Analysis Of Trump’s Response To The White Supremacist Movement In Charlottesville

Perception of Trump’s statement by white supremacists

Question:

Discuss About The Perceive Comment Positive One That Seeks?

“We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides, on many sides,” Said Trump while on vacation at his Bedminster Resort.

In my own culture and political view as a white, I would perceive the comment positive and one that seeks to unite the nation on a common agenda of demonizing hate and violence in the states. As an individual, I felt that the president did not attack the white supremacist group for the offense, despite the fact that the violence and attacks sprouted from the organized event where civilians and the police were operations. The speech was given by Trump after violence spread across Charlottesville in a speech that received mixed feeling in the way the president unwillingly avoided to rebuke the white nationalist movement by its name despite the same being visible and evident.

 In my view, since I supported the movement, viewed it as a rhetorical victory on our side where the president left the interpretation open in defining hatred and violence concerning the violence which spread quickly (Ramage, Bean & Johnson, 2015). By saying on many sides, the president did not directly attack the white supremacist movement and stayed clear from offending the group drawing his recent support for the movement during his campaign speeches.

 Drawing reference from his campaign speeches, it was evident that he ‘fought’ for the restoration of white supremacy by condemning the blacks who in most cases were referred to as immigrants. In my view, I found the statement rhetorical as his statement on many sides pointed fingers to all the movements engaged in race activities despite the single case leading to the violence being caused by the white supremacist group. Later, the president issued another statement terming racism as evil and that all that caused the same were termed as thugs and criminals including white supremacists, Neo-Nazis, and other groups (CNN, 2017). This too went down well for me despite mentioning the white movement. However, the rhetoric comes in whereby other teams were referred to in an isolated event where the white supremacists were the sole perpetrators in the case.

Therefore, it was a win for me as it did not openly rebuke the group as opposed to the situation when referring to the black supremacy groups in similar situations.

Perception of Trump’s statement by black supremacist groups

However, the same can be interpreted differently by the Black supremacy groups and its supporters regarding the level of address it received. A similar event involving black supremacist groups in a fight with the police would have received stronger and more direct condemnation which would have the specific name mentioned in isolation. In many occasions during the campaign, the president blamed the Black Lives Matter movement following the murder of police officers which is a similar occurrence that happens even in the white supremacist management frequently. The rhetoric lies in the intentional omission of blanket condemnation in black isolated events but having an inclusion whenever it occurs among the white protesters (Abel, 2014).

In a way, the president strives to drive a negative message to the event but fails to mention the direct people involved despite the facts being open, a total contrary to the case of black demonstrators. In a way, I feel the people from the other side of the race would feel much aggrieved and let down whenever the president condemns the event while labeling all groups as evil instead of dealing with the case in isolation. Thus, the rhetoric can be read in different angles depending on the side where one belongs. The state was a big win for the whites while a letdown for the blacks who face unequal condemnation when faced with a similar situation.

“We’ve seen a great deal of really troubling stuff in the last week, a spike in harassment, a spike in vandalism, physical assault. Something is happening that was not happening before,” ADL national director Jonathan Greenblatt speaking to the New Yorker.

The second statement on the similar issue associated the president to the rise in the violence fronted by the white supremacists. The rhetorical statement on something happening that was not happening before relates to the growth of protests among the whites that were not recorded before during the President Obama regime (Herrick, 2015). On my side, the statement hurts the whites whose case is being related to the soft spot the president takes on their movement’s activities. The fact that Trump kept on defending the same and issuing statements that directly pointed to their support justified the rhetoric in the statement issued by ADL national director.

On the other hand, this is a statement that resonates well with the culture of the Black Lives Matter who draw a lot of support to the fact that the president is having a double standard on the issue of racism. The fact that the activities have grown in number in the present days, preferably after his election meant that he stood for them thus becoming a mockery on the side of the whites (Ramage, Bean & Johnson, 2015). Further, the statement acts as a win for the other movements and groups that were mentioned in an event where they did not participate as it is seen as an attack on the president for supporting partly the activities of the White Supremacist groups.  

The power of rhetoric in shaping interpretations

In my research, I purposed to focus on Trump’s statement which would be received differently by the white and the black race movements. The power of rhetoric in his issuance of statement addressing different events stirs different interpretations which lead to a different view on the given situation. The broad support of defense he received the report from the whites showed the level of sharp racial issues. On the other hand, it received negative comments mostly from the black movement groups and their proponents. On the contrary, the speech by the ADL national chairperson received the reverse of what the President faced. Therefore, the power of rhetoric was demonstrated in both statements sparking uproar on the social media.

The statement below is an extract from one of the sources used to illustrate the level of rhetoric speech in President Trump’s response to the white supremacist movement. 

“We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides, on many sides,” Said Trump while on vacation at his Bedminster Resort. (CNN, 2017).

The piece of information was extracted and used in the research from the CNN website where the news appeared on August drawing analysis to the case observed during the violence that erupted after protesters met the police during their white supremacist movement in Charlottesville. The information was delivered by President Trump following the violence where he gave his reaction to the menace.

Research process involves the act of extracting information relevant to a topic of choice which focuses on the elements related to a given assignment. The process is done carefully to present the issues in a detailed manner which offers a reflection of the factual information under study. In the long run, different pieces of information collected from various peer reviewed sources are used to support the main theme of discussion (Best & Kahn, 2016).

In the research, I chose to use the statement from the response by President Trump to the White Supremacist event that led to violence in Charlottesville and the references used therein. Before coming up with a statement or extract in research, a lot of mind thoughts are done to come up with the best source that meets the credibility stands in research. In most cases, the use of paraphrase in the research is essential in avoiding the act of using quotation marks all over the paper as it’s a literary style where one can extract meaning from a sentence while drawing reference accordingly.

The use of paraphrase and direct quotations in research

On the other hand, summarizing is used from the news source where unique elements quoted from a given reference or direct quotation can be used to expound on the issues discussed in the statement by different analyzers. The use of summary in research is essential in cutting down non-essential facts within a research source which does not apply in the context needed. The use of direct quotation remains inevitable in the Western culture where the existence and influence of fake news remain to thrive.

 Statements issued by individuals have to be quoted and subsequently summarized after that to draw much credence to a given statement. For instance, it was prudent for the source to directly quote part of the speech delivered by the President following the violence to bring credibility to its organization as a broadcasting and media firm. Direct quotation is common in published reports and more especially the media where it relays information that can be proved and authenticated before reaching the public domain.

Paraphrasing and quoting relates to rhetorical situations since the words quoted can be explained easily through a paraphrase to explain the several components discussed therein. Paraphrasing relates to the art of extracting meaning from a quote or works of another person while using the same to explain a given phenomena. According to Scott (2014), it becomes easier to explain the different rhetorical elements existing in a given quote and making it clear to individuals in a well explained and analyzed form. Summarizing assists in putting a long speech into a context where only small amounts of information can be extracted and put in a summative form for individuals to understand or for research elements explanation (Bean, Chappell & Gillam, 2014).

 Therefore, the three aspects are preferable as they make more sense to the research process which calls for outlining special rhetoric elements in the research process. The secondary references used in the study were authentic and selected from reviewed sources. The choice of extract from the CNN reporting is perfect given the fact that the news source is genuine, global, and trusted for news free from bias. The choice of reference depicts the high level of author experience as it eludes any doubt on the validity of information by giving supporting documents that inform a piece of information.

In conducting research, I first deliberate on the choice of sources to use which in most cases relies on peer reviewed sources which are widely acceptable in academic writing. I judged each source used after reading and understanding the content therein and finding the level of relevancy within a given source. After selecting a number of them and reviewing their content, I preferred those that had a direct relation to the topic of discussion and inputted them through correct citation according to the preferred writing format (Jamieson, 2013).

In the text, I chose to use the APA model in writing where the author and the year of publication are listed in the reference section as well as the source of information. A similar in-text citation is inserted within the text which relates the information to the sources thus making information validated and provable. The research process is long and cumbersome where the relevant information has to be extracted before the actual writing preceded by a sketch or draft on the contents. Proper quotation and reference to a piece of information obtained from online and books have to be noted and well cultivated in the research work. Thus, the research was well done with information retrieved from the next statement as well as other sources to support the same. The choice of referencing style was important as it brought out the important details and sources included according to the 6th edition of the APA writing style.

References

Abel, R. L. (Ed.). (2014). The Politics of Informal Justice: Volume 2: Comparative Studies (Vol. 2). Elsevier.

Bean, J. C., Chappell, V. A., & Gillam, A. M. (2014). business rhetorically.

Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (2016). Research in education. Pearson Education India.

CNN. (2017). Trump made two statements on Charlottesville. Here’s how white nationalists heard them. Retrieved from https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/14/politics/charlottesville-nazi-trump-statement-trnd/index.html

Herrick, J. A. (2015). History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. Routledge.

Huffingpost. (2017). 16 Reasons why no-one should be shocked by Donald Trump’s defense of white Supremacists. Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trumps-defence-white-supremacists_uk_59940e6ae4b04b193361a58a

Jamieson, S. (2013). Reading and engaging sources: What students’ use of sources reveals about advanced reading skills. Across the Disciplines, 10(4), n4.

Ramage, J. D., Bean, J. C., & Johnson, J. (2015). Writing arguments: A economics with readings. Pearson.

Scott, J. (2014). A matter of record: Documentary sources in social research. John Wiley & Sons.