Jason A. Edwards

Apologizing for the Past for a Better Future: Collective Apologies in the United States, Australia, and Canada

This article examines the rhetorical phenomenon of collective apology. Specifically, collective apologies issued by American President Bill Clinton, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper were analyzed inductively to determine the purposes and strategies that make up these speeches. This inductive approach reveals that the purpose of collective apologies is to repair relationships damaged by historical wrongdoing. Moreover, it is found that rhetors use the rhetorical strategies of remembrance, mortification, and corrective action. Ultimately, this research lays the groundwork for collective apology to be considered a distinct rhetorical genre.

The mission of healing: Kofi Annan’s failed apology

Kofi Annan traveled to Rwanda in May of 1998 attempting to repair the image of the United Nations (U.N.) and to heal the fractured political relationship between the two entities. However, the U.N. secretary general largely failed to fulfill his mission. This article analyzes the reasons why Annans mea culpa failed. It argues that in Annans address before the Rwandan parliament, his rhetorical choices constrained his ability to repair the U.N.s image and U.N.–Rwandan relations. Specifically, this article demonstrates that the U.N. leaders nondiscussion of his personal culpability for U.N. action, his democratization of blame for the genocide, and the appearance of personal arrogance created by his language choices hindered his ability to fulfill his mission. The article concludes with implications for image repair theory, lessons from Annans failure for rhetors who apologize for historical wrongdoing, and directions for further research into the phenomena of public apology.

Melding a new immigration narrative? President George W.Bush and the immigration debate

The rhetoric of immigration in the United States is grounded in a cultural dialectic featuring themes of inclusion and exclusion. Throughout American history, one of these themes has usually been ascendant, while the other has been in decline. In this article, the authors analyze how President George W. Bush attempted to construct and manage the immigration issue as he pushed for comprehensive reform. They argue President Bush attempted to accommodate both sides of the immigration debate by using themes of inclusion and exclusion at the same time. Although Bush failed in his attempts to pass immigration reform, his conflicted rhetoric may actually carry with it the key to understanding how future presidents will construct and manage this issue in the near future.

Redress for old wounds: Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's apology for the Chinese head tax

This essay examines how political leaders apologize for historical injustices. Specifically, we analyze Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harpers apology for the head tax imposed upon Chinese immigrants. The prime ministers apology was historic in that it marked the first time a Canadian Prime Minister formally apologized for the head tax. We argue that Harper used a combination of the frontier myth and collective apology rhetoric in his expression of remorse toward the Chinese-Canadian community. While controversial, this rhetoric created a discursive space for a constructive and strengthened relationship between the Chinese-Canadian community and the Canadian government.

The Peacekeeping Mission: Bringing Stability to a Chaotic Scene

This article examines the military intervention called the peacekeeping mission. This article argues that this particular intervention is qualitatively different than war and crisis rhetoric. A tentative model of the rhetoric of peacekeeping that involves 2 elements is proffered. First, it is found that peacekeeping mission rhetors emphasize a chaotic scene that drives American action. Second, and perhaps most important, American intervention is characterized as facilitating security to allow larger political, economic, and cultural stability to take hold within a particular state. Further, peacekeeping mission rhetors highlight the constraints of the intervention to make it more palpable to the American public. Exploring peacekeeping mission rhetoric has implications related to presidential justifications for the use of military force and U.S. foreign policy in general.

Debating America’s Role in the World: Representative Ron Paul’s Exceptionalist Jeremiad

This essay examines Texas representative Ron Paul’s foreign policy discourse during the 2008 presidential campaign. The author argues that Paul encased his opposition to America’s foreign policy within a secular jeremiad. Although Paul failed to win any of the Republican primaries, his opposition to America’s involvement with Iraq and other parts of the globe is a microcosm of a larger debate occurring among U.S. foreign policy elites on the extent of America’s role within the world and about the very nature of its exceptional status. This analysis informs a theoretical understanding of American exceptionalism and interrogates a larger debate in U.S. foreign policy.

Make America Great Again: Donald Trump and Redefining the U.S. Role in the World

In this article, I explore presidential candidate Trump’s rhetoric concerning America’s role in the world. I argue Trump’s rhetoric broke with the post-World War II consensus of maintaining and extending U.S. globalism. I further assert that Trump modified America’s exceptionalist arguments that served as rhetorical support for this consensus. Trump’s rhetoric suggested the United States’ current path in foreign policy was in a state of chaos that needed to be curtailed. His rejection of this postwar consensus and turn toward an “America First” foreign policy would restore order to the United States’ foreign policy universe. Trump’s rhetoric set to redefine the United States’s role in the 21st century but has serious implications for the leadership position it has taken for the past 75 years.

Bringing in Earthly Redemption: Slobodan Milosevic and the National Myth of Kosovo

Slobodan Milosevic’s rise from a minor Communist Party figure to the eventual Serbian president was bound up in rhetoric. Specifically, I examine how Milosevic rhetorically recast and modified the myth of Kosovo. The myth of Kosovo is one of the fundamental pillars of Serbian identity. I argue Milosevic modified the fundamental themes of the myth—disunity and unity—to bring an earthly redemption to Serbs in the late 1980s. Milosevic’s use of the Kosovo myth cemented his hold on presidential leadership in 1989 and is an important example of how past events are fruitful topoi for political leaders trying to build nationalist movements.