[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.More importantly, however, the president defined globalization as aprocess, one that brought with it a good deal of change, especially in eco-nomic terms.Clinton argued that forces of integration economics and in-formation technology drove globalization, but at the same time counterforces of disintegration threatened its progress.As Clinton told the UnitedNations General Assembly in 1993:From beyond nations, economic and technological forces all over the globe arecompelling the world towards integration.These forces are fueling a welcomeexplosion of entrepreneurship and political liberalization.But they also threatento destroy the insularity and independence of national economies, quickeningthe pace of change and making many of the people feel more insecure.At thesame time, from within nations, the resurgent aspirations of ethnic and religiousgroups challenge governments on terms those traditional nation-states cannoteasily accommodate.25Clinton portrayed the process of globalization as working from the outside in.The president explained that these forces of integration propelled the worldtogether.However, these energies were not part of the  normal part of anation-state s development.The forces that drove globalization were strange,as they were  from beyond nations, which was not negative per se, but dif-ferent from the  slow, steady, certain change that came with the Cold War.Clinton asserted these energies needed to be internalized and harnessed be-cause they helped create more business opportunity through a growth in  en-trepreneurship while at the same time liberalizing domestic political sys-tems.Nation-states which shared similar economic and political systems,naturally gravitated toward each other, further cementing ties between states.These ties were emblematic of a larger more integrated world in which theUnited States had to stake out its position.The sense of speed within Clinton s discourse is notable.Globalizationquickened the  pace of change. The effect of this increased pace made peo-ple feel  insecure. The integrative economic and technological forces oc-curred so quickly that it had unleashed  resurgent aspirations of ethnic and re-ligions groups. The speed by which these processes happened created anenvironment of instability among nation-states and populations that were notmeeting the pace of global change.In turn, these harms threatened to imperilthe progress towards integration and interdependence.Because the president08_421_03_Ch02.qxd 10/13/08 8:39 AM Page 33Staying the Course as World Leader 33believed globalization was inevitable, any harm that would imperil thatprogress would also affect American foreign policy, forcing it to managethose harms.The dueling forces of integration and fragmentation resulted in a push-pull dialectic in the formation of the international order.This duality pre-sented opportunities and challenges for the United States and the world.Thetwin engines of globalism connoted an image of an international setting inconstant flux and change.In the post Cold War world, the United States hadto live with constant adjustment, unlike the stable bipolar order of the ColdWar where change was minimal.For Clinton, change was the primary pillarof the new international order.Change caused insecurity and uncertainty.Itwas within this flux that the president argued the United States must adjustits role.The president also portrayed this flux in more vivid terms, specifically us-ing a series of natural metaphors to define the post Cold War environment.Metaphor is a fundamental part of rhetorical invention.It is a comparison be-tween two things, places, situations, or events, among things that are unre-lated.26 Metaphors can be overt and/or covert trigger words and phrases thatserve to activate conscious and unconscious rational and emotional associa-tions and responses.27 They are important conduits that rhetors use to con-ceptualize and define the world around them [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]