Elizabeth Weiser, PhD, email contact: weiser.23@osu.edu
- It’s said that we either learn from history or are doomed to repeat it, but to what extent is this true with regard to the current rhetoric surrounding the War on Terrorism? This project will use archival sources to find and analyze public discourse (both written and oral statements and such public reactions as rallies, memorials, songs, films, etc.) from some aspect of the current war, the Second World War, and the Vietnam War to determine how the language used to define the War on Terrorism is shaped (or not) by that of earlier conflicts. Possible research questions might include: how are government statements post-9/11 similar to or different from such statements post-Pearl Harbor in World War II or the Gulf of Tonkin in the Vietnam War? Does the language of the immediate public reaction mirror that of earlier wars? When does public criticism become acceptable in each conflict? In what ways do government/public debates regarding the later expansion of the wars or the presidential campaigns waged during the wars employ similar rhetorical tactics or reference each other, and in what ways are they unique?