Neo-Aristotelian Analysis of Reagan's "Evil Empire" Speech
This paper presents a Neo-Aristotelian rhetorical analysis of President Ronald Reagan's 1983 "Evil Empire" speech delivered to the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, Florida. Following the structured steps of Neo-Aristotelian criticism, the analysis examines the historical situation and Cold War exigency that prompted the speech, Reagan's background and motivations as a communicator and political leader, and the application of rhetoric's five classical canons — invention, organization, style, memory, and delivery. The paper concludes by evaluating the speech's effects, arguing that by morally challenging the Soviet Union and rallying the American public, Reagan's address played a significant role in the eventual collapse of the Soviet empire and the end of the Cold War.
- Introduction: Historical context and paper's analytical purpose
- Reconstruction of the Original Situation: Cold War backdrop prompting Reagan's speech
- Investigation of the Speaker's Background, Motivations, and Intentions: Reagan's showbiz roots and Cold War motivations
- Application of the Five Canons of Rhetoric: Invention, organization, style, memory, and delivery analyzed
- Evaluation of Effects and Effectiveness: Speech's impact on Cold War and American identity
- Conclusion: Speech's role in ending the Cold War
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper applies a clearly defined analytical framework — Neo-Aristotelian criticism — systematically and transparently, using a table to present the steps before executing them, which gives readers a roadmap for the analysis.
- Direct quotations from Reagan's speech are incorporated effectively, allowing the rhetorical content to speak for itself while the analysis frames its significance.
- The evaluation section ties the analytical framework back to measurable historical outcomes (the collapse of the Soviet Union, economic renewal), grounding rhetorical analysis in real-world consequences.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates structured rhetorical criticism: it names an established critical method, defines its steps explicitly, and then applies each step in sequence to a single artifact. This methodological transparency is a hallmark of communication and rhetoric scholarship, showing readers not just what is argued but how the analytical lens works.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with historical context and a thesis statement, then moves through the four steps of Neo-Aristotelian criticism in order: situational reconstruction, speaker investigation, canon application (subdivided into five named components), and evaluation of effectiveness. A brief conclusion synthesizes findings and reinforces the speech's historical significance. Citations are sparse but drawn from primary commentary and rhetorical scholarship.
Introduction
When President Ronald Reagan delivered his historic "Evil Empire" speech in 1983, America's enemies were well-known and consisted most especially of the former Soviet Union. Children born since the turn of the 21st century have never known a world with a Berlin Wall or a divided Germany, and even observers at the time of the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991 could not believe what they were seeing. Despite their incredulity, many analysts in the aftermath credited President Reagan with ending the Cold War due in large part to this address. To determine the basis for that claim, this paper provides a Neo-Aristotelian analysis of Reagan's "Evil Empire" speech, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.
Reconstruction of the Original Situation
A Neo-Aristotelian analysis of a historic speech focuses on three basic principles: (a) the situation, (b) the speaker, and (c) the speech itself. The first step involves reconstructing the artifact's original situation by examining the exigency — the event or issue that provoked the speaker to address a problem that could be resolved through rhetorical communication — as well as the context in which that exigency occurred and the audience the speaker chose to address. The context includes historical and cultural events that gave rise to the speech, the broader conversation it joins, and socio-cultural attitudes toward the speech's topic. The critic must understand who the audience was, what they knew and felt about both the speaker and the exigency, and what role they might play in resolving it.
In 1983, the outcome of the Cold War was still uncertain, and the Soviet Union together with its Warsaw Pact allies still appeared as a monolithic threat arrayed against the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies. Moreover, Soviet efforts to expand their hegemony beyond their existing sphere of influence were apparent to American policymakers. It was against this backdrop that Reagan presented his "Evil Empire" speech.
Works Cited
Gingrich, Newt. "The Evil Empire: On the 25th Anniversary of Two Famous Reagan Speeches, the Former Speaker of the House Asks Why We Haven't Learned More from the 40th President." American Heritage 58.4 (Spring–Summer 2008): 18–21. Print.
Kramer, Peter. "Star Wars." History Today 49.3 (March 1999): 41. Print.
"Neo-Aristotelian Criticism — Steps in the Process." Modern Rhetorical Criticism. 2016. Web.
Ritter, Kurt. Ronald Reagan: The Great Communicator. New York: Greenwood Press, 1992. Print.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.