Variation and continuity in intertextual rhetoric

Abstract

This article employs critical intertextual analysis (CIA) to examine how American presidents from opposing political parties respectively inaugurated and extended the war in Afghanistan. After explaining the CIA framework, I investigate two post-9/11 “call-to-arms” speeches delivered by George W. Bush and Barack Obama. I find that Obama responds to changing circumstances (e.g. public dissatisfaction) by varying stylistic elements of Bush’s rhetoric. Nevertheless, he rearticulates the overarching features of Bush’s “war on terror” discourse. Thus, Obama ultimately achieves policy continuity, but only by employing micro-rhetorical strategies that create the appearance of change. I conclude that, if Obama had been more enterprising, he might have enacted real change – and broken completely with Bush’s rhetoric and policy of global war.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 35 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.