Rhetorical Analysis Of Robert Jensen's 'Citizens Of The Empire'

Robert Jensen’s Citizens of the Empire is a warning. It is a message to the citizens of the world’s “greatest” nation and a remedy, as he describes, “to despair over the future of democracy.” In the manifesto, Jensen focuses on the political actions following the terror attacks of 9/11 and questions why it is hard for the American public to challenge the acts done in the name of freedom, the corrupt political culture, and the failure of universities to promote citizens who are politically active and critical. He also proposes that ideas of national superiority and binding respect for military servitude are dangerous political frameworks. To make his point, Jensen uses devices including personal experiences, quotes from political commentators
In the first section, he identifies and critically examines important “rhetorical frameworks” that have been artificialized in the public: America as the greatest nation on earth, supporting the troops, and patriotism. The first framework that he discusses is something that has been brought up in our class as well, which is American exceptionalism. When approaching this topic, Jensen looks at what defines a nation’s “greatness.” He proposes that if it were history or the ability to correct mistakes that made a nation great, then America fails both. First, its history shows bloodshed throughout centuries like the almost complete elimination of the Natives in the nineteenth century, and second, it lacks the ability to acknowledge the wrongful ways that wealth has been acquired within its systems including the cheating of the reservation land to create casino revenue. The second framework Jensen introduces is the “support the troops,” more implicitly, “support the war.” The demonstrate this point, Jensen describes a personal anecdote about a past student of his who had to give up education to serve in the army. She could not express her reservations about her situation, according to Jensen, and had to perform her legal obligation. Jensen then asks the reader whether he too should have kept his objections to himself and shown support for her even if his beliefs told him otherwise. This story drives the argument that there is an unspoken rule that requires citizens to show support of troops. I believe this system is dismantling a democratic society like Jensen said because it discourages free expression of dissent. Lastly, the third framework Jensen introduces is “patriotism,” especially the kind that arose after 9/11 in forms of public-service television ads. Jensen also gives examples of the different forms of patriotism that he has seen in the public during the U.S. attacks on