No description available.

No description available.

An Inconvenient Truth (2006) och The planet (2006) är två stycken dokumentärfilmer som behandlar klimathotet och dess globala följder. Uppsatsen diskuterar den retoriska meningen och de retoriska skiljaktigheter, likheter mellan dokumentärfilmerna. Den diskuterar även syftet av de filmsekvenser som används till varje tal/intervju. Uppsatsen innehåller analyser av varje film samt en analyssummering mellan båda filmerna. An Inconvenient Truth (2006) är en dokumentärfilm med fokus på Al Gores och hans kampanj där han försöker informera folk gällande klimathotet. The Planet (2006) är en dokumentärfilm med olika typer av forskare och experter som med hjälp av statistik från forskning belyser vad som händer och kommer att hända med planeten. / An Inconvenient Truth (2006) and The Planet (2006) are both documentaries with focus on the climate change and its global causes. This report discusses the rhetorical meaning and rhetorical differences, likenesses between the documentaries. It also discusses the purpose in choosing types of visual scenes to each speech/interweave. The report contain analyzes of each movie and a analyze summit between both movies. An Inconvenient Truth (2006) is a documentary with the focus on Al Gore with his campaign to inform people about the climate change. The Planet (2006) is a documentary including different kind of scientists and experts who use statistics from their research to show what is happening and what will happen to the planet.

<p>An Inconvenient Truth (2006) och The planet (2006) är två stycken dokumentärfilmer som behandlar klimathotet och dess globala följder. Uppsatsen diskuterar den retoriska meningen och de retoriska skiljaktigheter, likheter mellan dokumentärfilmerna. Den diskuterar även syftet av de filmsekvenser som används till varje tal/intervju. Uppsatsen innehåller analyser av varje film samt en analyssummering mellan båda filmerna. An Inconvenient Truth (2006) är en dokumentärfilm med fokus på Al Gores och hans kampanj där han försöker informera folk gällande klimathotet. The Planet (2006) är en dokumentärfilm med olika typer av forskare och experter som med hjälp av statistik från forskning belyser vad som händer och kommer att hända med planeten.</p> / <p>An Inconvenient Truth (2006) and The Planet (2006) are both documentaries with focus on the climate change and its global causes. This report discusses the rhetorical meaning and rhetorical differences, likenesses between the documentaries. It also discusses the purpose in choosing types of visual scenes to each speech/interweave. The report contain analyzes of each movie and a analyze summit between both movies. An Inconvenient Truth (2006) is a documentary with the focus on Al Gore with his campaign to inform people about the climate change. The Planet (2006) is a documentary including different kind of scientists and experts who use statistics from their research to show what is happening and what will happen to the planet.</p>

This thesis project examines how scientific authority is produced through rhetorical practices instead of the “information deficit” model of science communication. By conducting a rhetorical analysis of the science documentary An Inconvenient Truth, this project demonstrates how the documentary format itself and the film’s leading agent, former United States Vice President Al Gore, attempt to persuade audiences through building degrees of scientific authority by employing multiple rhetorics or narrative themes of science to bolster the scientific facts supporting anthropogenic climate change. Additionally, I demonstrate how these narrative themes parallel three scholarly themes within the rhetoric of science literature: science as a story of perpetual discovery, science as reference, and science as an agent of moral prosperity. I argue that scientific authority is best understood through these multiple rhetorics of science which, in the dramatic case of An Inconvenient Truth, require Gore to overcome certain social and cultural obstacles by appealing to the values and sensibilities of his audience. Successful scientific persuasion, therefore, depends more on the elements of rhetoric rather than solely relying on accurate and verifiable scientific information as the crux of successful persuasion.

Environmental rhetoric has the capacity to render private citizens a concerned public. In doing so, it can prompt in individual practices of what, in classical rhetoric, was described as civic virtue and engage them in activities of responsible citizenship that work toward practical change. Within the recent tradition of environmental public discourse in the United States, Rachel Carson and Al Gore have each realized this capacity in their use of environmental rhetoric, by addressing, respectively, the issues of pesticide pollution and global warming in ways that galvanized citizens as an active public. This thesis examines the reasons behind this effectiveness. It asserts that both Carson and Gore employed a modernized epideictic as a rhetorical tool through which on the one hand, enabled them to invoke the shared values and associated emotions that have the capacity to bind citizens together in common cause, and on the other hand, to convey their own ethical character as civic speakers worthy of trust and emulation. My project in this thesis is to comprehensively track the process of arousing those political emotions and character in the writings of Rachel Carson and Al Gore, both of whom entered the public discourse in moments of environmental crises.

No description available.

No description available.

This dissertation uses Critical Discourse Analysis to study debates among elite members and affiliates of the Democratic Party from 1988-2008 on class issues and their relevance to the party's environmental agenda. This research builds off of several related historical and theoretical accounts (both primary and secondary) of new social and economic divisions between college-educated and non-college educated workers that have shaped American politics since the 1970s. I focus on how Democratic interest in environmentalism changed as a 'professional-managerial-class' or 'new class' supplanted unionized, industrial workers as the primary social base of the Democratic party. I trace how related people and groups associated with the party understood the relevance of these different classes to consolidating enduring electoral power, and how these informed specific arguments for what ideological views or policy proposals the party should publicly embrace. Furthermore, I identify 'green' narratives related to environmental protection, as an emerging thematic framework that some Democrats felt could help them build a coalition based primarily around support from educated, white-collar workers. I contend that the ideological character of the party's environmental rhetoric, as articulated in this debate, has been influenced mostly by attempts to tailor the party's agenda to the perceived sensibilities of the college-educated, rather than the older working-class base. My analysis proposes three overarching core concepts most often ascribed to the professional class and its members' ideological disposition. I use the discursive method described above to explore their relationship to the framing of the climate issue and its connection to broader ideological values. These are (A) Meritocracy (B) Technocratic Rationality, and (C) Individualism. I argue these professional-oriented climate narratives can be understood as adapting the conceptual reasoning of an older liberal tradition to the structural conditions of the post-70s, globalized economy. Specifically, that the frequent emphasis on these three concepts implicit to the PMC-centric discourse is consistent with a liberal view of freedom as 'non-interference', and a related hostility to democratic interventions into the market. This ideological analysis is significant to the dissertation's focus on framings of climate change because an account this conceptual logic reveals the potential limits of the Democrats' efforts to create majoritarian, political support for environmental protection. / Doctor of Philosophy / This dissertation provides an analysis of debates among elite members and affiliates of the Democratic Party from 1988-2008 on class issues and their relevance to the party's environmental agenda. This investigation is informed by existing accounts of the social and economic divisions between college-educated and non-college educated workers that have shaped American politics since the 1970s. I focus on how Democratic interest in environmentalism developed as a 'professional-managerial-class' or 'new class' supplanted unionized, industrial workers as the primary social base of the Democratic party. I trace how related people and groups associated with the party understood the relevance of these different classes to winning future elections, and how these informed specific arguments for what ideological views or policy proposals the party should publicly embrace. Furthermore, I identify 'green' narratives related to environmental protection, as an emerging thematic framework that some Democrats felt could help them build a coalition based primarily around support from educated, white-collar workers. There are two narratives about class and its relevance to the party that recur frequently in these sources. The first advocates for a coalition made up primarily by the working-class, conceived of as wage-earning, high-school educated voters working in domestically bound, blue collar industries. The second argues the party should build a coalition made up of a professional-managerial class—referred to as the "symbolic analysts", "the rising learning class", "ideapolis dwellers", or "wired workers"— conceived of as affluent, well-educated professionals working in globally integrated sectors of a high-tech "new economy". Each of these views are based on identifying specific ideological sensibilities with the respective classes, which then justify arguments for particular framings of the party's identity and policy agenda. I contend that the ideological character of the party's public philosophy, as articulated in this debate, has been influenced mostly by attempts to tailor the party's agenda (or rhetoric) to the perceived sensibilities of the college-educated, rather than the older working-class base. I show that this was motivated by a belief that a coalition built around votes from the PMC would serve as a more reliable electoral base in a political environment where it was difficult to build support through redistributive, New Deal-style policies as the party had done since the 1930s. Some members perceived the professionals' investment in a post-material "New Politics" or "progressive centrism" as an alternative. The college-educated, they argued, could be motivated to support the Democrats on cultural grounds, allowing the party to embrace more free-market policies. In addition, several figures, including Chuck Schumer, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore argued that environmentalism could or should serve as the foundation of this progressive centrist version of the party, because of green issues' supposed compatibility with a 'pro-business', market-based agenda.

This thesis examines the development of decision making taken by two countries, the United Kingdom and the United States, in response to Croatia’s declaration of independence from Yugoslavia. The focus is on the recognition process and the reasoning and rationale used by the government officials and diplomats of the United Kingdom and United States to arrive at their policy decisions and opinions. The concentration is mainly on events from the early 1990s until mid 1992. Topics explored include matters such the politics behind non-recognition, democratic social norms, respect for human rights and Western national interests. The thesis first hypothesizes, then analyses, which International Relations theory, that is, realism or constructivism, possesses the best capacity explain why these nations initially withheld their recognition of Croatia’s independence before moving to accept the Republic of Croatia as an independent state. The role of the International Relations theories is to offer an interpretation and understanding of these events and decisions. Subsequently, they are judged on their ability to do so. The thesis finds that via the insight of scholars, analysts and theoretical perspectives that both the John Major government of the UK and the George H.W. Bush Administration of the United States behaved mostly according to realist principles, with some instances of constructivist manner. / Graduate / 0615 / 1616 / 0335 / cljubic9@gmail.com