Abstract
This essay extends Burke's notion of victimage as a symbolic response to socially‐created guilt to analyze six years of political debate and action in the U.S. drug war (1986—1991). We use a Burkean/metaphorical framework to explore the characteristics of guilt‐based drug rhetoric and its ethical entailments. We argue that scapegoating rhetoric—the rhetoric of vilification in times of “war—is “dialectically appealing”; in Burkean terms because it provides for common enemies, invites a community united against these foes, morally justifies public opinion, and offers guilt relief to a large number of people. Scapegoating in the drug war was problematic, however, because it misplaced blame for the drug problem, it circumscribed drug policy debate about alternative solutions, and it contributed to a frustrated and sometimes apathetic citizenry more often the victims of racism, vigilantism, and unfair drug sentencing than the beneficiary of medical attention and drug education. The essay concludes with a disc...
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.