Antiwar Rhetoric Essay

The types of individuals who take part of the United States’ (U.S.) larger political narrative is all encompassing. Namely, who has a voice in the political discussion is continuously changing and individuals who would initially have the smallest voices would soon have the opportunity to begin movements. However, this does not mean that they are always included in the larger narrative and that their hopes for liberation (i.e. rights and freedoms) are met. Especially during the 1950s to 1980s in the U.S., one can see how the voices of women and the antiwar working-class begin to have a much larger impact on American society; however, one can argue that what they fought for was at times excluded from political discourse. Therefore, as this
This rhetoric can be applied to the working-class who were known to be drafted into the war and did not want to be part of this narrative anymore. In campaign advertisements for Nixon (1968-1974) and McGovern (1968), they both used the antiwar rhetoric to demonstrate that their goal was to end the war. During this period, many people wondered why there was a large amount of working class men going into the war and because of this, there was a large draft resistance. The advertisements created by Nixon and McGovern helped to reinforce the antiwar movement’s fight toward ending the war and getting Americans back to what it once was. Moreover, these advertisements appear to help liberate the working-class who were proponents of the antiwar movement. However, this was not always the case as the U.S. was still fighting in Vietnam even much after Nixon won the presidency. This evidently shows that while the working-class was trying to fight for their liberation out of the war (antiwar movement), and were given the hope that this would be pursued by the government because it was stated in these advertisements, what one clearly sees is that many of these candidates offered empty promises and that the antiwar movement would continue on for more