As the first “sitting” Republican president to travel to Africa, George W. Bush made point in addressing America’s past exploitation of African citizens to use them as slaves. On July 8, 2003, Bush delivered a speech at Goree Island, Senegal where he condemned the action of America’s ancestors towards the Africans and his desire to offer leaders from various African countries aid in their struggle against war, terrorism, famine, and disease. He followed the address by contributing a significant amount of financial assistance for development and AIDS and malaria treatment. In his article “George W. Bush at Goree Island: American Slavery and the Rhetoric of Redemption”, Martin J. Medhurst offers an analysis of the speech and argues that it is
…show more content…
Medhurst introduces the theory “inner texture of a text” where writings contain “repetitive and progressive patterns, narration, structural and argumentative patterns, and sensory-aesthetic dimensions of the text” and further labels Bush’s speech as a narration as it draws the path of slaves’ journey to America to the present day. As he compares the speech to Abraham Lincoln’s addresses, he notes that Lincoln clarified that while he disapproves of the actions of Americans in owning slaves, he is no place of judging others as it is only God’s place to do so. However, Bush makes a point in placing judgement on white, Christian Americans who took part in slavery and allowed it to continue by referring to them as “blind” to their faith. Bush’s standards to judge are not held to the time in which slavery took place, but on the faith that Christians are supposed to hold. In other words, it does not matter that slavery took place centuries prior so much as that it violated God’s message as the repercussions of slavery continue to take place through inequality. Medhurst points to another comparison between Bush and Lincoln in that Lincoln “fulfilled the will of God” not by his words condemning slavery, but by his actions helping the slaves becoming free members of society, whereas Bush made minimal effort in reaching out to those whose ancestors were brought to America as
Medhurst introduces the theory “inner texture of a text” where writings contain “repetitive and progressive patterns, narration, structural and argumentative patterns, and sensory-aesthetic dimensions of the text” and further labels Bush’s speech as a narration as it draws the path of slaves’ journey to America to the present day. As he compares the speech to Abraham Lincoln’s addresses, he notes that Lincoln clarified that while he disapproves of the actions of Americans in owning slaves, he is no place of judging others as it is only God’s place to do so. However, Bush makes a point in placing judgement on white, Christian Americans who took part in slavery and allowed it to continue by referring to them as “blind” to their faith. Bush’s standards to judge are not held to the time in which slavery took place, but on the faith that Christians are supposed to hold. In other words, it does not matter that slavery took place centuries prior so much as that it violated God’s message as the repercussions of slavery continue to take place through inequality. Medhurst points to another comparison between Bush and Lincoln in that Lincoln “fulfilled the will of God” not by his words condemning slavery, but by his actions helping the slaves becoming free members of society, whereas Bush made minimal effort in reaching out to those whose ancestors were brought to America as