Ronald Reagan became president during the Cold War. In this address, he articulates the competing ideologies that had for several decades pitted the Soviet Union against the United States. The Berlin Wall, which cut off West Berlin from East Berlin, became a symbol of the deep divide between Western democratic nations and pro-Soviet governments.
Complete a rhetorical analysis of the speech. How and why is or is the speech not effective? What is the purpose of the text? What is the author’s point of view in the text? Does the author fairly represent both sides of the topic? What point would an opponent of the point of view focus on? This entry should be at least 350 words.
Complete a rhetorical analysis of the speech. How and why is or is the speech not effective? What is the purpose of the text? What is the author’s point of view in the text? Does the author fairly represent both sides of the topic? What point would an opponent of the point of view focus on? This entry should be at least 350 words.
| Just Kidding! |
Part 1
ReplyDeleteWithin President Reagan’s speech in Berlin, he is effective in delivering a message, intended to inform and persuade, to all: the belief that democracy will always prevail over totalitarianism. This belief resonated in the hearts and minds of many, in large part, due to the rhetorical skill of the former president. Throughout the course of his speech, then, Reagan uses a variety of rhetorical strategies that assist him in articulating his strongly held point of view.
Reagan’s capability to appeal to ethos, logos, and pathos advance his argument, and make clear his intentions. To establish his ethos, Reagan primarily draws upon the idea of freedom and democracy, as the majority of his audience in West Berlin has experienced the effects of it; West Berlin, however, had also seen its opposite: totalitarianism. He speaks primarily of the wall that divides from the East and the West, and explains the divide that he seeks to unite, which clearly display his good will and virtue. Also, Reagan also strikes a relatively conciliatory tone, showing his desire to make peace, not further inflame the already heated tensions. Just as Reagan is capable of establishing his ethos, he is similarly effective in utilizing logos. While the whole speech itself truly constitutes this “logos,” one particular aspect of the speech summarizes much of his message – that is, the fact that “Freedom leads to prosperity.… Freedom is the victor.” Leading up to this, Reagan juxtaposes the successes of the Western world with the, as he calls it, “backwardness” of Communism. This leads him to the development of the enthymeme and the core message of his speech, mentioned above. Finally, Reagan is effective in appealing to the emotions of his audience by bringing to light the issue that seems to plague them the most: the Berlin Wall. Many families were torn apart by the building of this wall. By calling for Gorbachev to “tear down this wall,” Reagan not only further articulated his want for freedom, but he also used pathos to help his audience to understand his fundamental belief.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteReagan also uses a tone and style to suit the situation at hand. As mentioned before, his tone seems to be rather conciliatory, and by using a more formal and logical style of speech, he is effective in combining these two rhetorical strategies together to deliver a successful speech. Through his conciliatory tone, Reagan is able to, in a sense, compliment the Soviets for the slight advancements they made for a slight increase in the amount of freedom of its people, which more than fairly represents the Soviets. Because his tone is strikingly measured and conciliatory, however, he must back up his ideas with a significant amount of logic. He understands that many would prefer war, as this, in the minds of many, would portray a strong force against injustice. However, Reagan displaces this assumption with an idea of using defensive rather than offensive strategies. Reagan uses an example from history, namely, how an alliance formed to combat Soviet use of SS-20 nuclear missiles. The alliance “held firm” and because of this, “an entire class of nuclear weapons” was eliminated. This clearly displays the logic behind his argument and tone. If they would remain strong through allied forces and defensive strategies, then they would be able to achieve peace, prosperity, and their mission of democracy abroad.
Reagan, finally, throughout the course of his speech, uses numerous comparisons to display the injustices found within Communist nations. He explains the economic and political successes of various parts of Europe, such as Italy and France, which resulted from free enterprise and a free press. On the other hand, Communism led to an elimination of the dissemination of truth, as well as the destruction of any possible technological or economic innovations. Reagan then uses a disjunctive enthymeme to summarize this position: “It [the Soviet Union] must make fundamental changes, or it will become obsolete.” In this way, Reagan is clearly effective in refuting an argument that would have almost certainly been made – that government control of the economy (socialism) and to a larger extent, communism, makes a positive, just impact on the lives of many and allows for truth to be delivered to all (the statis theories of harm and justice).
Holy Crap! You went all out! I must commend you for the time you took to thoroughly sift through the speech and identify all of its rhetorical elements. I also really liked your opening paragraph. It really did a good job of informing me about what I was about to read. I also liked how you identified the freedom enthymeme. It really is logos in its purest form, and it's uber-important that we recognize it. Excellent work!
DeleteWow, just wow. This is analyzed extremely well. I liked how you analyzed this speech right down to the bone. You definitely know how to dig deep when needed to. Extremely great work!
DeleteAlthough I can’t agree with every single point you made, it was an amazing analysis. It’s clear that you really dove into this speech to find every possible appeal to the rhetorical elements. The major point I cannot agree with is whether Regan sparked tensions with the Soviet Union or not. You clearly establish early on that Regan deliberately avoided prodding the Soviets, but, as I laid out in my own analysis, political tensions were at a point where direct actions would result in destruction, causing Regan to adopt a style of not directly saying all of his points, rather implying his most forward accusations. Otherwise, it is a great analysis of a great speech.
DeleteBerlin has faced such tragedies up to this point, and they are still struggling economically, socially, and emotionally. This is a place that needs a victory and deserves relief from their hardships. Their leaders refuse to help them achieve this and focus solely on complete domination at the cost of the Berliners’ happiness. As President Reagan delivers his speech to the beaten down crowd and separated bystanders at home, he portrays the leader that the world has been waiting for. He explains the issues which are prominent and produces his plans to fix them, as opposed to criticizing them and demanding a change. He wants to be part of the solution to this continuous problem. Rather than just stating the problems that are troubling Berlin, he sparks a discussion among the people and helps explain the ways to fix them. Reagan doesn’t simply take the American outsider approach to this speech: he sees the citizens’ point of view and thoroughly describes how things have progressed this far; he understands that these problems are affecting the entire world. Reagan proceeds to make sure that Berlin citizens know that they are not standing alone. President Reagan truly believes that their is a solution to every obstacle if people on both sides are willing to try to work together. If an opponent were to make a counter argument, they would likely say that President Reagan was too optimistic. Reagan clearly has a strong sense of perseverance and shows his tenacity throughout his speech. But, isn’t optimism a good thing? President Theodore Roosevelt had such a thirst for progression , and he was able to have completed an incredible portfolio of achievements. Without the optimism that President Roosevelt possessed, we would not have untainted meat, the Panama Canal, or the Great Lakes. When Reagan, shows that he has hope, he inspires citizens and leaders to feel the same way. While Reagan isn’t the perfect orator, he is an incredible rhetor. Throughout his speech, he continues to use pathos, logos, and ethos to their full potential. He also uses kairos to impart a longing for change. President Reagan demanded equality and change from the leaders of Berlin. And, in the end, Mr. Gorbachev listened.
ReplyDeleteEmma, I think you did a great job identifying the wide variety of rhetorical strategies that President Reagan used throughout the course of his speech. However, I do kind of feel you gave more of a summary of the speech, rather than a full analysis of each rhetorical aspect. I definitely feel that you could have elaborated a bit more on each aspect, especially pathos, logos, and ethos.
DeleteI'm on the same page as Isaac here. You did identify the rhetorical strategies, but I feel that you could have gone a little more in depth with them, as this was very much more of a synopsis of the speech rather than a true analysis. You veered from the prompt somewhat.
DeleteI really like how you can put focus on the Berlin citizens and how unjust their government is. I also like how you point out that Reagan isn’t perfect, unlike his very well written speech. I do agree with Isaac thought with that you could have been more specific and analytic about the speech. But overall, great job!
DeletePart I
ReplyDeleteIn his famous ”Tear Down This Wall” speech, President Reagan very effectively delivers the message that, as long as we in the rest Western world are enjoying democracy, so, too, will the few who are advocating for continued totalitarian division in Europe. In other words, totalitarianism will die. Reagan expertly and skillfully uses rhetoric to get his point across to the Soviets that democracy is the way to go, appealing pathos, ethos, and logos throughout the entire speech. Before we can dive into the appeals, however, we must first recognize the kairos: that there exists a division between East and West. Throughout the speech, Reagan reminds the audience of the divide and what it is doing to this world. Essentially, Reagan points out that the rift is doing a number on the whole world and needs to end. Now for the appeals. Ethos is appealed to right out of the gate in the second paragraph, saying that he has nothing personally against the city of Berlin or the Soviets, as he says that there is a lot of good, memorable history in Berlin. President Reagan also appeals to ethos several times throughout the speech when he talks about the perks of democracy and what totalitarianism has done to an otherwise respectable society. Reagan’s peace-seeking tone throughout the speech also establishes some ethos, as he repeatedly points out that his mission is a continuation of the missions of preceding US presidents, which is a mission for the restoration of peace and democratic principles to Berlin and the end of totalitarianism. It is in this same way that he appeals to pathos. I felt that his speech was getting the people of Berlin to think, “Now wouldn’t true freedom be nice?” His speech had to have tugged on the heartstrings of the people in the audience, because who wouldn’t want it? Pathos was also appealed to in the first paragraph of the entire speech when he mentions President Kennedy, who basically got the ball rolling as far as trying to free East Berlin went. Surely people remember and miss Kennedy, who was an advocate for a united, democratic, and free world. Reagan appeals to logos when he talks about how the rest of the world made a strong recovery after World War II, but Germany is still stuck behind the times. He knows, as many in the audience likely do, that if the Eastern side of the division would just unite with the Western side, Germany as a whole can rise from the ashes and become just as prosperous as the rest of Europe and Asia. West Germany, which is much more democratic, has done its best to pick itself up and dust itself off, so if East and West unite, they can rise back up together. Later on, Reagan makes up a maxim: “Freedom leads to prosperity.” He uses this to sum up everything he’s iterated about how the two parts of Germany should bury the hatchet and reunite.
Part II
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of this speech was to get the Berlin Wall torn down, ending an era of division in the city of Berlin, and Europe, for that matter. Reagan gave this speech to convince the totalitarian side that democracy is how it ought to be and they won’t get anywhere without it. As such, Reagan speaks from a democratic point of view. He never lets his firm belief that the inconveniences of democracy will never outweigh its benefits, which is easy for him to say coming from the good ole US of A, which has been able to reap the rewards of democracy since 1776. A commie might argue that their system has worked for them, but given the run-down, impoverished state of their side of Berlin, it really has not.
While the first part of the speech is a little heavy on the side of democracy, Reagan does give totalitarianism some time, but not much. His roast at the end is one of the only times, which is when he talks about how those protesting his being there would not be able to enjoy the ability to protest if totalitarianism comes out on top. All in all, Reagan proves his skill as a rhetor, as he does a very good job with the rhetorical appeals, establish credibility, tugging on people’s heartstrings a little bit and firing them up, and getting people to think.
Jarret, I enjoyed your rather extensive analysis of President Reagan’s speech! It puts on full display the variety of rhetorical strategies he used to construct his argument, which, of course, is the central focus of a rhetorical analysis! I also noticed that you put much emphasis on the way he puts ethos to use, which I think is great, because, in my opinion, this was the most important and effective rhetorical strategy used, as many in West Berlin were more likely to want a forceful reaction by the United States. So, by establishing ethos, Reagan was able to gain their trust so they would be willing to listen to his insights. This was a GREAT rhetorical analysis!
DeleteYou did a great job of explaining different things that I did not notice in the speech. I definitely would not have picked up on some of the things you noticed. I really liked how you also incorporated President Kennedy too. Great job!
DeleteI agree with Bethany, you pointed out some things I never even thought of. Very good analysis.
DeletePresident Ronald Reagan was excellent when it came to speeches. President Reagan wanted to almost “upset” the crowd in order for his speech to be more effective. By doing this, the president was able to have an extremely effective speech. Personally, I think he was able to have such an effective speech because he incorporated a large amount of logos, ethos, and pathos. Ethos is present when Ronald talks about the different point of views everyone has dealing with knocking down the wall. He wanted to relate to everyone in the crowd in order to draw more attention to what was going on. Also, he wanted people to hear other point of views instead of having just one fixed opinion. To add to the ethos used throughout his speech, he mentions how the east and the west need to be equal. The main purpose of tearing down the wall that separates Berlin is to unite East Berlin with West Berlin. The two have been struggling to get along, therefore, it is in great hope that the eats and the West will finally come together as one. To establish pathos, I think President Ronald Reagan tries to connect with everyone in the audience, also making it seem as if he knows how they feel. By doing this, he is able to connect with people and better explain his ideas. Logos is used when freedom is talked about. Reagan used freedom as an example because he talked about how certain countries are thriving because their are free, and the there’s other countries in the would who are not free and are struggling. The president definitely wants to tear down the wall in order to, hopefully, establish peace and prosperity. For most of the speech, the president really only focuses on democracy instead of totalitarianism. If he would have spent equal time talking about democracy and totalitarianism, then I think his speech might have been just a tiny bit better. Overall, President Ronald Reagan was able to have a very well written speech. In the end, the wall was torn down. He was also a very good rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteI like your statements about how the President wanted to unite the East and West; you explain perfectly. Also, great enthymeme about the necessity of bringing the West and East together.
DeleteI really like how you started your essay with formally addressing the logos, pathos, and ethos. I also thought it was a great idea to add the enythmeme.
DeleteI also liked how you included the enthymeme, job well done.
DeleteRonald Reagan truly hit the mark with a rhetorical masterpiece with this speech. He established ethos, pathos, and logos, and uses each to their maximum potential. This speech is effective for multiple reasons. It delves into the history of Berlin and the world, as well as repeatedly reiterating that the Wall was a symbol of communism and the enemy to freedom. On the topic of freedom, Ronald Reagan continually repeats that he and the United States are not only looking out for the city of Berlin, but also the freedom of the globe. The purpose of the text is in part to convince the Russian president, referred to as “Mr. Gorbachev,” to demolish the wall separating Berlin, but also the metaphysical wall separating all of Europe. The text also serves as a rallying cry against the political ideology of communism, as well as a rallying cry to join under the flag of and for freedom in and around the world. The author of the text, Ronald Reagan, I believe has a very clear point of view in this speech. He blasts the communist regime currently ruling Soviet Russia, and the ideologies and practices thereof. He also very clearly states that the wall not only threatens the German idea of freedom, but the idea of freedom for the world in its entirety. He essentially lets it boil down to, “Soviet Union, bad. United States and freedom, good.” I think Ronald Reagan does represent both sides seemingly fairly. He does give examples that highlight that the United States is not perfect to be humble, and admits that the Soviet Union has done some things that are beneficial, but in the end he is right in saying that the United States and freedom should and will be the winning force in the Cold War as the Soviet Union and communism are lesser and not as strong. I believe the opposition would focus on the fact that Reagan continually comes back to the ideal of freedom was the most important. They could possibly retort that the nation is surviving just fine without this “freedom.” In fact, the Soviet Union continued for many years after this speech, but it wasn’t a quality existence.
ReplyDeleteI like how you tied in the Soviet Union, and gave two sides of the story in a way. Good job!
DeleteAs we all know, Ronald Reagan was great at delivering speeches, and this one surely was a great example of one of those amazing speeches. In this speech, Reagan uses numerous rhetorical devices to strengthen his argument, which allowed him to be very clear and effective. He was trying to persuade the people of Berlin to tear down the wall and make a must-needed change in their form of government. Along with the main devices of pathos, ethos, and logos, there is a great amount of kairos as well. At the time when he delivered his speech, there was a terrible division between East and West Berlin. Throughout the speech, he identifies the division, the problems with it, and why it is crucial for them to get rid of it and unite together as one. The timing really could not have been better. Now moving onto the rest of the rhetorical devices. Reagan used a very effective balance of pathos, ethos, and logos, but I’ll start with pathos. It was very apparent that Reagan was very emotionally attached to this subject; his words dictated that very clearly. He is very enthusiastic about breaking from totalitarianism and making the switch to a democracy, which he stresses over and over that democracy is the best way to do things and that totalitarianism is causing so many problems for them. This really had to captivate the people of Berlin emotionally. They had such a prominent figure lobbying for their side, which must’ve felt amazing for them. Using the pathos helped him establish his ethos very effectively. President Reagan establishes his ethos right from the very beginning of the speech, and it continues to grow more and more as he continues to talk. He focuses very much on getting freedom for them and that he does not want them to continue to fight. He states he doesn’t have any personal grudges with either side, and he compliments Berlin as well. With the way he was passionately talking about creating change and the wonderful way he worded things, it would’ve been hard for the audience not to like, especially when you consider the time he was delivering this message. Lastly, there is the use of logos. President Reagan used an incredible amount of logos throughout the course of his speech. It seemed for any argument he made, he proved it with factual evidence and specific examples from past events. He did a wonderful job of relating the past to the current situation and blending it all together as one, while still remaining very firm in his argument. He was very educated on his topic, and knew exactly what he was talking about when referring to both governments, which again helped increase his ethos. If a speaker knows exactly what they are talking about and can continue to provide solid examples to back up his argument, it is hard for an audience not to be attracted to that. When you combine the pathos, ethos, and logos as well as the kairos, this speech was destined to be tremendous.
ReplyDeleteI like how you went really in depth for logos pathos and ethos. Good work!
DeleteGreat job discovering President Reagan’s three subjects of his speech. Also, amazing job explaining them and showing how they were effective.
DeleteI agree that Reagan was emotionally attached to this subject. Good job!
DeletePresident Reagan was truly an excellent rhetor. This becomes very evident in his speech given in Berlin. Like all great rhetors, Reagan used logos, pathos, and ethos to sway his audience. Logos is used most in the situations where Reagan is talking about why the wall should be torn down. One example of this is how Reagan says that if the city wishes to be free, and the wall is dividing them, why keep it? Pathos is used a lot throughout the speech. Reagan needed to be emotional in order to get his point across. The most obvious use of pathos is in the famous line, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” This shows that he truly cares for the wellbeing of Berlin. Finally, it is very clear that Reagan uses a lot of ethos in the beginning of his speech. He flatters the audience by talking of all the good things of Berlin and says how much he loves the city. He even goes as far to speak the German language. However, in this situation, it is the kairos that makes this speech special. Take yourself back to the time period and put yourself in that position. Imagine how scared we are now with the Trump v Kim Jong Un situation, but multiply it by one hundred. The world was on the brink of a nuclear war that could have easily left our entire planet in shambles. Think about that for a second. And in the midst of it all, this movie star becomes president. I would be scared too if fate of the world was put in the hands of a new president, especially if I didn't think that he was qualified for the job. Reagan had a lot to prove, not only to his audience in Berlin but also to the people watching back home, the people of other nations, and even to himself. This was his chance to show that he was the man for the job, and he definitely did. By taking advantage of the whole situation that the world was in, Reagan was able to appeal to his audience.
ReplyDeletePresident Ronald Reagan presents an effective and agreeable speech. Within his testimony for the destruction of the wall, President Reagan uses a perfect amount of ethos, pathos, and logos. His ethos is placed in the correct places before he brings up the main subject of his talk. President Reagan also uses many topics of invention including comparisons, historical examples, and past fact/ future fact to persuade his audience to be on his side.
ReplyDeleteStarting off in the second paragraph, President Reagan praises the country of Berlin and states that “it is his duty to speak,” which is important or else his audience could ignore his point of view. The next paragraph appeals to his audience not currently in his presence due to the fact that he is inviting them to hear him out and that he wishes them his remarks. The President stands his ground on his view that the wall needs to be tested down by literally saying it. The President calls out Mr. Gorbachev to take the wall down for the good of his own people. This is very important because his audience, for the most part, also wants the wall to be gone and this unites them. Ethos, establishing authority, and pathos, uniting and creating emotions in the audience, are used in the right amounts and used effectively.
The topics of invention are used frequently throughout the President’s speech because they are effective. The most used invention is comparison. Comparison is effective because it shows that Berlin has changed greatly and has come over many obstacles. This could also be past fact future/ future fact because he is telling his people that change is possible. Also, President Reagan uses an amazing enthymeme which states that because the people welcome change and they believe that security and freedom go together, the people can accomplish anything. The President’s continuous examples of how democracy or freedom helped create amazing countries is effective because it shows that anywhere can be created into somewhere great. He is creating the new future in the audiences heads by using these examples.
President Reagan wants this wall torn down mainly for two reasons. He wants the people of Berlin to come together and be free. He wants the city to establish its old symbols of love and worship. The other reason for tearing down the wall is to let the rest of the world experience the wonders of Berlin. He continuously compliments Berlin of its life trough the difficult times and wonderful arts that have came from them. President Reagan uses his ethos as President and a guest speaker to try to untie the audience to ask for the wall to be torn down. Lastly, the President’s repetitive examples of the past and of others countries opens the minds of the people that good can and will come out of the destruction of the wall.
I love how deeply you took the time to analyze this work. I like your explanation of his ethos, pathos, and logos. Good job!
DeleteIt is clear that you took time to really go in-depth with each of the appeals, and really knew what you were talking about. You didn’t just base your analysis off of what you remembered from annotating it, something that can’t always be said for everyone. A great analysis, overall.
DeleteMultiple presidents have visited Berlin in the past to help the city with their communistic background. Reagan establishes logos, ethos, and pathos that directly applies to the kairos of the situation. The reason President Reagan went to Berlin was because of the wall. The Berlin Wall was established by communists to keep the communist controlled area separate from the democratic region.
ReplyDeleteLogos is very present throughout the entire document. It talks about how many of the European countries have started new from their old ruins, including Berlin. Berlin is now one of the greatest industrial cities in Germany. Logos is also present at the very end of the speech. Regan suggest having the Olympics at Berlin. This would allow people to visit creating the use of Berlin’s sores, hotels, and different restaurants. This is so true, a lot of popularity and growth can be made by this decision.
Ethos is very prevalent in this speech. Not only is Ronald always for freedom, he’s also helping another country with their freedom. This is not mandatory for the United States to do, its out of hope for the other countries to prosper and grow to be better. This shows how the United States is with other countries. Regan wants the best for Berlin, giving them ideas on what to do and how to do it properly to prosper better.
Pathos is also very abundant in the reading. The feeling of hope from the people of Berlin must’ve been phenomenal. Imagine having someone coming in to save them from a horrible memory of communism and all the threats with it. When Reagan said, “Tear down this wall!” The amount of hope and joy felt by the people of Berlin must’ve been out of this world. They all wanted to be saved from this wall and now someone is standing up for them and helping them.
The reason Reagan was so persuasive and helpful in his speech was the ethos, logos, and pathos. Without acknowledging the main points of the speech, the wall might still be up today. The city of Berlin should give thanks for what president did, because he wasn’t forced to, he just chose the option to.
President Ronald Reagan gave one of the best speeches in history while speaking about the destruction of the Berlin Wall. This speech is quite effective because it relieves the violence that had been going on between East and West Berlin for quite some time. Reagan uses ethos, pathos, and logos throughout the speech. Reagan uses many comparisons and historical examples throughout his speech. I believe his comparisons are the most effective part of this speech. The kairos of the speech is also relevant because he is speaking at a time when the Soviets and Democrats were fighting. President Reagan establishes his goodwill by explaining that he admires the Berliners courage and determination. He uses practical wisdom by saying that it is his duty to speak there. He wants to help the, because they truly need it. Reagan establishes moral virtue by talking about how beautiful Berlin is and that "He still has a suitcase in Berlin." Reagan uses pathos by explaining the brutality of the situation, he wants to evoke determination in the crowd. He's calling for a much needed change. He puts courage into his audience. He uses logos by using enthymemes and historical examples. He says that because they remained strong, they have the possibility to eliminate nuclear weapons from the face of the earth. Another example of logos is when he says, "East and West do not mistrust each other because we are armed;we are armed because we mistrust each other." He is pointing out their differences in liberty and justice. A historical example he used was when President Kennedy spoke at that City Hall 24 years before that. He uses this parallelism to point out how when Kennedy spoke the people were free and happy but now when he is here they do not have that same freedom. Reagan wants them to tear down that walk to create a place of love and worship. He wants the people of Berlin to be free from the chains of the Soviets. Reagan is trying to unite the East and West into what they used to be: a symbol of happiness, strength, and love. He is calling upon the leaders and people of Berlin to evoke a change and to tear down that wall. I think that Reagan is very effective in delivering his speech, and he using many rhetorical strategies to do just that.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading Reagan’s speech, I really enjoyed the line about having a suitcase in Berlin. I love that you included it here. Good job!
DeletePart One:
ReplyDeleteThirty years ago, a speech was delivered at the western end of Unter den Linden, or “Under the Linden Avenue.” That speech set in motion a chain of events that would end in the destruction of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the liberation of East Germany. That speech, delivered by the president at the time, Ronald Regan, remains among the greatest pieces of rhetoric in the modern age, and continues to be dissected and analyzed to this day. That speech contained a very simple request, one that incited riots in the city of Berlin for days on end. In that speech, Ronald Regan asked General Secretary of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down a wall.
The speech, upon a cursory examination, appears to only be this request, but when a closer look is taken, it is clear that Regan had several other motives with this speech. Former President Regan had two clear points when delivering this speech: the Berlin Wall should be removed, and freedom will always beat communism. Every word Regan spoke pushed forward both of these arguments. No moment was wasted, everything Regan said had at least two layers of meaning. Take, for instance, the very line that cemented this speech in history. Regan says, “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Regan delivers this line, not only as a request, but as a threat, an offer of friendship, and a question of their reforms. The most obvious interpretation of this line, a request to remove the wall that has been separating Germany for decades, is clear to anyone who reads the lines. Regan’s enthymeme, “Anything that detracts from freedom must be removed. The Berlin Wall is detracting from freedom, and must be removed,” although not directly stated, creates a dividing line between the United States and the Soviet Union. This speech was delivered to half of the world, and many of the politically inclined citizens of any country could see the hidden meaning of this enthymeme Regan created, the Berlin Wall is not the only thing detracting from freedom. The Soviets needed to change, or they would require removal as surely as the wall. Immediately before Regan delivers this famous line, the president calls into question the political and legal reforms that have been taking place in the Soviet Union. These particular lines are not often called upon when the speech is reviewed, as the changes Regan refers to did eventually result in the Soviet Union becoming Russia, but in the historical context, it was impossible to predict where these reforms intended to lead the country.
I love your introduction! Also I like how you explained the motives behind his speech. I definitely agree with your analysis. Great job!
DeletePart Two:
ReplyDeleteRegan makes it clear that if the Soviets are willing to change, the United States will be willing to change their opinion. Regan extends a hand of friendship, but is equally willing to take it away. Regan directly challenges Gorbachev to tear down the wall, a mildly concealed threat that reveals how far the free men and women of America are willing to go to defend their freedom. Although Regan cannot outwardly say it, as the political climate at the time could not allow for such direct actions, Regan implies that hostilities between Russia and the United States will continue until the Berlin Wall is taken down. That is, the Cold War will not end until the Soviet Union withdraws from Germany. This layered way of speaking was President Reagan’s particular style of rhetoric, directly meaning one thing that is easy to accept, while also implying several other things that are either aggravating to a country, such as the Soviet Union, who has the power to destroy the Untied States, or much more challenging to accept. Regan bleeds this style into each of his lines, every word he says could be taken in a completely different direction, depending on who exactly is listening to him. Each person who hears the speech can pull something completely different out of it, much like the Bible. Everyone hears the same words, but everyone has their own meaning derived from it.
President Regan delivered an expertly crafted speech that managed to almost singlehandedly bring about the destruction of the Berlin Wall, and set in motion the chain of events that would end in the creation of Russia and the end of the Cold War. Without that one speech, hostilities may have continued for years on end, possibly continuing to this day. Regan’s many-layered style of speaking was the largest contributing factor, as, in ten minutes, he managed to upset the German population, appeal to and threaten the Russian government, and show how far people are willing to push to stay free.
President Ronald Reagan was a very profound speaker. In his speech on June 12, 1987, President Reagan petitioned to Mr. Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. He also clearly presents the three Aristotelian appeals which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Firstly, he establishes his ethos when he says that it is his duty as an American president to speak to the people of Berlin about freedom. He also says that he has “a suitcase in Berlin.” I think this means that he has political ties with Berlin as well as the need and want to protect it. He also compliments the city and its culture. Ethos is also shown when President Reagan asks Mr. Grobachev to tear down the wall. He presented both sides of the argument by quoting one of the men named Khrushchev. He also talks about the communist political ideology. President Reagan presents logos by telling the crowd about the wall and how it surrounds the city. When he talks about the Strategic Defense Initiative, the Four Power Agreement, and what happens in the City Hall. Another main topic of the logic of the speech was democracy. Although he showed a lot of logic, I feel that he did not support some of his evidence. However, the speech was still effective. President Reagan brings pathos into the speech when he talks about the people’s freedom and being hope to the country. He wants the people to know want freedom is like. He also talks about how he feels a connection with how old the city is. It is five hundred years older than the United States. President Regan showed another emotional connection with the people of Berlin. He shows that, in our hearts, we are all Berlinians. We all want something. To bring hope to the people, he shows them what it could be like if the wall was torn down. This gets the crowd on his side. I think that he wanted to the crowd to be angry about the wall, but then he gets them to agree with him about the wall and make them excited for the future. Overall, President Ronald Reagan’s speech was extremely effective because the city ended up tearing the wall down. He used logos, ethos, and pathos to make his speech great and inspiring. The height of his speech, to me, was when he said, “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”
ReplyDelete