Critical Analysis of Speech
Donald Trump’s Immigration Speech
Introduction
President Trump, even before his election into office, spoke about the protection of American workers from immigrants, especially those coming from Mexico. The conservative approach is one of the policies that made Trump sail through the presidential elections over his rival. While in office, immigration policies follow an economic nationalism approach. He places America and Americans first, with programs that are designed to protect the workers and the industries. The approach is a deviation from decades of policies that assert on immigration policies centered on asylum, family reunification, and safe border refugees. It is, therefore, not surprising for the president to address the nation calling for funds to build a border wall between America and Mexico meant to deter immigrants.
Context
From the oval office, Trump chose to address the nation, pushing for finding to build the Mexican border wall. The basis of his argument surrounds humanitarian and security grounds where he is applying pressure on the democrats newly empowered amid an extended partial shutdown of the government. Therefore, the address was calling on Democrats to return to the Whitehouse and have a discussion on the same. Trump is of the view that amid the security and humanitarian situation involving immigrants, it is immoral for politicians to sit and do nothing. However, a look at the issue in the context of his administration shows that previous meetings held are yet to yield any fruit. The address comes at an opportune moment where the Mexican border is observed as a permanent solution to the immigration issues that the Americans face. According to the border wall proposal, Trump asserts that the idea is to see a halt to the flow of criminal aliens as well as deadly drugs from neighboring communities into America.
Themes, Frames and Arrangement
The central theme of the speech, as delivered by Trump, is a push for increased funding for the Mexican border wall. The president justifies the creation of the wall by mentioning the increasing rate of crime, as supported by several statistics. He further elaborates on where the resources to build the wall will come from and the savings that will be achieved. Hence, the speech is coined in a manner to look into the extent of the problem and proposes solutions that should be examined in length by the political players. The frame of a speech is a cognitive shortcut that helps understand the complexity of information by looking at specific information presented. For instance, the speech delves into the problems that have come up as a result of illegal immigrants.
The extent of the problems is graphically emphasized, and the possible diagnosis of a border wall proposed. However, the hindrance at the moment is an agreement of the political players on a proposal to allocate resources to the cause. The flow of the speech gives it content the desired weight as the president starts with an appeal to the nation based on the crisis. The various paragraphs are presented professionally, with each having a new angle of looking at the problem. With the arrangement of the speech, the audience can get a feeling of the frustrations realized by illegal immigrants, especially from the choice of vocabulary used. For example, Trump mentions that “the situation is terrible…., with grief-stricken fathers……, and victims having pain in the eyes.”
Rhetorical Devices
Direct reference to media, events, or individuals, mentioned explicitly forms a rhetorical device that enhances a speech (Regmi, 2015). For instance, there are direct and explicit references to people that Trump uses to win the hearts of the people. Trump mentions the killing of a neighbor by an illegal alien in Georgia by beheading and dismembering. He further says a 16-year old that was viciously stabbed and beaten by a 13 gang member (The New York Times, 2019). With the examples, Trump asks that we shed no more blood, especially of those close to use, such as family members. In this assertion, Trump can give an analogy of the extent of the immigration problem.
Another rhetoric device observed in the speech is an analogy, which, according to Hernández-Guerra (2012), involves drawing comparisons of people as well as situations. For instance, the similarity of the case when there were no immigrants and now paints a picture of a community that is getting worse in terms of the levels of violence and crime. The strain on public resources is also compared to when immigrants were just a few. At present, the president asserts an increasing level of poverty and unemployment with the African Americans and Hispanic Americans hit hard. With such remarks, Trump is looking into getting buy-in from the audience and the legislators for the proposed border wall budget to succeed.
Imagery, as used in the speech, aims at painting a picture to the audience of the levels of insecurity cropping up as a result of illegal immigration. When Trump is mentioning the murders committed by immigrants, imagery is applied extensively in the speech. The use of imagery is meant to make the audience revolted and hence support the cause. A 16-year-old girl is mentioned as a victim of sexual assault and later beaten to death using a hammer. Imagery is a successful tool in creating a picture of the extent of crime levels in the United States as a result of illegal immigrants.
Persuasive Modes
The speech encompasses rhetorical strategies that Trump uses to ensure that he gets buy-in from the audience and hence push his agenda. The speech observes pathos, ethos, and logos as persuasive strategies that appeal to trust, authority, emotions, and reason.
Pathos
In appealing to the emotions of the American people, Trump mentions some of the statistics as observed in various parts of the country. An emotional response is inevitable, especially when the mentioned statistics relate closely. For instance, Trump says 266,000 arrests, 10,000 assaults, 4,000 violent killings, and 30,000 sex crimes (The New York Times, 2019). The statistics assert to a dire situation to change the policies that govern immigration for the benefit of the people.
Ethos
According to Shao (2013), a speech requires an appeal to the trust and authority to bring forth elements of trust and knowledge. Pathos, as adopted in a speech, is meant to ensure that the audience recognizes knowledge and accord the speaker trust as he delivers the address. The context of using ethos by Trump combines the audience and himself as a lot that can be trusted, have skills, knowledge, and a caring attitude to have the best interests of the country at heart. At the beginning of the speech, Trump asserts that he and the Mexican president are patriots. With such a statement, the attention of the audience is captured and interested in matters about the two countries. He brings home the report by mentioning his love for the United States.
In the use of ethos, Trump insists on the need to ensure there is a cooperation between neighboring countries. Such a statement suggests that the proposed changes relating to immigration policies are designed fairly and reasonably. Trump asserts that the systems are in line with discussions held before, and a mutual understanding is on its way forward. At the same time, he calls on the American legislators to have more conversations in line with the safety and security of Americans. With such a relation, Trump, in his speech, ensures that the convincing attribute is accompanied by knowledge, trust, and authority.
Logos
Trump appeals to the reasoning of the audience using logical arguments, statistical evidence, and facts in supporting his statements. Logos allude to the examination of data, events, and discussions that follow the line of thinking the speaker advances (Higgins and Walker, 2012). In the speech, Trump makes use of many statistics that involve immigrants to drive his point home. Trump draws from the levels of criminality recorded with the police involving illegal immigrants to convince the audience that the immigrants are posing a threat to security, safety, and the wellbeing of Americans. In the arguments, Trump asserts that it goes back to the government to use resources to alleviate some of the problems brought forth by immigrants.
The speech asserts that illegal immigrants have increased the rate of crime in America. The rise is fuelled by a strong economy in America where all the people want a share. The request from law enforcement agencies for professional purposes is $5.7 billion, which trumps sees as a translation to a steel barrier as opposed to a concrete barrier (Clark, 2019). Since the cost of illegal drugs is over $500 billion a year, Trump asserts that the border wall will pay for itself in a short time. With the statistics Trump gives in his speech, they allude to a substitution of efforts from one agency to another, which the audience should approve.
Conclusion
The analysis of the speech shows a passionate appeal to the congress, through logical reasoning and presentation of relevant statistics on the issue of illegal immigrants. However, it is still the role of the audience to digress the presented information and critically think about ways to address the issue or challenge suggestions by the speaker.
References
Appendices