Analysis Of William J. Fulbright's 'On The Arrogance Of Power'

A Critical Evaluation of William J. Fulbright’s “On the Arrogance of Power, 1966”

With power comes responsibility. However, the responsibility to act in foreign conflicts has always been cause for skepticism, especially in America. In his essay "On the Arrogance of Power, 1966", Senator William J. Fulbright uses all three categories of Aristotle’s rhetorical strategies to successfully argue why America’s arrogance of power is not always well received by the countries it is trying to help. Fulbright argues that it is America’s power that makes it arrogant when involving themselves with the plights of other countries. Although his argument is not without flaws, Fulbright uses emotion, logic, and credibility to make a strong argument for why

America might be better off setting an example to the world through inaction rather than assuming the responsibility to help those who are reluctant to receive it.

When speaking on matters relating to Americas foreign policies, Senator William J. Fulbright speaks with both authority and credibility. Although Fulbright does not make any obvious ethical appeals within the body of his essay, as both an American and a Senator he is able to convince the reader that he is well educated on the matter. Throughout “On the Arrogance of Power, 1966” Fulbright relates to his peers but presents alternate views on how America should react to the predicaments of foreign countries. Fulbrights strategy of presenting an alternate view without openly criticizing his peers only adds value to his argument.
Fulbright’s credibility is not the only strength in his argument.

Throughout his essay Fulbright makes several appeals to the emotions of the reader. By making strong emotional appeals Fulbright strengthens his position by making the reader experience a range of emotions from anger to empathy. For example, Fulbrigt starts his essay characterizing America as arrogant. An accusation of arrogance would generally envoke anger. However, Fulbright quickly explains that it is Americas overwhelming power that makes it arrogant when interacting with impoverished countries. Fulbright explains that the South Vietnamese resist America’s presence because they fear they would lose their coveted traditions due to the great cultural and economic impact associated with America. By doing so, not only does Fulbright make the reader feel validated but he also makes them feel empathy towards the impoverished South

Vietnamese.
The strongest emotional appeals made within his argument are those directed to the American people who are presumably his target audience.

Several times throughout his essay, Fulbright asks that the American people set a precedent to other countries by not participating in foreign affairs but rather to use its positive relationships with other countries to exemplify strength. By explaining that America’s positive relations with other countries shows its ability to be cooperative, understanding, reliable, and respectful, Fulbright plays on the emotion of his target audience. Furthermore, Fulbright asks that if America must act, that it do so with both empathy and compassion. In his conclusion, Fulbright states “It will involve, no doubt, the loss of certain glories, but that seems a price worth paying for the probable rewards, which are the happiness of America and the peace of the world” (Fulbright). By insinuating that America is capable of happiness and promoting world peace in consideration of his proposal, Fulbright invites his readers to feel hopeful and

enthusiastic.
Many parts of Fulbrights essay make logical appeals to the reader. Throughout his essay Fulbright describes actual encounters between American soldiers and the South Vietnamese people. Fulbright presents incidents of assaults on American soldiers, burned American jeeps, and Americans being referred to as both “Imperialists” and “Communists”. Fulbright is able to present factual and logical reasoning behind his many claims that Americans were not welcomed by the people of South Vietnam. Given the economic and cultural differences between the America and South Vietnam, Fulbright is able to make logical deductions as to why America’s presence might upset the South Vietnamese. Although most likely the American people have nothing but good intentions for the people of South Vietnam, the South Vietnamese may see their presence as a violation to their way of life. Throughout his essay Fulbright continually compliments America and its intentions but provides a lot of insight supported by actual events to conclude why South Vietnam might consider their presence an insult. Fulbright states “Our very strength is a reproach to their weakness, out wealth a mockery of their poverty, our success a reminder of their failures” (Fulbright).
William J. Fulbright’s “On the Arrogance of Power, 1966” presented a successful argument as to why America should not always assume the responsibility to aid in foreign countries unless invited. Although Fulbright uses this essay as a means to criticize Americas over involvement in foreign affairs, his argument is presented with credibility and solid emotional and logical appeals that the reader might feel strongly compounded to agree with Fulbright’s very opinionated views.

Works Cited
Fulbright, William J. “On the Arrogance of Power, 1966.” Department of Physics: University of Washington Online. n.d. Web. 19 November 2015.