Discuss the following two campaign commercials as they relate to Rodgers’ analysis in “Losing the Words of the Cold War.” The first, “Peace through Strength,” is from Reagan’s 1980 campaign. The latter, titled simply “Peace,” is from his 1984 campaign. Rodgers notes that Reagan moderated his Cold War rhetoric of “peace” and “freedom” after 1983. Do you see evidence of that moderation in the contrast between the two commercials?
One thought on “Week 12 Day 1 Discussion Question 3”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Reagan’s cult of personality was as much a product of the times he lived in as the cult leaders that flourished during those times such as Jim Jones and Charles Manson. A common tactic with which they ensure the loyalty of their followers is to break them down to rebuild them in their image. Modern Christian movements have been criticized for resorting to Old Testament threats of damnation to then offer reconciliation through Christ, an action which goes fundamentally against the concept of Christianity (in Protestantism, the Old Testament is a text meant to be referenced for greater understanding of the New Testament, rather than to be observed or followed; Christ’s death occurred so that man would no longer need to follow the Old Testament to atone for Original Sin). This brand of movements largely occurred during the 20th century, and the 80’s would largely be embodied by the televangelist and the firebrand preacher. Reagan’s tone in the first commercial is decidedly masculine, depicting a dire state of global crises that could only be remedied by his leadership, he says that he will “negotiate a balanced and equitable arms limitation agreement”, upon which the camera cuts to Reagan and a group of men seated around a table. This image conjures up traditional concepts of Wall Street power brokers and “dealmakers”. Rodgers notes that Reagan’s “pre-presidential speeches…turned the Cold War’s anxieties back on domestic politics”. Such anxieties were, to some extent, gendered, as exemplified by the Lavender Scare and the sexualized language describing the Soviet Union.The ad criticizes Jimmy Carter as “weak”, an adjective commonly used to describe the female sex; it presents Reagan as someone who oozes “confidence”. The second ad is more reconciliatory; Reagan had served a term as President and had assumed the responsibilities as well. (On a personal note, right before the inauguration of Donald Trump, my mother noted that the TV personality and demagogue had become relatively restrained and conciliatory in his public statements; she reckoned that this was because he had been briefed on the reality of global tensions that threatened the United States, and realized, at least to some extent, the implications of the power which he wielded. Sadly, in the end, this sentiment did not come to fruition in Trump’s policies.) The assumption of power has changed the political approaches of many a candidate; George H.W. Bush, despite the now infamous “Read my lips:no new taxes” promise, did raise taxes as a result of the then economic crisis. Barack Obama promised to shut down Guantanamo, he did not. While the first ad stubbornly insisted upon productive negotiations with the Soviet Union, the second offered that more lenient and achievable demands would be more successful. This was an characteristically feminine approach to conflict resolution, but strangely, Reagan’s masculinity overrides this effeminacy.