Hilary Benn's speech during the parliamentary debate on whether to bomb Syria has been regarded as hugely significant in winning hearts and minds in support of David Cameron's case, and hailed as a triumph of political rhetoric. Julian Baggini begs to differ, arguing in an article for the New Statesman that this reaction to a speech riddled with illogical points speaks volumes about both the poverty of rhetoric in contemporary political discourse and the equally worrying susceptibility of MPs and the electorate in general to persuasion by cynical, emotive and reason-free means.
(Thanks to Simon for the link.)
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment