Rhetorical Analysis On 9/11

Words: 1529
Pages: 7

In response to September 11, George Bush addresses the question, "Why do they hate us?" with the answer that they hate “our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote...”. However, critiques that are anti-American and anti-Western frequently center on American policies, actions, or cultural influence. These criticisms can take many different forms and emphasize particular elements of the political system, the economy, American or Western civilization, or foreign policy. In the twentieth century, African, Asian, Middle Eastern, and Latin American communities experienced a traumatic change through the struggles for independence from the west, industrialization, and attempts at building their own nation. These regions experienced …show more content…
The organization used pamphlets and leaflets to spread information about specific anti-imperialist movements, events, and causes. Through its publications, posters, and activism, OSPAAAL actively critiqued American and Western policies, conveying anti-imperialism as a primary theme and emphasizing how the exploitation of western powers led to inequality and poverty within these continents. These materials also portray a theme of solidarity, aiming to unite and promote collaboration among those who have endured these struggles for equality. In general, the goals of OSPAAAL propaganda materials were to raise awareness of global injustices and encourage support for revolutionary actions. And they convey important messages about the tragic and horrific events that the people of Asia, Africa, and Latin America endured, with the hope of raising awareness and uniting them. Initially, many societies did not have anti-American attitudes toward the United States. Rather, societies, such as those in the Arab world, held a positive view and interpretation of the United States. Given its lack of imperialism compared to Britain, France, or Russia, societies perceived the US as a powerful ally and a champion of …show more content…
Makdisi emphasizes how Cold War dynamics and Western geopolitical goals shaped unequal international policies toward nationalist leaders such as Mossadegh and Nasser. Nasser believed that Israel was the greatest threat, but based on Cold War logic, America focused on limiting Soviet influence. America dismissed his attempt at non-alignment and perceived him to be overly ambitious. This caused a shift towards seeing the “U.S. government as a representative of the historic force of colonialism and imperialism (and capitalism) and as a power holding the Arab world back from its rightful place at the eagerly anticipated postcolonial'rendezvous of victory.’” Additionally, America’s persistent political and economic dominance in non-Western nations was evident when the Central Intelligence Agency overthrew Mohammed Mossadeq, Iran's nationalist prime minister, in 1953 after Iran nationalized the Anglo-Iranian Oil