Zhao Liu COM 204 Major Paper 2 Ronald Reagan Remarks

Zhao Liu COM 204 Major Paper #2 Ronald Reagan, “Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate” (1987)

As a result of the Cold War, the Berlin Wall separated West Berlin from East Germany, with guard towers along large concrete barriers, dividing Berlin from 1961 to 1989. During the 750th anniversary of Berlin, President Ronald Reagan delivered a speech at the Brandenburg Gate to Mikhail Gorbachev and the people of Berlin, both Eastern and Western. Reagan employed the rhetorical technique of transcendence—using "we"—and association to connect with his audience, advocating that tearing down the Berlin Wall and promoting liberalization were the path to peace and freedom.

Reagan’s use of "we" fostered a sense of shared identity and common interest between himself and his audience. By stating, “We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness,” he created a bond that acknowledged their collective witness to history and their joint aspiration for change. This use of transcendence made the audience perceive Reagan not just as a politician but as a fellow Berliner, sharing their hopes for increased openness and freedom. He further emphasized that “We welcome change and openness,” aligning himself with the audience’s desire for liberation and reform, despite not being German himself. This linguistic choice established a sense of unity rooted in shared values and goals, particularly the belief that freedom and security are intertwined—the advance of human liberty would inevitably lead to stronger world peace.

Reagan’s strategic use of "we" also reflected an identification with the Berliner people, making him a representative of their collective aspirations. The shared use of "we" created a bond that empowered Reagan to speak on behalf of the people’s beliefs, turning his speech into a collective voice advocating for liberty. He articulated a stance against the Soviet expansionist policies, urging Western nations to resist Soviet attempts at control, reinforcing a unified front grounded in shared liberty and security.

Building upon this collective identification, Reagan employed Kenneth Burke’s concept of association to advocate his proposals further. He challenged Gorbachev to pursue peace, prosperity, and liberalization, stating, “if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate.” This statement linked the goals of both Western and Eastern Europeans, raising Gorbachev’s consciousness of common interests shared with the Berliners and Western allies. It positioned liberalization as a pressing shared goal, compelling Gorbachev to acknowledge the mutual benefits of tearing down the Berlin Wall.

The association technique created a sense of group cohesion predicated on shared values—freedom, peace, and reform. Former Reagan advisor Dinesh D’Souza argued that Reagan’s speech aimed to pressure Gorbachev into demonstrating sincerity by compelling him to respond to these shared interests publicly (Robert & Jones, 2006). By invoking common ideals, Reagan established a moral and political pressure that linked the fate of the Berliners with the broader trajectory of Soviet reform and openness.

Reagan also employed Aristotle’s rhetorical device of pathos to stir emotional responses from his audience. The imagery of the Berlin Wall as a “gash of barbed wire, concrete, dog runs, and guard towers” painted a vivid picture of human suffering, oppression, and division. Such descriptions evoked feelings of sympathy, pain, and a desire for liberation. The emotional appeal was intensified by phrases like “every man is a German separated from his fellow men,” emphasizing the cruelty of the division and the universal yearning for reunion and freedom. This emotional appeal aimed to galvanize audience support for tearing down the wall by connecting their feelings of suffering to the symbolic importance of unity and freedom.

Reagan’s speech also highlighted the personal and collective pain inflicted by the Berlin Wall, portraying it as an obstacle not only physically but also psychologically and emotionally. By evoking the suffering of families separated and individuals denied liberty, he stoked feelings of compassion and urgency, convincing his audience that change was imperative. The emotional resonance of such imagery aligned with Aristotle’s notion that pathos can motivate action by appealing directly to the audience’s deepest feelings and desires.

In conclusion, Reagan’s speech at the Brandenburg Gate exemplifies effective rhetorical strategies grounded in the theory of identification and emotional appeal. Through the deliberate use of transcendence, Reagan established a collective identity with his audience, positioning himself as a fellow Berliner who shared their hopes for freedom. He also employed association to link common interests and moral goals with Gorbachev, applying ethical persuasion grounded in shared values. Lastly, he utilized pathos by vividly depicting the suffering caused by the Berlin Wall to evoke a visceral emotional response that motivated support for tearing down the barrier. Overall, these rhetorical techniques helped Reagan convincingly advocate for the end of division in Berlin, advocating peace and freedom not just as political goals but as universal human rights.

References

• Bruner, M. S. (1989). Symbolic Uses of the Berlin Wall. Communication Quarterly, 37(4), 319-332. doi:10.1080/
• Robert, R., & Jones, J. M. (2006). Reagan at the Brandenburg Gate: Moral Clarity Tempered by Pragmatism. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 9(1), 21-50. doi:10.1353/rap.2006.0030
• Burke, K. (1969). A Grammar of Motives. University of California Press.
• Aristotle. (2007). On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translated by George A. Kennedy. Oxford University Press.
• Herman, J. (2004). The Speech That Changed the Cold War. American Political Science Review, 98(3), 555-568.
• George, A. (2010). The Power of Rhetoric. Harvard University Press.
• Leith, D. (2018). The Art of Rhetoric. Routledge.
• Norris, P. (2000). Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet. Cambridge University Press.
• Foss, S. K. (2009). Rhetorical Criticism: Exploring the Persuasive Force of Symbols. Waveland Press.
• Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 22 (pp. 3-54). Routledge.