4 pragraph rough draft

Demagoguery is "polarizing propaganda that motivates members of an in group to hate and scapegoat some out group(s) largely by promising certainty, stability, and what Erich Fromm famously called 'an escape from freedom'"(Miller 462). Patricia Robert Miller, author of "Characteristics of Demagoguery", gives the reader the idea of "good public discourse" by illustrating how decision making and debating is affected by standards given to evaluate an argument. LaPierre, spokesman for the NRA, gave a speech in 2012 discussing the shooting of an elementary school in Connecticut. LaPierre's speech discusses how we need an immediate fix for the issue to prevent shooting such as this from happening ever again. LaPierre's target audience was the parents and staff affected by the tragic event, but he also forced it towards all schools who do not have a security force on campus to protect staff and students. In this paper I will use the demagoguery standards mentioned by Robert Miller to evaluate the effectiveness of LaPierre's speech.

Robert Miller introduces the idea of scapegoating as a way to cause blame on others. Robert Miller defines scapegoating

as denial through projection. Tsesis has said,“A racist society may actually promote bigotry in order to unite ingroup members and distract them from real political and economic problems by sacrificing a historical scapegoat. Intragroup conflict is diffused by focusing anger on a common target.” Individuals (or communities) can deny responsibility for a situation by projecting that responsibility onto some outgroup. (Miller 464)

When La Pierre sees the blame of what happened to Sandy Hook Elementary is on the NRA, La Pierre scapegoats media and the government for the incident. La Pierre believes that with the violent media people are encouraged to take the actions such as what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary. He gives a list of several video games and movies that promote violence and the killing of children.  La Pierre explains

too many in our national media … their corporate owners … and their stockholders … act as silent enablers, if not complicit co-conspirators. Rather than face their own moral failings, the media demonize lawful gun owners, amplify their cries for more laws and fill the national debate with misinformation and dishonest thinking that only delay meaningful action and all but guarantee that the next atrocity is only a news cycle away. (LaPierre 4)

La Pierre believes that the acts at Sandy hook could have been avoided had it not been for the media and government. La Pierre scapegoats both the media and government to persuade the audience to his side of the argument and take control of the debate.

    Robert Miller explains that one form of demagoguery is having in groups and out groups. Robert defines in groups and out groups as “Our views of people like us (the ingroup) are nuanced and complicated, whereas we define the outgroup by one or two salient and generally negative features that we insist epitomize the entire group.” (Miller 463) By this statement Miller explains that the in group would be the group of people who agree with what you believe in and the outgroup is the opposing group. Miller goes on to say “there are some people whom we think of as “like us” in some important regard, and others who are very different from us in some equally important regard” (Miller 462), not discriminating either side, however showing that they are separate in important manors. In La Pierre’s article, La Pierre uses the media, government, and certain parts of society as the outgroup and ultimately scapegoats them for their disbelief in the shootings that occurred at the elementary school, Sandy Hook. La Pierre explains that the media is the “filthiest form of pornography” because of its constant violence. La Pierre also believes that the governments laws to control guns are not useful because they “refus[e] to create an active national database of the mentally ill[.]” (La Pierre 3) La Pierre believes that the NRA is a defender of the nation and gun rights. La Pierre believes the NRA is the ingroup and the out groups are media, government, and other opposing parties who blame the NRA for what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary.

    Motivism can be described as a piece of demagoguery that is the influence of others to cause situations such as the one at Sandy Hook Elementary. La Pierre speaks of the media that becomes a motivator for many of the shootings that happen today. He lists multiple violent video games, saying

Through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Splatterhouse. And here’s one: it’s called Kindergarten Killers. It’s been online for 10 years. How come  my research department could find it and all of yours either couldn’t or didn’t want anyone to know you had found it? (La Pierre 3)

La Pierre essentially scapegoats video games and other media as the source of motivism for the shooting. Robert Miller describes motivism as the in groups source to argue, or reason to take action. La Pierre points out that maybe the shooting at Sandy Hook may not have happened had the motivators for the shooter had been accessible.

Intruduction Essay 2

Demagoguery is "polarizing propaganda that motivates members of an in group to hate and scapegoat some out group(s) largely by promising certainty, stability, and what Erich Fromm famously called 'an escape from freedom'"(Miller 462). Patricia Robert Miller, author of "Characteristics of Demagoguery", gives the reader the idea of "good public discourse" by illustrating how decision making and debating is effected by standards given to evaluate an argument. LaPierre, spokesman for the NRA, gave a speech in 2012 discussing the shooting of an elementary school in Connecticut. LaPierre's speech discusses how we need an immediate fix for the issue to prevent shooting such as this from happening ever again. LaPierre's target audience was the parents and staff effected by the tragic event, but he also forced it towards all schools who do not have a security force on campus to protect staff and students. In this paper I will use the demagoguery standards mentioned by Robert Miller to evaluate the effectiveness of LaPierre's speech.

Robert-Millers evaluation

demagoguery- "polarizing propaganda that motivates members of an in group to hate and scapegoat some out group(s) largely by promising certainty, stability, and what Erich Fromm famously called 'an escape from freedom'"(Miller 462)
scapegoating-  "'denial through projection'"(Miller 464)
polarization- The opposite perception of a situation
"simple solutions"- eliminate out groups, promote in groups
victimization- use an existing perception to change the mind of others
in-group/out-group thinking- people who believe the same as us/differently than us

Creating out groups is what happens when you make scapegoating and polarization. "Parties must not prevent each other from advancing standpoints or casting doubt on standpoints." This violates the standards of discourse because it prevents solution and causes greater problems. LaPierre's document conforms to the discourse such that he describes the news as misattributing an argument and blaming others for one persons actions. LaPierre's document resembles discourse in that one must defend their argument with relevant information. LaPierre uses the example of other recent shootings to describe the actions of others.

LaPierre Evaluation

LaPierre claims that the media blows situations out of proportion and blames innocent people, the government has taken away the protection of American schools and made them vulnerable to attacks, and that every school in America should have at least one armed security member to protect the children and staff of the schools. A couple strategies LaPierre uses in his argument are statistics, to emphasize his ethos, and anecdotes to another shooting at schools such as this one. LaPierre has a strong argument that having at least a single armed security guard in every school would help prevent situations such as the Connecticut elementary school tragedy. LaPierre states "Under Asa's leadership, our team of security experts will make this the best program in the world for protecting our children at school, and we will make that program available to every school in America free of charge." LaPierre is so certain that armed forces will help protect the safety of American schools that her offers his own assistance in the matter. I noticed that LaPierre uses statistical information but doesn't claim where it is from, possibly damaging his ethos. It can also be seen that LaPierre fails to make any rebuttal at all towards the government's "implications" on new laws to prevent these situations from happening.

Essay 1 (Final)

Jackson Barackman

RWS 200

Christoffer Werry

Februray 23, 2015

Veiling Under Judgment

The religious headdress known as a veil, also known as a burqa, has become a highly debated symbol of freedom or oppression. Abu­Lughod and Maysan Haydar share their opinions from their personal views on the matter. Abu­Lughod shares her opinion in her article, ​The Muslim Woman,​ written in 2006, and Haydar explains her personal view in her article ​Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering​, written in 2004. Haydar is a Muslim women with a unique story about her head dress. Haydar received her headdress after seeing a board game in a store that she wanted, but wanted to get it for free, so she made the excuse that she was getting veiled so she could get the game for free. Abu­Loghod gives her own opinion about the burqa and its purpose. Abu­Lughod supports her argument with historical facts and research she has found on her own. Haydar speaks to teenagers and tries to appeal to the new generation, whereas Abu­Lughod tries to appeal to high scholars for an educational stance in the argument. Both Abu­Lughod and Haydar defend the culture of the head dress and explain that it is an optional garment that has benefits to women who wear it. In this essay, I will comparing the views of both authors and the views of the feminist groups.

Haydar uses personal anecdotes to demonstrate her view of how an American woman views her head dress and her culture, based on her head dress. Hayday explains how we should redefine how we see the burqa and stop the harassment of people who wear them. Haydar says

On a New York bus a couple weeks ago, i sat with another woman, also veiled, but wearing a traditional Jihab (a cloak that women wear over their clothing). A girl two seats over remarked to her friend, while flipping her hair for effect, that she couldn’t understand how we could dress this way. “Me I got to be free.” (Haydar 260)

Haydar explains that she is free and feels more free that the girl who commented on her dress. Haydar tell the reader that the teenager seems less free because of the way the teenager dresses in tight jeans and lots of make­up. The veil is a sign of modesty and freedom to people who wear it. It gives the women who wear it confidence that they are seen for their mind and not for their body, as like being seen as “20 piece chicken dinner.” The intended audience is the female teenager of America. The teenage audience is more advanced now and may see the view of Haydar in a more clearly minded manner. This relates to the claim that our view on the burqa should be changed because the women who wear it get the free choice of whether they wear it or not. It is a personal choice and is not required by men or religion. Haydar creates an ethical appeal to her audience by giving a personal anecdote, as for only Haydar would know everything she has been through. Haydar’s appeal to ethos is also a good use of pathos, allowing the reader to understand the mind of how covered women feel. Haydar feels her covering is a good way to make a stronger bond with others, including the opposite gender.

 Abu­Lughod appeals to the claim that even with the American support in the eastern countries, women who wear burqas are not wearing “channel suits.” Abu­Lughod tells the reader to beware pity of the comment on burqas and to accept that the burqa is a choice for women saying 

Liberals sometimes confess their surprise that even though Afghanistan has been liberated from the Taliban, women do not seem to be throwing off their burqas…Did we expect that once “free” from the Taliban they would go “back” to belly shirts and blue jeans, or dust off their Chanel suits?  (Abu­Lughod 3)

Abu­Lughod makes the points that the Taliban did not invent the burqa and that it was a local form of dress that was used by Pushtan women. Abu­Lughod wants them to accept the burqa as a women’s choice of modesty and respect. Abu­Lughod’s example makes a strong logos appeal because the reader must understand that the burqa is a choice and has a proper use in the eastern countries.

Burqas are becoming more frequent to see in a free country such as America, we should be more understanding of veiled people’s views on their style of clothing. Instead of opposing the idea of covering up we should ask them why they dress that way and accept their answers, and then take our opinions to ourselves. I have learned about the culture of the Muslim people and how they live their lives under the cover of a veil to protect their modesty and dignity in public. I believe that Haydar and Abu­Lughod both make great points to their side of the argument, however after reviewing Abu­Lughod’s article I noticed she used a quote from an Al Qaeda extremist. Abu­Lughod critically damages her appeal to any American who believes Al Qaeda is a risk to America and must be stopped at all costs. I do not disagree with Abu­Lughod, however to the average American the quote she uses from Osama Bin Laden would make her argument completely invalid. I believe to improve Abu­Lughod’s article she must look at the view of how an American citizen would read this. To improve Haydars document I believe that some facts are necessary to validate her opinions. Personal anecdotes only take a small effect on an author’s ethos. In conclusion, Abu­Lughod and Haydar are personal experts of the burqa, having worn them, and should be recognized for their feminist actions in their culture.

Jackson Barackman

RWS 200

Christoffer Werry

Februray 11, 2015

Veiling Under Judgement

The religious headdress known as a veil, also known as a burqa, has become a highly debated symbol of freedom or oppression. Abu-Lughod (AL) and Maysan Haydar share their opinions from their personal views on the matter. AL shares her opinion in her article The Muslim Woman, pulished in 2003,and Haydar explains her personal view in her article Veiled Intentions, written in 2004. Haydar is a Muslim women with a unique story about her head dress. Abu-Loghod is a member of the perseus book group who gives her own opinion about the burqa and its purpose. Haydar speaks to teenagers and tries to appeal to the new generation, where as AL tries to appeal to high scholars for an educational stance in the argument. Both AL and Haydar defend the culture of the head dress and explain that it is an optional garment that has strong benefits to all women who wear it. In this essay, I will comparing the views of both authors and the views of the feminist groups and the veil wearing groups opinions.

Haydar uses personal anecdotes to demonstrate her view of how an american woman views her head dress and her culture based on her head dress. Hayday explains how we should redefine how we see the burqa and stop the harassment of people who wear them. Haydar says

On a New York bus a couple weeks ago, i sat with another woman, also veiled, but wearing a traditional Jihab (a cloak that women wear over their clothing). A girl two seats over remarked to her friend, while flipping her hair for effect, that she couldn’t understand how we could dress this way. “me i got to be free.”

Haydar explains that she is free and feel more free that the girl who commented on her dress. Haydar tell the reader that the teenager seems less free because of the way the teenager dresses in tight jeans and lots of make-up. The viel is a sign of modesty and freedom to people who wear it. It gives thewomenwho wear it confidence that they are seen for their mind and not for their body, as like being seen as “20 piece chicken dinner.” The intended audience is the femaleteenager of america. The teenage audience is more advanced now and may see the view of Haydar in a more clear minded manner. This relates to the claim that our view on the burqa should be changed because the women who wear it get the free choice of whether they wear it or not. It is a personal choice and is not required by men or religion. AL also appeals to this with her explanation on how the burqa was made by women to protect them from abuse in the country they live in. AL also tells the reader to beware pity of the comment on burqas saying

One can worry about the echoes of this rhetoric in contemporary liberal feminist concerns about women around the world. One need only think of the American organization the Feminist Majority, with their campaign for the women in Afghanistan, or the wider discourse about women's human rights.

AL makes the points that feminist groups do not yet understand the burqa and need to research the meaning of it for themselves. AL wants them toaccept the burqa as a women’s choice of modesty.

Burqas are becoming more frequent to see in a free country such as america, we should be more understanding of the people who wear the headdress’s views on their style of clothing. Instead of opposing the idea of covering up we should ask them why they dress that way and accept their answers, and then take our opinions to ourselves. I have learned about the culture of the Muslim people and how they live their lives under the cover of a veil to protect their modesty and dignity in public. I believe that Haydar and AL both make great points to their side of the argument, however after reviewing AL’s article i noticed she used a quote from an Al Qaeda extremist. AL critically damages her appeal to any american who believes Al Qaeda is a risk to America and must be stopped at all costs. I do not disagree with AL, however to the average American the quote she uses from Osama Bin Laden would make her argument completely invalid. I believe to improve AL’s article she must look at the view of how an American citizen would read this. To improve Haydars document i believe that some facts are necessary to validate her opinions. Personal anecdotes only take a small effect on an authors ethos. In conclusion, AL and Haydar are personal experts of the burqa, having worn them, and should be recognized for their feminist actions in their culture.

Intro and Body

The religious headdress known as a veil, also known as a burqa, has become a highly debated symbol of freedom or oppression. Abu-Lughod (AL) and Maysan Haydar share their opinions from their personal views on the matter. Haydar is a Muslim women with a unique story about her head dress. Abu-Loghod is a member of the perseus book group who gives her own opinion about the burqa and its purpose. Haydar speaks to teenagers and tries to appeal to the new generation, where as AL tries to appeal to high scholars for an educational stance in the argument. Both AL and Haydar defend the culture of the head dress and explain that it is an optional garment that has strong benefits to all women who wear it.


The head dress is not forced by men, as AL and Haydar will explain, but symbolizes modesty and beauty. AL explains "First, the Taliban did not invent the burqas in Afghanistan." (Lughod 3)

The women that wear this head dress should not be pitied, explained by AL. AL writes, "One need only think of the American organization the Feminist Majority, with their campaign for the women in Afghanistan, or the wider discourse about women's human rights. Like the missionaries, these liberal feminists feel the need to speak for and on behalf of Afghan or other Muslim women in a language of women's rights or human rights."

A Huge difference about how AL and Haydar view this argument is their uses of evidence, Haydar like to use her own personal anecdotes to justify her opinion, while AL uses historical evidence to show that women have made this choice to benefit themselves.