Democracy and civil rights: The universalizing influence of public argumentation

Abstract

An examination of American public discourse about civil rights in national magazines from 1939–1959 indicates three stages in the controversy: a positive re‐characterization of Blacks, an inclusion of Blacks under the nation's ideographs through an appeal to “law,”; and a final contest between segregationist and integrationist rhetorics. In this last stage, the universalizing influence of public argumentation favored the success of the more inclusive and universal integrationist rhetoric. The study indicates the potential for rhetorical analysis—the use of empirical case studies to develop historical and critical theories of the influence of rhetoric on social processes.

Notes

Celeste Michelle Condit is Assistant Professor of Speech Communication, University of Illinois. Earlier versions of this essay were presented at the SCA Regional Research Seminar on Ideology and Public Argumentation, Birmingham, 1983, and to the Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin, 1984. The author expresses appreciation to the participants for their helpful commentary.