Politicians often use language as a tool to persuade the general public with their assertion of power. Politicians use linguistic strategies and rhetorical devices to persuade and to have an effect on its audience to achieve their political goals. Rhetorical ploys are a way to persuade without making a real argument while linguistic phenomena makes it hard for the receiver of an argument, to detect what is actually being argued. This essay aims to analyse how linguistic phenomena and rhetorical ploys are used to blindfold the intended meaning with examples from political speeches.
Since a great variety of linguistic phenomena and rhetorical ploys exist, this essay will limit to show examples of the rhetorical ploys smokescreen and compassion and the linguistic phenomena vagueness and quantifiers.
In an article from the economist it is discussed that the use of language between the Republicans and the Democrats is a war of words. The Republicans and the Democrats use smokescreen to obfuscate arguments to avoid discussion of an issue by changing the subject. In the…show more content… If speakers or writers do not use quantifiers with adequate precision, it can become unclear and lead to possible misinterpretation and rhetorical abuse . It is crucial to know that using quantifiers in an argument can sometimes be deliberately on purpose to support and strengthen the argument. The use of quantifiers in speeches can have bad impact on people and should be used carefully. One of the best examples is the statement from Brian Kilmeade, Fox News, “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims” . This statement generalises all Muslims to be terrorists, which is not true. It is well known that some terrorist acts have been executed by Muslims, but definitely not all of them. Anders Breivik who did the massacre on the Norwegian island Utøya is a European example of