Obama

While contemporary communication theorists often avoid the concept of charisma due to its status as an ineffable mystical quality or a natural knack for persuasion, this essay argues that charisma is rather a technē. Using Max Weber's theory of charisma to analyze the major works of the famous community organizer Saul Alinsky, this study seeks to 1) revitalize charisma as a practicable rhetorical strategy, 2) define community organization as one variety of charismatic praxis, and 3) establish Alinsky as an overlooked figure in recent rhetorical history. In recent years, the concept of charisma has been largely ignored by people working in fields related to rhetoric. Although communication scholars showed a flurry of interest in charisma between 1960 and 1980, most contemporary work on this topic is done in the field of organizational psychology. 1 One possible reason for the dearth of new rhetorical scholarship on charisma is that researchers sometimes assume it is an inherent characteristic of some speakers—either you have it or you don't. Indeed, the Greek word for charisma (χάρισµα) roughly translates to " gift of grace, " suggesting that it is something that is inherited rather than learned. 2 Charisma is theorized as a mystical trait, one that is ineffable and irreducible, and therefore inimitable. The enigmatic account of charisma has discouraged communication scholars from undertaking any technical description of this phenomenon. However, a rhetorical theory of charisma that explains not only what it is but how it is done is essential for the effective critique of current speech, politics, and media.

Notion ancienne, le « rêve américain » compte une forte dimension démographique, car il est indissociable des courants migratoires liés aux États-Unis. Or, l’élection de Barack Obama est inséparable de cette notion, puisque le président a déclaré dès sa première campagne qu’il souhaitait « maintenir le rêve américain en vie ».

For centuries, European thinkers, and their contemporary white followers, have run rampant in the halls of academia prematurely championing the success of liberalism to speak to the experience of those historical groups of people excluded from modernity, while simultaneously celebrating the universal embrace by the supple bosom of whites’ anthropologically spe- cific ideas of reason and humanity. This philosophical impetus has solidi-  fied the political regime of integration as not only the most desirable but also the most realizable condition of Black (co)existence in America. The education of Black Americans has been collapsed into a single ideological goal, namely, how to mold these Blacks into more functional and produc- tive members of American society under the idea of equality established by Brown v. Board of Education. Unfortunately, however, such a commit- ment elevates the ethical appeals made by Brown, which focused on higher ideals of reason and humanity found in liberal political thought and the eventual transcendence of racial identity, to moral code. This ideology, instead of attending to what Blacks should learn or the knowledge Blacks need to have in order to thrive as Blacks in America, forces Blacks to abide by the social motives that aim to create good Negro citizens

President O'bama’s eulogy for Clementa Pinckney took the form of a sermon in the black vernacular tradition. This particular sermon exhibits ring-form composition; as such it is symmetrical about a structural midpoint. It opens with the recitation of a scriptural passage and closes with the hymn, “Amazing Grace”. Grace is introduced as a theme in the middle section, which is also where Obama mentions the killer. The sermon is placed in a traditional of black performance going back to 19th century camp-meetings. Finally it is suggested that the performance takes place in an emerging discursive space that is neither religious nor political, but partakes of both.

Opposition to the Iraq War is thought to have contributed to the election of Barack Obama in 2008. The present study shows that controlling for other factors, including the percentage of the vote going to the prewar Democratic presidential candidate, states with relatively high levels of Iraq War military fatalities had a higher percentage vote for Obama. This result is consistent with a prediction derived from rational political theory and the results of several studies examining the impacts of war fatality rates in other military conflicts in previous elections. However, in the current study, we find that the effect of Iraq War fatalities on the percentage vote for Obama is conditioned by state military enlistment rates. Military fatalities have a strong effect in states with historically low military enlistment rates. But the effect disappears in states with very high levels of military enlistment.

As the Bush administration started to implement the empire project, the US transformed from hegemony to an empire. However, since the project failed, the US, which could not be an empire either, passed into a revision period, as there is no way going back to hegemony. From that point on, the US lost its luxury to dictate "be either on our side or against us" like it did during Bush's term. During the Bush administration the US tried to use its advantageous status in the changing world with its empire project and strived to shape the said change in favor of its own interests. However, it could not succeed and, on the contrary, ended up weakening its present effectiveness and lost its superiority in many fields. Subsequently the Obama administration will mostly clean up the mess left by the Bush administration and will go for a revision. To start with, the Obama administration has to be on good terms with the Islamic World because of the badly distorted relations during Bush's term.

Dalam penyusunannya, kami memperoleh banyak bantuan dari berbagai pihak, karena itu kami mengucapkan terima kasih yang sebesar-besarnya kepada kedua orang tua dan segenap keluarga yang telah memberikan dukungan, kasih, dan kepercayaan yang begitu besar.

Penulisan ini bertujuan untuk merumuskan suatu konsep mengenai pemimpin yang memiliki integritas yang diperlukan pada masa kini. Dalam penulisan penulisan ini sebagai suatu karya ilmiah dibutuhkan suatu metode penelitian yang tepat guna mendapatkan data yang konkret. Kaitannya dengan itulah maka di sini penulis akan menguraikan sumber data dan teknik pengumpulan data yang dipakai dalam penyusunan penulisan ini sebagai berikut: Pertama, yaitu pengambilan data melalui eksposisi Alkitab yang dijabarkan secara deskriptif. Kedua, yaitu pengambilan data melalui buku-buku perpustakaan yang ada kaitannya dengan pokok penulisan ini sebagai penunjang eksposisi Alkitab. Alkitab menjadi sumber utama dalam penulisan penulisan ini. Ketiga, yaitu pengambilan data melalui penelitian lapangan yaitu melalui wawancara dengan tujuan menunjang eksposisi Alkitab. Setelah pembahasan yang relatif panjang tentang pemimpin yang memiliki integritas, maka dapat disimpulkan bahwa integritas sungguh sangat penting bagi seorang pemimpin. Integritas perlu bagi para pemimpin supaya pilar-pilarnya menjadi superstruktur. Integritas adalah kekuatan konstruksi kepemimpinan. Bahwa dalam kehidupan seorang pemimpin tidak hanya harus memiliki suatu kehidupan kerohanian yang tinggi tetapi juga harus ditunjang oleh integritas diri dalam kepemimpinannya. Bobot kepemimpinan tidak ditentukan oleh tingginya pendidikan semata atau banyaknya jam terbang dalam pelayanan, melainkan oleh integritas diri. Pecahnya Kerajaan Israel, hancurnya Kerajaan Yehuda adalah karena rapuhnya integritas para pemimpinnya. Keruntuhan masyarakat juga diawali dengan pemimpin yang kehilangan integritasnya, yang berakibat runtuhnya sendi-sendi norma masyarakat, seperti ayah tidak menjadi teladan, anak-anak mencari figur dari film, televisi dan media lainnya. Bahwa pemimpin yang berintegritas adalah pemimpin yang selalu mematutkan hidupnya dengan Firman Tuhan, bergantung penuh pada pimpinan Roh Kudus, mengusahakan karakter yang baik, dan selalu menunjukkan sikap kerendahan hati.

Bilateral relations between Nigeria and the US from 1999 to 2012 had a dual character: acrimony and friendship. Between 1999 and 2003, their relationship was cordial; between 2003 and 2004 it degenerated into a full scale diplomatic tussle where Nigeria regarded the action of the US government on Iraq invasion as inappropriate; between 2005 and 2009, diplomatic relations was cordial with the increase in economic activities; between 2009 and 2010, their relations was sour as a result of Nigeria’s inclusion on the terror list by the US government; and between 2011 and 2012, their relations became stable and entered a new phase of strategic partnerships in the fight against terrorism.  The steps taken by these two countries to stabilize their relations during these periods call for careful study.   
Moreover, since the main focus of the research is centered on Nigeria-U.S relations, perhaps, their relationship is primarily driven by economic motives, which in turn shape other areas of the relationship between the two countries. Nigerian economy  represents hope, not only for West African countries, but also foreign powers such as the US who believes that Nigeria’s leading role in Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and African Command (AFRICOM) would provide the motivation for other African countries.

On November 4, 2008, more than 12 million young Americans elected the person who made them believe in their abilities to bring about change, the person who gave them hope, and the person who let them feel united. It was Barack Obama who won the election, and it was young people who were pivotal in helping him win. This paper explores the communication strategy that allowed Barack Obama to engage youth so effectively; it also reveals successful tactics of using new media for reaching the Millennial generation.

This essay interrogates the madness of racial discourse in Obamerica. Instead of signaling the beginning of post-racial America, Obama is further proof that America suffers from racial
schizophrenia, a disorder defined by, “auditory hallucinations, paranoid or bizarre delusions, [and] disorganized speech and thinking.” In the madness of Obama-mania, the U.S. prematurely declared victory over racism even when the demography of poverty, wealth, education, and incarceration denotes the continuation of a racialized caste system. Worsening material conditions for Black and poor people in Obamerica has coincided with state sanctioned racial profiling via New York City’s “Stop-and-Frisk” policies, while the killings of Trayvon Martin, Oscar Grant, Michael Brown, Kimani Gray, Tamir Rice, and Aiyana Stanley-Jones have reignited concerns that it is open season on young, Black boys and girls.

On 21 May 2013, I was bestowed the Heart at East Lifetime Achievement Plaque in Tel Aviv's Cinematheque. “Heart at East” is a coalition of 20 NGOs dedicated to promote community consciousness as it exposes and defies Israel’s folkloric marginalization of Mizrahi cultures. Formed in 2009, Heart at East was meant to remedy the extreme inequality in the allocation of public funds and other resources distributed by the Israeli regime to cultural institutions. The Heart at East Lifetime Achievement Plaque was established by these Mizrahi NGOs as an alternative to the Israel Prize, the state’s most prestigious lifetime achievement award. The Israel Prize recognizes contributions to the categories of humanities, natural sciences, culture and arts, and national contributions. Its award ceremony is on Israel’s independence day. Most recipients of this award, however, have been Ashkenazi. The Heart at East Lifetime Achievement Plaque aims to remedy this bias by recognizing the lifetime achievements of Mizrahi community authors, artists, musicians, scientists, and grassroots leaders coming from Israel’s majority citizenry. Below is a link to the Hebrew-to-English translation of the powerpoint presented by the Heart at East MC at the ceremony:

History repeats itself. Not as a farce; but as tragedy. Those who witnessed the White House-led propaganda against Iraq in the run-up to the 2003 American war on that country cannot miss the startling similarities between those days and the past few ones. Replace Iraq with Syria. It’s almost a reloading of history. If Iraq was part of a larger American plan to reshape the Middle East, irrespective of what all the explanation the Bush clique and the neocon media were distributing, the real reasons behind a possible Syrian war cannot be different.

This time the target is Iran, and to weaken the geopolitical standing of Russia. Syria has been the most trusted ally of Iran for years. And it’s also a key link between the Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite group, and Iran. The Islamic Republic sends weapons and cash to the Hezbollah through Syria. The Hezbollah is an effective threat to any future American/Israeli plans to attack Iran. In the wake of a future strike on Iran, the Hezbollah could open a new front on Israel’s northern border. A master in asymmetrical warfare, the Hezbollah has fought long battles with Israel in the past. It successfully resisted Israel’s occupation of Southern Lebanon for long 18 years, forcing the “most powerful country in the Middle East” to end the occupation unilaterally in 2000. Six years later, Hezbollah again resisted a month-long Israeli bombing and ground operations.

The Legacy of Iraq critically reflects on the abject failure of the 2003 intervention to turn Iraq into a liberal democracy, underpinned by free-market capitalism, its citizens free to live in peace and prosperity. It argues that mistakes made by the coalition and the Iraqi political elite set a sequence of events in motion that have had devastating consequences for Iraq, the Middle East and for the rest of the world.

Today, as the nation faces perhaps its greatest challenge in the wake of the devastating advance of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and another US-led coalition undertakes renewed military action in Iraq, understanding the complex and difficult legacies of the 2003 war could not be more urgent. Ignoring the legacies of the Iraq war and denying their connection to contemporary events could means that vital lessons are ignored and the same mistakes made again.

In a journal article entitled "'No More Peace!': How Disaster, Terror and War Have Upstaged Media Events" (2007), Elihu Katz and Tamar Liebes offered a substantial revision of Media Events: The Live Broadcasting of History (Dayan & Katz, 1992). Katz and Liebes included " dark " events in the " media events " concept, distinguishing unexpected, disruptive events from the carefully scripted, integrative events that had been the sole focus of Media Events. They also claimed that disruptive events – like disaster, terror and war – have in fact upstaged more classical media events. In contrast, in this chapter I argue that ceremonial media events-as originally conceptualized by Dayan and Katz in the nineties-are still essential and powerful features of our social lives. First, I present an overview of the " pessimistic turn " of media events research and provide my criticism of it. Second, I discuss three contemporary case studies from three national contexts: the Obama inauguration (2009), the royal wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton (2011) and the most recent World Cup (2014). These three events represent the three basic scripts introduced by Dayan and Katz: " conquest, " " coronation " and " contest. " I argue that the selected case studies (and many other events) still bring societies and nations together in our " disillusioned " media environment, providing momentary hope for local and cosmopolitan citizens.

Opinión *NOTA: Las ideas contenidas en los Documentos de Opinión son de responsabilidad de sus autores, sin que reflejen, necesariamente, el pensamiento del IEEE o del Ministerio de Defensa. Documento de Opinión informó el pasado 7 de agosto de 2013 que el presidente Barack Obama cancelaba su viaje a Rusia y la reunión bilateral prevista con el presidente Vladimir Putin. Sin embargo, el presidente de Estados Unidos acude esta semana al encuentro del G-20 que se celebra en San Petersburgo los días 5 y 6 de septiembre. Se trata de la primera ocasión desde el fin de la Guerra Fría en que tanto EE UU como Rusia suspenden una reunión entre sus presidentes a causa de la desconfianza y descontento mutuo. El argumento principal que se recoge en este documento de análisis es que la política de EE UU y Occidente con Rusia ha sido fallida en los últimos quince años porque han colisionado dos modelos diferentes de diseñar la política exterior. El estadounidense, basado mayoritariamente en el paradigma racional de toma de decisiones frente al ruso con un componente subjetivo asentado en la personalidad del líder.

The promotion of democracy in Cuba has been, especially
after the Cold War, a distinguishing feature of US foreign policy
towards Havana. This article analyzes the evolution in US democracy
promotion in Cuba, especially after the latest openings to Cuba
(December 2014). Regarding the promotion of democracy on the
island, the so-called ‘abandonment of democracy’ in US foreign policy
never took place, and this implies a renovated effort to foster regime
change – or at least a regime evolution – in Cuba. Obama resisted the
virulent and invasive rhetoric of the ‘Bush doctrine’, and introduced
some changes in US-Cuba state-to-state relations, while giving a
strong relevance to the ‘people-to-people's diplomacy’ and ‘public
diplomacy’, still perceived as tools to foster a political change on the
island.

Revelations of donations to the Clinton Foundation after Hillary Clinton joined the Obama administration in January 2009, invite a second look at her decisions as Secretary of State.

In early January 2011 U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was en route to the Gulf region with planned visits to Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. Her office announced that she will discuss “regional security issues including Iraq, the Middle East peace process, Lebanon, Yemen…and Iran….”She’ll want to take stock of where we are on the sanctions regime.” The growing tension in Egypt was not on her agenda.

But on February 11, 2011, violent clashes between demonstrators and security forces in Egypt led to President Hosni Mubarak’s resignation and transfer of his powers to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. Next, violent protests, the first major Libyan protests in years against Gaddafi rule, erupted in Benghazi, Libya.

Gaddafi’s days were then numbered when on 25 February the U.S. flew its diplomats out of Libya.  Within minutes of their departure the Obama administration, citing numerous human rights violations, announced it had imposed sanctions on the Gaddafi family and the Libyan regime. President Obama stated, “We will stand steadfastly with the Libyan people in their demand for universal rights, and a government that is responsive to their aspirations. Their human dignity cannot be denied.”....

With the deadly ISIS advance, the sudden rousing of Shia militias and the threat of Kurdish secession, Iraq faces a host of deep-seated and intractable problems. Together, these events raise a number of serious questions, not just for Iraq and its future but also for the broader Middle East, the United States and its Coalition partners and the international community. While these challenges and questions will drive much academic debate, political analysis and media discussion in the months and years ahead, they are not the central purpose of this chapter. While there is always a risk in commenting on unfolding events, including the potential to overstate their significance and likely long-term impact, it is difficult to ignore the significance of the deadly ISIS advance and all that has happened since. This chapter argues that key to understanding these events is coming to terms with the three varied and complex legacies of the 2003 Iraq War. The first central legacy of the Iraq War is the ongoing consequences of several critical mistakes made by the US-led Coalition before, during and immediately after the 2003 intervention. The second legacy addressed here is the fact that the 2003 war shattered – perhaps irreversibly - Iraqis fragile cultural mosaic and its rich and complex history of overlapping and intersecting communities, ideologies and narratives. The third and final legacy of the 2003 Iraq War detailed in this chapter is its significant regional and global consequences – from spiralling sectarianism across the Middle East to a profound challenge to America’s status as the last remaining superpower and its use of military power for ‘humanitarian’ ends. The argument here is that these three important legacies set in train a sequence of events that have served as the collective catalyst for the expansion of the ‘Islamic State’ from mid-2014.

Öz Amerikan sinemasında 1930'lardan bu yana gazeteci karakterlerine sıklıkla rastlanılırken, bu filmlerle bir yandan özgür basın miti kurulmakta, ayrıca basının iktidar ve toplumla sıkı sıkıya ilişkisi nedeniyle filmler aracılığıyla toplumsal ve siyasal söylemler inşa edilmektedir. Bu çalışmada, sinemada son dönemde inşa edilen özgür basın, Amerikan demokrasisi mitleriyle filmlerin dönemlerine dair içgörüleri ve öngörülerini teşhis edebilmek açısından 2010'dan sonra gösterime giren Spotlight, Truth ve Nightcrawler filmleri incelendi. Spotlight kahramanın zaferi, Truth kahramanın yenilgisi, Nightcrawler ise kötü adamın yükselmesi üzerine kurulu olduğundan Shock'un Birleşik Anlatı Teorisi temel alındı. Bu teoride filmlerde farklı sonlarla toplumsal değerlerin pekiştirildiği veya aksine değişimlerin önerildiği belirtilirken, filmlerin bu yöndeki söylemlerini belirleyebilmek açısından da Kellner'in teşhise yönelik eleştirisinden yararlanıldı. Bunların sonucunda, filmlerin farklı anlatı yapılarıyla basına ve dönemlerine dair belirli sorgulamalar ve eleştiriler getirdiği, öngörüler sunduğu, dönemlerinin siyasi liderlerinden etkilenebildikleri (Barack Obama) veya gelecek yeni lideri (Donald Trump) karakter yaratımında öngörebildikleri tespit edildi. Farklı anlatı yapılarına rağmen filmlerin hepsinde özgür basın miti inşa edilirken, mitin özellikle basının hakikatı arama ilkesi ve bağımsızlık temelinde yüceltildiği, bu mitlerin de Amerikan demokrasisi mitine hizmet ettiği görüldü.

Abstract
While cinema depicts journalist since the 1930s, films on journalism establish and reinforce the free press myth, and also reflect tendencies of their society in its discourse. In this perspective, we have chosen Spotlight since its protagonists have a victory; Truth due to its heroine has a defeat; and Nightcrawler, in which the villain has a victory. In the study, to look at the free myth on journalism and to designate films insights on social and political situations at a given point in history, protagonists and narratives were analyzed according to Schock's The United Theory of Narrative and diagnostic critique of Douglas Kellner. In the analysis, we have seen that movies reinforce the free press and American democracy myths through all type of journalists and narratives. Besides, these films appear to reflect their period's desire, fear, and conflicts, and also inspired by the leaders of their period (Barack Obama) or predict the future leaders (Donald Trump). In conclusion, the analysis shows that films about journalism reinforce the free press myth, and also represent their period's tendencies, conflicts, and crises and have some prediction about the future, and give messages to the society Barışkan Ünal, Dr.,

“Terrorism” is fundamentally the same, whether it is carried out by States or non-State actors. Difference arises as one identifies the processes wherein labels are applied which identify select acts of political violence as "terrorism," while terming others "legitimate defense" within the national interest. The subjective labeling of “terrorism” which obscures the systemic violence of State terrorism has accelerated in the post-9/11 "Global War On Terror/Terrorism," as wars advanced by the US and its allies have further expanded into the Middle East, Asia and Africa with numerous proxy wars. This construction of terrorism can be seen as a rhetorical tool utilized by the State, as well as non-State actors that challenge State authority. Throughout these arenas of violence, authoritative language is used by the State within a process of “othering,” and intentional language is adopted to demonize anti-State opponents and legitimize State-crafted actions

Obama adopts the dual track policy of engagement and containment toward Iran, which is the result of "smart power" strategy.In terms of operation, Obama administration adopts such measures as engagement with all ranks of Iran officials through different channels, attaching great importance to public diplomacy, keeping and updating pressure and sanction economically and militarily. Because of Iran's important strategic location and abundant oil and gas resources, and the pressure from Israel lobbies and Congress, Obama adopts the dual track policy of engagement and containment. In the future, Obama's dual track policy towards Iran will be balanced based on the further responds of Iran. What's more, Obama will prefer using international cooperation and coordination to settle Iran nuclear issue instead of resorting to military.

Testimonio del ascenso al poder y primer mandato. El libro es un anecdotario íntimo desde el privilegiado ángulo de Obama como mandatario de los EEUU. Pone su foco en los momentos críticos que le tocó sortear y en los desafíos geopolíticos de su tiempo. América Latina apenas aparece mencionada.

Laurie E. Gries has written an accessible, clear model of how to employ new materialist philosophy for the rhetorical analysis of what she terms " visual things. " For scholars and students who are looking for a grounded introduction to new materialism and rhetoric, I recommend Still Life with Rhetoric. For those who are more familiar with the literature but looking for direction on what this body of thought can do for them analytically, I recommend the book highly. Gries introduces an approach and provides a nuanced example of its application that will appeal to many. One may or may not embrace all of what Gries suggests, but regardless she provides a valuable set of principles and practices that may help others focus their own projects. The last several years have witnessed an eruption of scholarship within rhetoric informed by the overlapping literatures of actor-network theory, object-oriented ontology, and speculative realism, among other names. " New materialism " has been adopted as the uncomfortable, contested term of art among rhetoricians for this complicated nest of ideas (others outside the field use it similarly but it is hardly agreed on as a catch-all term, nor should it be). One of the refreshing things about Gries's book is that she does not attempt to parse the various schools of thought too closely or join the turf battles that often mark the literature. Although such discussions are important and can be productive, they are readily available elsewhere. Instead, she accepts the general moniker but clarifies her thinking by focusing on specific concepts in relation to an extended case study filled with images of the red, white, and blue Obama Hope image that Shepard Fairey produced for the 2008 presidential cycle and that has since become a staple in our visual field. Gries joins a growing number of rhetoric scholars influenced by some vein of new materialist thinking to focus on methodology, which is understandable and welcome. Given that new materialism problematizes basic premises of humanism and agency, it is unsurprising that scholars would want to re-format the methods of analysis to align with new premises. What sets Still Life with Rhetoric apart is the precision with which Gries defines and enacts these revised premises as guidelines for rhetorical analysis.

With the deadly ISIS advance, the sudden rousing of Shia militias and the threat of Kurdish secession, Iraq faces a host of deep-seated and intractable problems. Together, these events raise a number of serious questions, not just for Iraq and its future but also for the broader
Middle East, the United States and its Coalition partners and the international community. While these challenges and questions will drive much academic debate, political analysis and media discussion in the months and years ahead, they are not the central purpose of this chapter. While there is always a risk in commenting on unfolding events, including the potential to overstate their significance and likely long-term impact, it is difficult to ignore the significance of the deadly ISIS advance and all that has happened since. This chapter argues that key to understanding these events is coming to terms with the three varied and complex legacies of the 2003 Iraq War. The first central legacy of the Iraq War is the ongoing consequences of several critical mistakes made by the US-led Coalition before, during and immediately after the 2003 intervention. The second legacy addressed here is the fact that the 2003 war shattered – perhaps irreversibly - Iraqis fragile cultural mosaic and its rich and complex history of overlapping and intersecting communities, ideologies and narratives. The third and final legacy of the 2003 Iraq War detailed in this chapter is its significant regional and global consequences – from spiralling sectarianism across the Middle East to a profound challenge to America’s status as the last remaining superpower and its use of military power for ‘humanitarian’ ends. The argument here is that these three important legacies set in train a sequence of events that have served as the collective catalyst for the expansion of the ‘Islamic State’ from mid-2014.

There is an inverse relationship between public access to the Internet and the inability of governments and institutions to control information flow and hence state allegiance, ideology, public opinion, and policy formulation. Increase in public access to...

Race 2008: Critical Reflections on an Historic Campaign brings together a diverse group of scholars and activists to examine the gendered politics, images, rhetorical practices, and racial/ethnic conflicts that served as a backdrop to this momentous election. It features perspectives marginalized or ignored by mainstream media and political pundits, thus providing alternative, critical insights on the social dynamics fueling campaign rhetoric, grassroots activism, and intergroup conflicts in 2008 and beyond.

Mainstream liberal narratives have often depicted politics as a matter of power and competing interests, disregarding emotions or conceiving them as threats to a rational and well-ordered society. In the last decades, however, this viewpoint has been increasingly challenged by a number of scholars researching on the complex and multidimensional role of emotions in politics.

This edited collection aims at providing a concise but comprehensive introduction to this area of research. The essays contained in this volume focus on a single case, the Obama phenomenon, illustrating empirically how the variable ‘emotions’ can enrich political analysis. Taken together, the essays reflect the plurality of approaches available to the study of politics and emotions and thus contribute to the cutting-edge debates on this fascinating topic.

With contributions by Marcos Engelken-Jorge, Ramón Maiz, Brad Verhulst, Mary-Kate Lizotte, Andrew J.W. Civettini, Oliver Escobar, Alan Sandry, Åsa Wettergren, Deborah Gould.

16 września br. w warszawskim oddziale European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) odbyła się debata ,,Amerykańskie wybory, europejski dylemat: UE i USA w świecie po erze Obamy”. Wzięli w niej udział: Jeremy Shapiro – dyrektor ds. Badań w ECFR; Sylke Tempel – redaktor naczelna Internationale Politik oraz Berlin Policy Journal; Marcin Zaborowski – wiceprezes, szef warszawskiego biura Center for European Policy Analysis.

Reviews:

"Eine überzeugende Skizze der US-amerikanischen Gesellschaft der Gegenwart in ihrem historischen Kontext." (Marinke Gindullis, Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, Online, 3.2.2009)

"Die bislang scharfsinnigste Analyse, die hierzulande in Sachen Obama erschienen ist." (Rainer Rilling, Blog "On the Left Side", 28.9.2008)

"Vor und nach dem 4. November waren hierzulande linke Analysen zu den US-amerikanischen Präsidentschaftswahlen eine rare Ausnahme. Erst recht ungewöhnlich die im September 2008 abgeschlossene Studie von Ingar Solty, in der eine Reihe begründeter und offenbar realitätstüchtiger Prognosen formuliert werden. Solty theoretisiert den Auftritt Obamas als politischen Reflex auf die innere wie äußere (Hegemonie-) Krise der USA, der cäsaristische und charismatische Formen und Potentiale mobilisieren konnte. Er geht davon aus, dass eine solche Figur zukünftig das Moment charismatischer Herrschaft aufrufen kann und insofern anschließen wird an das für die USA traditionell typische Modell einer imperialen Präsidentschaft. Es geht also nicht nur um die aktuell stattfindende >Stunde der Exekutive<, in die bevorzugt in Zeiten der Krise übergewechselt wird, sondern um eine Fortsetzung der Grundtypik eines politischen Autoritarismus, der seit langem für die politische Präsidialordnung der USA kennzeichnend ist und nunmehr unter den Bedingungen neoliberaler Klassenfragmentierung und einer >Lähmung der Gesellschaft< durch >die wechselseitige Blockierung zweier polarisierter gesellschaftliche Blöcke< (5) besonders vital reaktualisiert wird. Nur erstaunlich wenige linke Kritiker wie Judith Butler oder Mike Davis haben nach der Wahl diese verschobene Kontinuität von Bush zu Obama thematisiert – zu groß war die Erleichterung. Gängig war und ist vielmehr die Klage darüber, dass die Krise und die Wahl nichts anderes als den Wiederauftritt der liberaldemokratischen Variante eines Krisenneoliberalismus gebracht hätten (>Clinton 2.0<). Dass insofern der regime change von Bush zu Obama in der Substanz Personal und politische Formen betrifft, nicht aber die übergreifende Zielsetzung (>Führerschaft< in der Weltordnung und innere politische Integration in Zeiten des Krieges/der Krise), die autoritäre Struktur (>imperial presidency<) und die politische Technologie der Selbstmobilisierung beim Versuch der Konstruktion eines hegemoniefähigen politischen Blocks (Bushs Kriegspräsidentschaft und Obamas Messianismus) ist gerade für alle jene schwer zu verstehen, für die schon diese eine unbestreitbar historische Qualität des Obama-Projekts die substantielle politische Differenz ausmacht: dass ein Afroamerikaner nun die USA repräsentiert. Dies berührt vielfältige Momente der Selbstkonstitution – gleichgültig, ob diese sich auf 'Nation', 'Staat' oder 'Mehrheit' beziehen.
So ist auch das >Obama-Projekt< ein Projekt >von oben< (5), aber es eröffnet nach vier Jahrzehnten Republikanerhegemonie Chancen zur demokratischen (selbstermächtigenden) Teilhabe, durch die eine Neukombination der politisch hegemoniefähigen Gesellschaftselemente mitbewirkt werden kann. Der Wahlsieg Obamas eröffnet daher neue Spielräume für die Linke und bringt die Akteure im politischen Raum wie die durch sie repräsentierten Gesellschaftselemente deutlich in Fluss (8/9).
Solty diskutiert daher nicht nur Frage, wie die aktuelle krisenbedingte politische Neukonfiguration verbunden ist mit grundlegenden historisch spezifischen Mustern der politischen Herrschaft in den USA, sondern fragt auch danach, ob sich in den USA eine Scheidewegsituation ausbildet, in der sich nach dem New Deal und der vier Jahrzehnte dominierenden Kombination von starkem Staat (Reagan-Militarismus) und starker Ökonomie (der Neoliberalismus unter Reagan, Clinton und Bush) eine politisch-ökonomische Transformation des Neoliberalismus oder ein aussichtsreicher post-neoliberaler Entwicklungspfad konfrontieren. Die seit 2005/6 zunächst im politischen Raum offen ausgebrochene tiefe Krise des von Solty meist als bloß >neokonservativ< (6) bezeichneten rechtsimperialen Herrschaftsprojekts, das seit den 70er Jahren kontinuierlich aufgestiegen war und auf einer allerdings immer prekären Machtallianz aus großbürgerlichen Freihandelsimperialisten, einer (unilateral-)militaristischen Rüstungswirtschaft und der Öllobby sowie christlichen Fundamentalisten und militaristischen Nationalisten (6,8) beruhte, reflektiert für Solty letztlich, dass die USA nicht imstande waren, ihren Zugewinn an militärischer (Reagan ff.), politischer (1989ff.) und ökonomischer (Clinton – Bush I) Macht in eine von ihr geführte und bestandsfähige neoliberale politische Ökonomie der Weltordnung umzusetzen. Vielmehr ist nach Solty der >relative Niedergang der USA< (16) mittlerweile in eine tiefe ökonomische Krise des Neoliberalismus übergegangen, die das aktuelle (und womöglich prinzipielle) Scheitern dieser Herrschaftsambition krass deutlich machen. Solty sieht zugleich ganz entschieden kaum Möglichkeiten, dass sich im aktuell entstehenden neuliberalen, deutlich nach rechts verschobenen Herrschaftsprojekt relevante Momente des Umschwenkens auf ein postneoliberales Entwicklungsmuster etablieren könnten (20ff.). Er erwartet vielmehr unter der Obama-Präsidentschaft eine >neoliberale Selbst-Maastrichtisierung< (24) und prognostiziert: >Jedenfalls wird der Wendestimmung und konservativen Hegemoniekrise in den USA weder in innen- noch außenpolitischen Sicht eine wirkliche Wende folgen. Stattdessen wird unter Obama mit einiger Wahrscheinlichkeit die zahnlose und hegemonieunfähige progressiv-wettbewerbsstaatliche Nachbereinigungspolitik der Dritten-Wegs-Sozialdemokratie fortgesetzt werden […] und werden die USA im November einen zweiten Clinton bekommen – allerdings unter den Bedingungen eines fortgeschrittenen relativen Niedergangs in der globalen politischen Ökonomie. Die sich bietende Chance einer dauerhaften Aufhebung der 40 Jahre währenden Republikanerhegemonie wird verspielt werden< (37/8).  Vieles spricht dafür, dass diese Einschätzung zutreffen wird. Freilich kann die aktuelle Krise in den USA soziale und politische Dynamiken freisetzen, die weitaus größere politische Bewegung aufrufen könnten, als gegenwärtig absehbar ist." (Rainer Rilling, Das Argument: Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Sozialwissenschaften 279, 50:6 [2008], pp.922-3)

In this policy brief I review a series of executive orders issued by President Barack Obama between June 2012 and November 2014 that provide temporary and conditional relief from deportation to an estimated 5.2 million migrants without legal status (Mathema 2015). These measures emerged as an alternative after the U.S. House failed to pass legislation known as Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR), a bill that would have granted a path to citizenship to selected groups as well as increased resources for enforcement. The executive measures confer “no substantive right, immigration status or pathway to citizenship” (a prerogative of the U.S. Congress) and they are not without its critics. Limitations notwithstanding, the measures provide relief from deportation, facilitate access to drivers’ licenses and give access to work authorization.  To understand these measures, however, they must be analyzed as part of the full set of executive actions issued in November of 2014 and in the context of the broader immigration debate.

Mental image (emotional visualization provoked by discursive elocutio) is a new concept related to emotional capacity of words, an old and controversial issue in the history of Rhetoric. Since the roles of emotion and rhetorical figures in cognition have been vindicated, there is a renewed interest in rhetorical mechanisms that evoke emotional responses in order to persuade, as mental images do. Furthermore, present political discourse and mass-media demand efficient persuasive effects in a short time, something easy to produce when creating mental images by our lexical choices. Therefore this paper deals with the important role of mental images and their rhetoric and persuasive uses in present political discourse and, in particular, the key role of mental images conveying persuasion in two speeches by Barack Obama and José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.
-----------------------------------------
La imagen mental, es decir, la visualización emotiva provocada por la elocutio discursiva, es un concepto relativamente nuevo que se relaciona con un antiguo y controvertido aspecto de la Retórica: la capacidad psicagógica de la palabra. Reivindicadas tanto la importancia de la emoción como la función de las figuras retóricas en los procesos cognitivos, hoy se están revalorizando también los mecanismos retóricos que despiertan respuestas emocionales en el receptor, como la creación de imágenes mentales. A esto hay que añadir la utilidad de este tipo de imágenes en el ámbito del discurso político, donde las características de los medios de comunicación de masas actuales imponen una mayor efectividad persuasiva en un corto espacio de tiempo. En ese sentido, esta comunicación pretende dar cuenta de la importancia y funcionalidad de las imágenes mentales retórico-persuasivas en el discurso político actual, ya que en su utilización puede estar la clave del éxito o fracaso persuasivo, como ejemplificaremos en dos discursos de Barack Obama y José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.

During the 2012 presidential campaign an explosion of photo-shopped images circulated that depicted President Obama as unpatriotic. The 'crotch salute', 'left-hand salute', and 'Veterans Day non-salute' serve as case studies for understanding the role of trolling in the public sphere and Internet politics in an era of social networks and circulation. This paper tracks the cultural practices and logics of 'sharing' political memes and conceptualises memes as part of an agonistic public sphere and media ecology. Obama trolling is facilitated through the techno-cultural affordances of memes, which can only become public because of their mimetic form and sterilised partial anonymity. The paper seeks to conceptualise trolling as a broader cultural practice, which can be considered political. Normative assumptions about these memes would portray this trafficking as destructive to deliberative democracy but when understood as a generative cultural practice, trolling becomes central to articulating political emotions in social networks. Photo-shopped Obama salutes, in addition to Big Bird, binder, and bayonet memes, express not only political identities but also larger cultural values within networked popular culture.

Brutus realized, albeit belatedly, that killing Caesar was not in anyone’s best interest, least of all, Rome’s.
There will always be families, well organised families that consolidate economic power, then load it over men, and give unto themselves titles, such as ‘chiefs, paramount chief, representatives of the tribe’; and these families, always, relegate themselves as ‘blue-blooded’, chosen of the gods, favored amongst men, kings over men, lords of the commons, prefects over natural resources, amongst other flowery and not less perfumed titles, which entrench their rule over the ‘commons’ and perpetuate their (immoral) empires, at the behest of their ‘fellow men’.
Once in a while, a people is awakened from this selective and self-induced amnesia to question the source of their plunder, and if they, by luck escape the wrath of the ‘sleeping’ bull-dog, they may, for a season, share their opinion on why they quench their thirst by the sweat of their brow, and drops of own blood, while their ‘god-appointed’ tribal rulers insanely amass riches to obnoxious bounds.
This is a book-product of such introspection, a question seeking answers; a riddle seeking solution; and an African story seeking completion.
As we read, may we grow (in knowledge and understanding), as tall as the blue gum tree at our uncle’s home!

Thu’ Tinda!