothing more than a mere coincidence that is overdrawn when comparing to former president Donald Trump. However, Trump’s presidency heavily consulted with rhetoric and scapegoating allowing for emotions to prevail over logic, hence formulating an irrational identity around the visual/written campaign slogan. The savior complex that centers itself within his political career directly correlates to the feeling of displacement and hunger for visibility that led to senseless events such as the capital riot last year. History often repeats itself and persuasion/rhetoric is no exception. Society must understand the dangers of visual persuasion; a few years from now Trump may not be relevant within the political world but his slogan and the hat will always be identifiable to a certain political ideology.