Essay On Global Emotions

President George W. Bush uses pathos in his speech to help unify the people. His wording has people feeling shocked, surprised, and angry. He reasons the cause for the attack was because “we’re the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world” (Bush 7). Bush successfully vilifies the enemy, as it is still strong today, to unify the citizens under a common enemy. He continues pathos with a justice-seeking tone on how he will bring justice to those responsible. With compassion and hope, Bush asks people to pray on behalf of those affected by the

The president appeals primarily to pathos by listing ordinary people who fell victim to “deadly terrorist attacks.” He draws upon the audience’s feelings of anger and sorrow by including “moms and dads, friends and neighbors” among the murdered. President Bush details the efforts of different parts of the government to guarantee safety and stability. He guarantees his audience that everything possible is being done to find the terrorists who were responsible for the attacks. Also, the president shows pathos by saying this “Tonight, I ask for your prayers for all those who grieve, for the children whose worlds have been shattered, for all whose sense of safety and security has been threatened.”

September 11th catalyzed a major revival in the American public’s concern for domestic national security, which had dropped off following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The attacks, which were the first on American soil since Pearl Harbor, prompted American leaders to respond with swift and ambitious military action. At this time, the public perceived security of American territory against “terrorism”–an intentionally broad and emotionally charged term– as its chief national interest. Following the attack, President Bush announced the launch of a “global war on terror”, an international effort to combat terrorist groups and the nations that harbor them–prompting him to establish the Department of Homeland Security later that year.

On September 11th 2001, the United States was hit with a devastating blow when four commercial airplanes were hijacked by Al-Qaeda terrorist who deliberately crashed two of the planes into the World Trade Center complex, and a third plane into the Pentagon. The fourth plane, headed for Washington D.C., instead crashed in Pennsylvania. Nearly 3,000 lives were lost on this egregious day. In response, President George W. Bush waged the controversial “Global War on Terrorism” which turned out to be a self-inflicted wound for America, bleeding still today. Bush’s highly-criticized decision was inconsistent with the strategic principles of war.

The main point of this article is to criticize Trump’s actions handling issues carrying out role of leading a nation. In response to airstrikes and nations varying justifications, the author states in source B, “chaos engulfing the Trump administration that the U.S. airstrikes on Syria had to jostle for public attention with the voluminous news of the president's scandals.”(Boot) This quote signifies the overall theme of the article that the author believes Trump and his administration actions are not sufficient in dealing with Syria. The author uses fallacies such as red herring to divert attention away from the real issue and onto Trump’s personal life. The author’s opinion used to influence readers shown when the author states, “It is hard to imagine how Trump can do his job - for example, approving military strikes on Syria - while drowning in this rising tide of scandal.” (Boot) Source B reveals the

When the men of Agamemnon come to take Briseis, Achilles gives her up without a fight, despite how heavy his heart is at the thought of losing her. Once she is gone, Achilles withdraws from his companions and sobs, praying to his mother to understand why he is treated the way he is, why he isn’t treated with respect. His mother, hearing his laments, comes to console him, telling him that she will visit Zeus and try to sway him towards helping the Trojans and destroying the Achaeans, to make them pay for disrespecting the son of Thetis.

Following the death of the Federalist political party, and after entering a time of political unity, the United States entered what historians refer to as the “Era of Good Feeling”. This era began after the War of 1812, a war between America and Britain, and the Napoleonic Wars, a series of wars taken place in the seas near France, ended. The Federalist party was dissolving at the end of the war, and was completely dissolved when Monroe came into office as president in 1817. At the start of this era, there was primarily a one-party political system, the Democratic-Republicans, and there was a rise of nationalism, hence the era received the title “Good Feeling”. Socially, this nationalism was felt throughout the entire nation, specifically directly following the war, in 1815-1817. Economically, however, the issues of state sovereignty led to the rise of sectionalism, not deserving of the title “Good Feeling”. Furthermore, politically, America at this time began to split into the second party system. While at the start almost everyone was Republican, sectionalism arose during this era, and ultimately led to the ending of the good feelings entirely. Overall, the time between 1815 and 1825 is undeserving of its name, “The Era of Good Feeling,” and sectionalism played a larger role in the United States at this time then nationalism did.

Prior to 9/11there had been various terrorist attacks on Americans around the world and on American soil. However the events of September 11 intensely changed the United States Government’s approach towards terrorism. After September 11, the Bush Administration changed the previous American approach, which had primarily employed the combined tools of diplomatic cooperation, economic sanctions, and internationally coordinated law enforcement measures (Lee 2007: 137). Instead, the President declared in the aftermath of September 11 that the United States was engaged in a war on terrorism. In this war all terrorists who plotted against the United States and those who supported them were subject to American justice. This new

Although different emotions sprout different response, Smith argues that people’s cannot go beyond their own selves and therefore use personal conceptions to judge others’ sentiments of joy or grief. Smith states that although we can sympathy with others’ emotion, we cannot truly go beyond our own personal experience and preconception because “it is by the imagination only that we can for any conception of what he suffers” (1). Therefore, although one may sympathy with others’ feelings, people are always limited to their “own person.” Smith explores “there are some passions of which the expressions excite no sort of sympathy” (2) because it may depend on people personal perception or preconceptions. For instance, Smith argues that “the furious

Many times we fail to notice how those three emotions: sadness, anger, fear and many more can transfer to many people whether that affect is unintentional or purposeful. Yet, Sara Ahmed in “Affective Economics” explores the ways in which emotions and affects moves through bodies and effects groups of people. Ahmed explores how emotions can be performative and productive in order to show the effects emotions can have. Likewise, in Katie E. Oliviero’s “Sensational Minutemen” Oliviero explores how the Minutemen of the 2000s harness the performative qualities

On the brink of two different wars, two United States’ Presidents rose up to the challenge of calming the American people and fighting for the belief of justice. A day after devastation on December 7, 1941, Franklin D. Roosevelt gives his “Pearl Harbor Address to the Nation”. At the beginning of a terrorist crisis in 2001, George W. Bush announces a “‘War on Terror’ Declaration”. Both Presidents have many similarities in common, yet their differences set them apart with uniqueness. These two speeches, separate by nearly sixty years, weave an outright and assertive tone into their diction and detail.

The terrorist attack on 9/11 rattled the nation. In the immediate aftermath of the attack, it was entirely necessary for a resonant response by the United States to show that the country does not stand for such blatant disregard of human life. With the benefit of hindsight, it is now possible to look back and discern what factors drove the changes that were made to foreign and domestic policy as a direct result of the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately, both policy changes were emotionally driven, but it appears quite clear that the domestic response was largely anxiety driven, while the foreign policy response was dominated by anger and a desire for

Looking at this chapter when Mitch talks about his brother Peter, he expresses that he had a good childhood with his brother but growing up they drifted away from each other. Family is important because if we didn’t have family we wouldn’t know what friendship was. We can learn lessons from family about how people really are in the world. Family love is something everyone needs to make it through life. Family can influence us to do great things in life but also show us that there are going to be bad people throughout life.

Global Politics The study of international or rather global politics, seeks to provide an account of politics in the broadest domain. The domain of international politics in the twenty-first century is characterised by the increasing number of actors pursuing common and personal interests. It is largely due to the globalised, interdependent nature of the current international political environment that the concepts of sovereignty and power deserve further evaluation.