This study aims to investigate potential societal consequences of the ongoing western culture wars by looking at a crucial aspect of the concept, the usage of extreme elite rhetoric. Specifically, how does extreme elite rhetoric affect the likelihood of civil war? The theoretical argument is that extreme elite rhetoric increases the likelihood of civil war because of the negative impact it has on affective group polarization which, in turn, creates destructive group processes necessary for violence. In order to examine if this is the case, a small-N case comparison is conducted in which the cases of Ivory Coast and Zambia are compared. The findings indicate that the difference in political rhetoric, extreme rhetoric in Ivory Coast versus inclusive rhetoric in Zambia, was a contributing factor to the difference in outcome, civil war onset in Ivory Coast (2002) but not in Zambia. As shown, this appears to be because of the impact the different rhetoric had on affective group polarization; a sharp increase in Ivory Coast whereas it was largely mitigated in Zambia. Consequently, in line with the findings, the usage of extreme elite rhetoric, and thus culture wars may increase the likelihood of civil war.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2017-05-12T11:24:18Z No. of bitstreams: 1 andreasilveiradesouza.pdf: 751111 bytes, checksum: d9de133bfa6803c3ccba0742f02c7de6 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2017-05-17T15:28:18Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 andreasilveiradesouza.pdf: 751111 bytes, checksum: d9de133bfa6803c3ccba0742f02c7de6 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-17T15:28:18Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 andreasilveiradesouza.pdf: 751111 bytes, checksum: d9de133bfa6803c3ccba0742f02c7de6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-02-22 / CAPES - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / O objetivo geral da presente tese consiste na análise dos elementos teológicos e políticos que animam e que marcam o antagonismo entre as correntes fundamentalistas reformista e reconstrucionista no espaço público americano. Neste sentido, buscamos verificar como estas duas perspectivas, que se alimentam da mesma fonte teológico-filosófica, o pensamento do teólogo presbiteriano Cornelius Van Til, interpretam este pensamento de maneira tão distinta e concebem duas formas opostas de abordagem e inserção religiosa, sociopolítica e cultural. O intuito de nossa pesquisa é verificar, por meio da análise do discurso de Cornelius Van Til e de dois dos mais proeminentes representantes das correntes reformista e reconstrucionista, o teólogo Francis Schaeffer e o economista e teólogo Gary North, de que forma essas duas correntes fundamentalistas interpretam, porque assim interpretam, e também como e porque estabelecem suas ações sociais e políticas de maneiras opostas, tendo como base uma mesma perspectiva teológica. / The general goal of this dissertation is to analyze the theological and political elements that inspire and define the antagonism between the reformist and reconstructionist fundamentalist currents in the American public sphere. In this way, we seek to verify how these two perspectives, which feed themselves on the same theological-philosophical source, the thought of the Presbyterian theologian Cornelius Van Til, interpret this thinking in such a different way and conceive of two opposing forms of religious, sociopolitical and cultural approach and insertion. The purpose of our research is to verify, through the analysis of the discourse of Cornelius Van Til and two of the most prominent representatives of the reformist and reconstructionist currents, theologian Francis Schaeffer and the economist and theologian Gary North, how these two fundamentalists currents interpret, why they do it, and also how and why they establish their social and political actions in opposite ways, based on the same theological perspective.

Drawing from observation, autoethnography, ethnographic research and audio-taped interviews, this thesis explores the complicated and emotionally charged relationship between homosexuality and Christianity. The current culture war being waged in the media between the Religious Right and members of the LGBT community often results in the isolation and rejection of those who would define themselves as gay Christians. This thesis explores the role of the Bible as it informs and catalyzes this war and other foundational beliefs used as weapons in this rhetorical conflict. Additionally, this thesis analyzes the current battle between the church and the social movement for change in light of the historical battles fought over similar movements. The rhetoric of Christianity, specifically Fundamentalist rhetoric, has been emphatically defended and then dramatically changed in every such battle. Is this a possible resolution for today’s current battle? The thesis explores the historical basis and current application of rhetorical effects on this conflict through the author’s insight as a veteran of both worlds, interviews with major players in the battle such as Randy Thomas and Kristin Tremba of Exodus International and interviews with people who step on the battlefield everyday as pastors, congregants or observers in the fight. With each interview or rhetorical analysis, the viability of dialogue between these two groups is questioned and investigated.

No description available.