[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.S.global leadership.Thepresident observed that in order for the United States to maintain its leader-ship strong abroad, it must be strong at home.In other words, Americanglobal leadership was predicated on the United States renewing its domesticarena.In doing so, Clinton ameliorated the traditional tension between thetwo exceptionalist missions.He also positioned the United States to managechange offered by an accelerated age of globalization.This reading of Clin-ton s discourse give various implications for the president s foreign policylegacy, specific aspects of his foreign policy discourse (particularly historicalanalogies), and finally implications concerning American exceptionalism.08_421_06_Ch05.qxd 10/8/08 6:13 AM Page 148148 Chapter FiveI begin by asserting that Bill Clinton s overall commitment to Americanglobal leadership was one fundamental part of his rhetorical legacy.As Inoted in chapter 2, there was a major debate at the end of the Cold War aboutwhat role the United States should play in the world.Voices on both sides ofthe aisle called for various forms of isolationism or unilateralism.However,Clinton never wavered in his support of maintaining the U.S.role as globalleader, but leadership that would be more multilateral than his predecessors.James McCormick noted that this basic commitment to leadership offered asignificant foreign policy legacy.17 Clinton secured America s role as worldleader into the future and certainly future presidents will continue this basiccommitment.Moreover, the United States will surely find itself in a transitionperiod in the future where there are debates about America s role in the world.That future leader may draw upon the Clinton presidency, as Clinton did withTruman, to make an argument about America s place in the international or-der.Clinton s words and principled action may serve as a source of authorityfor future presidents who have questions about America s station in the world.Additionally, there are implications concerning Clinton s use of historicalanalogies.Three important insights can be drawn from the president s em-ployment of this rhetorical trope.First, my reading of Clinton demonstratesthat a broader understanding is needed in terms of how historical analogieswork in presidential rhetoric.Although analogy is considered a fundamentalaspect of rhetorical theory, how it is used as a critical device is limited inscope18 and that scope is further limited in studies of the presidency.Whenyou consider that presidents often use analogies in various ways to guide theirdecision making19 it is surprising scholars have not explored this area more,specifically noting the various analogies used and how they are used.Jill Edyobserved that historical analogies  can be used to predict the future. 20 Theyserve as  lessons of history 21 when contemplating future action.RichardNeustadt and Ernest May offer similar conclusions when they argue thatanalogies are used by political leaders to guide their thinking on a particularissue.22 I emphasize the words  contemplating and  guide to make a spe-cific point.Certainly political leaders use analogies when considering or con-templating a particular action.However, this book reveals another nuance tohow historical analogies work.These analogies serve to sanction a principleor policy that has already been put forth.In other words, historical analogiesare used to justify and persuade audiences about a particular decision that wasalready made.Clinton used historical analogies to sanction his decision tomaintain America s role as world leader, while at the same time they servedto rebut those who argued America should have curtailed its role within thepost Cold War environment.Moreover, this sanctioning principle was carriedover into decision to expand NATO, improve the transparency in the IEOs,08_421_06_Ch05.qxd 10/8/08 6:13 AM Page 149Conclusions 149and his debt relief program [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]