A Rhetorical Analysis of the Speaking of Barry Morris Goldwater, 1969-1974
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1980 A Rhetorical Analysis of the Speaking of Barry Morris Goldwater, 1969-1974. Sharon Bowers Porter Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Porter, Sharon Bowers, "A Rhetorical Analysis of the Speaking of Barry Morris Goldwater, 1969-1974." (1980). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3569. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3569 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If if was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University M icrdrilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR, Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ, ENGLAND 8110423 P o r t e r, S h a r o n Bo w e r s A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SPEAKING OF BARRY MORRIS GOLDWATER, 1969-1974 The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical ColPH.D. 1980 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Copyright 1981 by Porter, Sharon Bowers All Rights Reserved A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SPEAKING OF BARRY MORRIS GOLDWATER, 1969-1974 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Speech by Sharon Bowers Porter A.B., Florida Southern College, 1964 M.A., University of South Florida, 1975 December, 1980 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank the following people for their contribution to the development of this study: Dr. Waldo W. Braden, for his support and patience in directing the project . Dr. Harold Mixon, Dr. John Pennybacker, Dr. Donald Ragsdale, and Dr. Robert Von Brock for their assistance in assembling the manuscript . Dr. David Thomas of the University of Houston for his interest, guidance, and insight . Mrs. Judy Porter and Mrs. Sandy Messersmith for typing and proof-reading the manuscript . and Mr. and Mrs. Evan Bowers and Danny Porter for their unwavering faith in both the study and the author. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................... ii ABSTRACT.................................... iv Chapter I. INTRODUCTION................. 1 II. THE MAN: BARRY MORRIS GOLDWATER .............. 11 III. THE CONSERVATIVE MIND..................................... 26 IV. FAVORABLY DISPOSED AUDIENCES ............................ 51 V. NEUTRAL AND HOSTILE AUDIENCES. ......................... 136 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS................................ 200 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................. 239 VITA ..........................................................249 ABSTRACT The late 1960’s and early 1970's witnessed a political renaissance of conservatism in America and a resurgent interest in the conservative Senator from Arizona, Barry Morris Goldwater. This dissertation attempts to explain how the Arizonan made rhetorical choices in light of his political ideology. The investigation focuses on the question of whether Goldwater's conservatism or his view of himself limited his rhetorical flexibility and/or the ultimate acceptance or rejection of his messages. To facilitate this task, a comparison was made of how Goldwater approached two diverse audience types: (1) partisans and (2) neutral and hostile groups. Barry Goldwater's rhetoric displayed the characteristics of the authoritarian personality. His method of information processing re flected the tendencies of isolating information, filtering incoming data through accepted authority figures, and a reluctance to process new and scientific information. The Senator also exhibited the characteristics of this personality type through the drawing of specific in-out group distinctions and a view of the world as a hostile and threatening place. Barry Goldwater coached his arguments in terms of fundamental values and principles. To be free and to enjoy the individual liberties inherent in the democratic form of government demanded that man be strong, honor his commitments, and adhere to a system of societal laws and order. These were the fundamental premises on which Barry Goldwater's positions were based. Between 1969 and 1974 the Senator assumed the mantle of a states- man-preacher. Assured that the public was ready to receive 'the truth' as represented by the Senator through the guidelines afforded to him by the conservative ideology, Goldwater proceeded with his mission to dispense these facts to the masses. The claims, evidence, analogies, and reasoning, as well as the argumentative and persuasive strategies the Senator used, support the feeling held by the Arizonan that his mission was to impart the gospel of conservatism to the American public in the hope that they would use its guidelines as a cornerstone for action. Established as the spokesman of conservative audiences and convinced of the correctness of his position, the Senator saw his rhetorical purpose with these individuals as one of mobilizing strength for the cause they shared. Convinced also that the people listening to him would accept his position, the Senator capitalized on common premises and the means by which these individuals assimilated information rather than on offering formally valid arguments. Viewed as an authority figure for these groups, he based his arguments on premises they espoused, and constructed his arguments so that the listeners could easily accept them without causing dissonance with the other beliefs they held. When Barry Goldwater spoke to neutral and hostile audiences, he was dealing with a segment of society that did not share his view of reality. The Senator did adapt to his audiences when he argued for change and when he used broad-based American values rather than conser vative premises. However, primarily Goldwater based his rhetoric to neutral and hostile audiences on the belief he was now an accepted leader and an authority figure in the political sphere. Essentially the topics on which the Senator spoke and his stand on those issues were not appreciably different from those espoused in 1964. Goldwater's failure to present formally valid units of proof hampered his effectiveness with non-conservative audiences. These groups neither understood nor accepted the reasoning processes the Senator advanced. Operating from a different frame of reference, the information provided by the Senator failed to penetrate their belief- attitude structure. Chapter I INTRODUCTION The end of a free society is served by the interplay of rival forces as long as they blend the diverse groups into a unified system.^ This blending is exemplified by the liberal and conservative factions within the Republican and Democratic parties. Ralph Waldo Emerson stated of liberalism and conservatism, "each is a good half, but an impossible whole. In a true society, in a true man, both must 2 combine." In The Liberal Tradition William Orton indicates the function and interrelationship of the ideologies. Without the centripetal check of Conservatism Liberalism flies off in tangents toward radicalism, academic utopianism of philosophical anarchy. Without the centrifugal urge, Conservatism becomes mere dead-centrism, ossification of class or caste structure, Colonel Blimp with his what-we-have-we hold.^ The political philosophies of liberalism and conservatism provide checks and balances as they operate