Nixon, Agnew, and the “silent majority”: A case study in the rhetoric of polarization

King, Andrew; Anderson, Floyd Douglas

doi:10.1080/10570317109373712

Cited by 58 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, when issues related to the treatment of historically disadvantaged groups were spoken of in the inaugural addresses of post‐Johnson presidents, frames other than Civil Rights were regularly invoked. Nixon pioneered a more conservative approach—often characterized as his appeal for the “Silent Majority” (King and Anderson )—in his 1969 and 1973 inaugural addresses. For example, in his 1969 inaugural, Nixon implicitly criticized civil rights protesters when he disparaged “inflated rhetoric that promises more than it can deliver; … angry rhetoric that fans discontents into hatreds; … bombastic rhetoric that postures instead of persuading” and promised to listen to “to the voices of quiet anguish, the voices that speak without words, the voices of the heart—to the injured voices, the anxious voices, the voices that have despaired of being heard.” Other Republican presidents may have used coded language (Mendelberg ) relating to crime, drugs, welfare mothers, and other symbols of inner‐city dysfunction, to convey covert antipathy toward African Americans and Civil Rights .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, when issues related to the treatment of historically disadvantaged groups were spoken of in the inaugural addresses of post-Johnson presidents, frames other than Civil Rights were regularly invoked. Nixon pioneered a more conservative approach-often characterized as his appeal for the "Silent Majority" (King and Anderson 1971)-in his 1969and 1973inaugural addresses. For example, in his 1969 inaugural, Nixon implicitly criticized civil rights protesters when he disparaged "inflated rhetoric that promises more than it can deliver; .…”

Section: Civil Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Evolution of Roosevelt's Rhetorical Legacy: Presidential Rhetoric about Rights in Domestic and Foreign Affairs, 1933‐2011

Rhodes

2013

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars view the domestic and foreign commitments of the New Deal and Great Society as embodying rights with quasi‐constitutional status. But little research has examined whether presidents have encouraged citizens to perceive New Deal/Great Society commitments as rights deserving of extraordinary veneration. Based on a quantitative content analysis of hundreds of major presidential addresses and a qualitative analysis of inaugural addresses over the period 1933‐2011, this article shows that presidents have largely declined to characterize major domestic commitments as rights but that they have repeatedly described the United States' mission in foreign affairs in terms of protecting human rights.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Civil Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Evolution of Roosevelt's Rhetorical Legacy: Presidential Rhetoric about Rights in Domestic and Foreign Affairs, 1933‐2011

Rhodes

2013

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A strategy of subversion is concerned with a careful selection of those images that will undermine the ethos of competing groups, ideologies, or institutions. (King and Anderson (: 244)…”

Section: Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Appealing to the social conservatism of many Americans, Nixon created the “silent majority” as a political movement, with a conscience and common identity. Nixon used the strategy of subversion to demonize the war protesters and other groups that seemed to be holding traditional American values and institutions in a “state of siege” (King and Anderson : 248–249).…”

Section: Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modern American Populism: Analyzing the Economics Behind the “Silent Majority,” the Tea Party, and Trumpism

Patenaude¹

2019

American J Econ Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern American populism (MAP) was born out of the political upheaval of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. The article examines the causes of populism. Economic anxiety is found to be the main cause, but there is also evidence supporting an alternative theory that racial resentment is an important driving force behind populism. The article analyzes the role of populism in the 1972 election of Richard Nixon, the Tea Party election of 2010, and the 2016 election of Donald Trump using data provided by the American National Election Studies (ANES). There is ample qualitative evidence that economic anxiety caused the populist voting patterns that elected Nixon, Tea Party candidates, and Trump. Statistical data supported the same conclusion in the 2010 and 2016 elections, but the 1972 data were inconclusive. The data show that both economic anxiety and racial resentment played a role in the 2010 and 2016 elections, but the findings suggest that economic anxiety is the underlying factor that generates both racial resentment and support for populism.

show abstract

“…With such a force there could be no compromise, no halfway measures. Clearly this was the rhetoric of polarization (King and Anderson 1971;Raum and Measell 1974). It functioned to unite Americans and their Western allies against an enemy that was geographically removed, ideologically driven, and historically expansive and imperialistic.…”

Section: The Discourse Of Cold Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

Text and Context in the 1952 Presidential Campaign: Eisenhower's “I Shall Go to Korea” Speech

Medhurst¹

2000

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the textual context of Eisenhower's famous “I Shall Go to Korea” speech, delivered during the closing days of the 1952 presidential campaign. Four interlocking contexts of discourse are identified–the discourses of cold war, foreign policy, Korea, and the Eisenhower persona. By rhetorically activating each of these contexts, Eisenhower invited his listeners to understand his speech not merely as a campaign pledge but as a rhetorically, historically, psychologically, and ideologically satisfying means of making sense of the Korean War. Dramatically structured in the form of a courtroom case, with Eisenhower taking on the roles of both prosecuting attorney and witness, the “I Shall Go to Korea” speech was rhetorically tailored to take advantage of the audience's preexisting beliefs, values, and attitudes.

show abstract

Nixon, Agnew, and the “silent majority”: A case study in the rhetoric of polarization

Cited by 58 publications

References 4 publications

The Evolution of Roosevelt's Rhetorical Legacy: Presidential Rhetoric about Rights in Domestic and Foreign Affairs, 1933‐2011

The Evolution of Roosevelt's Rhetorical Legacy: Presidential Rhetoric about Rights in Domestic and Foreign Affairs, 1933‐2011

Modern American Populism: Analyzing the Economics Behind the “Silent Majority,” the Tea Party, and Trumpism

Text and Context in the 1952 Presidential Campaign: Eisenhower's “I Shall Go to Korea” Speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About