September 11, 2001 is a day that lives in infamy for American people. Every year Americans remember the how for the first time in history, multiple aircrafts were hijacked and used as weapons to destroy American landmark buildings such as the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. The 9/11 terrorist attacks marked the first instance of globalized terrorism. 9/11 and every act of terrorism after like Je suis Charlie and the November Paris attacks represents the economic and political nexus of emerging terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. This paper will compare the perspectives of two scholarly journals on terrorism, Dirk Haubrich’s “Modern politics in an Age of Global Terrorism: New Challenges for Public Policy” and Alan Krueger’s “Education, Poverty and Terror: Is there a causal connection?” to compare how terrorism is addressed politically and economically from each discipline. The paper “Modern politics in an Age of Global Terrorism: New Challenges for Public Policy,” implements political techniques such as appeal to scholarly audience through language, use of political techniques, and references to important political philosophers. While the paper, “Education, Poverty and Terror: Is there a causal connection?” uses strong empathetic language, emotion and pathos, and statistical data to support economically based opinion.
Language differs between each of these articles greatly. To start off these two sources define terrorism very differently. In Haubrich’s article he defines domestic terrorism as terror were the aggressors and victims homelands overlap, and global terrorism as terror actions and threats against foreign, diplomatic, or military-strategic policy. This definition has a very small geopolitical scope. Because of his political discipline, Haubrich is programmed to looked at terrorism as a geopolitical issue; before any other issue. Therefore the use of words like “diplomatic” and “military-strategic policy” displays his discipline because those are specific to political study.
In Haubrich’s article he defines domestic terrorism as terror were the aggressors and victims homelands overlap, and global terrorism as terror actions and threats against foreign, diplomatic, or military-strategic policy. This definition has a very small geopolitical scope. Because of his political discipline, Haubrich looks at terrorism as a geopolitical issue; before any other issue. Therefore the use of words like “diplomatic” and “military-strategic policy” displays his discipline because those are specific to political study. While it may seem like an obvious statement that political theorist uses discipline specific words, it is important to note why he uses this language. Haubrich does this because using this language appeals to the scholars of his same field. Using such language, is important because complex theoretical concepts, such as the concept of liberty and terrorism, discipline allows his arguments to conveyed in a clearer and concise way. Discipline specific language is a tool that scholars use to remove obscurity.
Since Psychology is a basis of economics Krueger uses words like “fear” and “terror” to define terrorism. The significant difference in language choice between thesetwo sources shows the differing viewpoints between the political and economic disciplines.
Psychology is evidently at the basis of political economy and, in general, of all the social sciences. A day will come when we will be able to deduce the laws of the social science from the principles of psychology. (Cozic, Mikaël, 2015)
The Krueger article focuses on using pathos through addressing public opinion. Throughout the paper Krueger addresses statistically found opinion and tries to change public opinion with facts or a contrasting view like here:
In the aftermath of the tragic events of September 11, 2001, … the National Defense University have called for increased aid and educational assistance to end terrorism … Instead of viewing terrorism as a direct response to low market opportunities or ignorance, we suggest it is more accurately viewed as a response to political conditions and long-standing feelings of indignity and frustration that have little to do with economics. (Krueger, 2003)
In this same quote the language affects the pathos. Emotionally loaded words like “indignity” and “frustration” allow for the readers to connect an emotional response to “the enemy” or “the terrorist” regimes. Loaded words like these, create a tone of empathy. This display of language allows the readers to understand and empathize with differing views. While this may be a far fetched concept, after reading words like indignity and frustration are emotions, those emotions are important to human ethics and if someone faces indignity politically, Americans can relate to that. Americans faced the same political indignity in 1770’s, Colonists faced misrepresentation and England’s harsh laws and so we revolted, (such as the Boston Massacre and the formation of the Boston tea and eventually the revolutionary war against England. So while it might be obscure, strong language like indignity and frustration allow the author to challenge public opinion through emotion.
Haubrich appeals to pathos in a more effective way. Terrorism is an emotional and passionate subject for almost everyone. To hook the readers, he mention events such as 9/11 to validate his arguments and to give a stronger emotional connection to what is being said. Such at the beginning of a new paragraph he describes a emotional, psychological, and cultural phenomenon called flashbulb memory:
A defining event in the history of a people can be said to occur when virtually everyone remembers where they were – and what they were doing – on hearing news of the event. In the mind of the public, 9/11 has most certainly been an event in this sense. (Haubrich, 2006)
This use of pathos emotionally connects the reader to his work and terrorism. Haubrich uses this to make the reader feel like they are participants in this issue because they have heard stories, have lost family or friends, or they themselves participated in this event. This emotional connection make the information seem more personally significant to the scholars reading this article. This very interesting political technique that politicians use in their campaigning. In 2008 Obama’s campaign slogan was “Yes We Can.” This political slogan directly extends an invitation to the people, so that they can be informed and participate in politics; Almost saying “You and I are going to do this together.” Haubrich uses this same technique so that the scholars that are reading this article become informed, passionate about what he has to say about terrorism, and maybe one day participate in the conversation. The significant difference in Pathos in these two sources shows the differing viewpoints between the political and economic disciplines. The economic discipline uses loaded words to create empathy, while the political article uses example terrorist events to emotionally connect readers to his work and to invoke a sense of participation in the conversation.
Logos, or the appeal to logic, is arguably the most important tool that scholarly articles use. Each article uses different logos to support claims they make. The Haubrich’s article also uses ethos in his different political theories. In his peer review article Haubrich references important political theories and theorist to supplement his claims. When talking about State legitimacy he references John Locke’s social contract.
Such force, however, may cause further violence, brought about by a populace that deems the oppression unjustified and excessive. This interpretation borrows from John Locke’s conception of the social contract, which held the view that individuals merely ‘lend’ (rather than surrender) the power to the government or the prince and reserve the right to take it from him if he has violated the conditions attached to that loan. The principle is enshrined in the democratic process, which forces governments to respond to popular pressures, either because political parties outbid each other in attempting to get into power or because pressure groups make unrelenting demands upon politicians once in power. (Haubrich, 2006)
Referencing John Locke strengthens Haubrich’s argument because John Locke had a strong influence over American politics. His theories revolved around life, liberty, and property. These same theories are found in the first section of the fourteenth amendment which states:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Since Haubrich references him it adds credibility to his logic because America, arguably the most powerful country in the world, uses the same man’s words as a foundation of America’s governing system. This strengthen’ his argument since what he says in supported by John Locke’s influential words. Referencing John Locke strengthens Haubrich’s ethos because it strengthens his logos. Logos is an appeal to logic, if Haubrich strengthens his argument with a credible, famous, and a highly referenced political theory philosopher. Since Haubrich is talking of the political theory between countries involved in terrorist issues, Haubrich makes his work even more credible.
Instead of referencing important political philosophers, the Krueger article uses large amount of statistical data to confirm his claims and refute incorrect common thought of the public. Throughout his paper, Krueger presents new statistical information based on studies he conducted about public opinion polls of certain aspects relating to terrorism. Krueger uses unbiased techniques when conducting his surveys like using randomization and unbiased and simple questions. These techniques are essential to good data collecting and are the basis of correct statistical inference. To increase the “goodness” or validity of his test Krueger performs statistical tests such as Chi-test for goodness of fit and G-test of goodness of fit. Both of these tests test fit of observed frequencies to expected frequencies. Doing these tests shows if there was any biases that influenced the data. Biases are either statistical errors or prejudices in favor or against a group, thing, person, or outcome. Doing these test make for better and unbiased data and can validate conclusions that the author comes to, (within reason.) Using these methods improves Krueger’s arguments because he used tested and unbiased data, in turn fortifying both the logos and ethos parts of his rhetoric. It makes a lot of sense that Krueger or someone else in the economics discipline would use these methods to come up with conclusions. Almost all economist related fields use statistical data to study how, when, and where people of an economy spend money. Using statistical data only improves Krueger’s ethos to his peers because it shows that he is a proficient at conducting statistical surveys and is proficient at interpreting them and coming to the correct conclusions.
In conclusion economic and political disciplinary perspectives address terrorism in very different ways. The paper “Modern politics in an Age of Global Terrorism: New Challenges for Public Policy” implements political techniques such as politically specific language choices, use of political techniques, and references to important political philosophers. While the paper “Education, Poverty and Terror: Is there a causal connection?” uses strong empathetic language, emotion and pathos, and statistical data to prove that despite public opinion terrorism would not be reduced with decreased poverty and increased education, but rather that terrorism is created by political unrest and diplomatic disputes between world powers.
Works Cited
Cozic, Mikaël. "Psychology and Economics in Historical Perspective."Nous Adhérons à Revues.org. Nous Adhérons à Revues.org, 30 July 2015. Web. 3 Dec. 2015.
"Constitutional Topic: The Fourteenth Amendment." USConstitution.net. 24 Jan. 2011. 27 Nov. 2015 .
Haubrich, Dirk. "Modern Politics in an Age of Global Terrorism: New Challenges for Domestic Public Policy." Wiley Online Library. Wiley Online Library, 6 May 2006. Web. 4 Dec. 2015.
Krueger, Alan B., and Jitka Malečková. “Education, Poverty and Terrorism: Is There a Causal Connection?”. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 17.4 (2003): 119–144. Web…
No comments:
Post a Comment