Abstract
ABSTRACT Before they can commit their states to war, leaders who believe that war is necessary must first secure public commitment to collective action and sacrifice. The chief instrument for achieving this is propaganda, an activity generally understood as morally problematic. Yet if we concede that some wars are morally permissible or even morally required, must we not also concede that propaganda campaigns orchestrated to marshal the public will to fight those wars are likewise morally permissible or required? Focusing on the content of presidential speeches and the strategic context in which they were delivered, I seek to isolate the morally blameworthy aspects of propaganda in two campaigns: the George W. Bush administration’s effort to marshal public support for the Iraq War and the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration’s attempt to draw the US into the Second World War. I conclude by offering a sketch of conditions under which propaganda may be understood as morally permissible.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
