Senator J. William Fulbright on the Arrogance of Power, 1966

 Tutor
Name 
Course 
Date 

Senator J. William Fulbright on the Arrogance of Power, 1966
Power is defined by political analogist as the ability of a person or a state to influence actions and behaviour of another party without or with hindrance. Power can be presumed to be evil or unfair in its applicability but, exercise of power remains an endemic concept in the contemporary society. Naturally, individual states exercise power and authority over its civilian population in pursuit of maintaining order in status quo. 
 However, most developed nations have the tendency of medalling with political affairs of developing nations with the aim of attaining selfish interests. Developed nations capitalize on the political turmoil in developing states to bail out their political, economical and social ideologies. Most nations across the globe hold the view that America; being a superpower nation should exercise power and authority over other states. This move has affected American relations with Europe, Middle East and Asian countries. It is against this shortfall that this piece of work will review Authors argument by stating its credibility in raising successful claims.
In the article, “Arrogance of power 1966” Senator William; the author has been successful to a large degree in raising his appealing argument in reference to violation of power and authority by American State. Being a world super power, America has an obligation of protecting and defending South Vietnam freedom from North Vietnam. However, William questions the method and criteria employed by the American government in restoring peace in a country defined as vulnerable to wars; democracy in a state that has never had a stable government and develop a state free from corruption when corruption is peoples’ way of life. The use of rhetoric questions has enabled the author to attract readers’ interests and form a strong foundation for the development of a thesis argument. 
Through the use of smiles and proverbs, the author has been in a position to develop a coherent argument about the issue at stake. William has used the Chinese proverb, “In shallow waters dragon become the sports of shrimps”, to shade more light on the topic under discussion. Proverbs provide a deeper meaning of the situation and events to the readers thus broadening their understanding (McCormack, 56). While the two states are fighting against each other, America benefits from the fight at the expense of the two nations hence leading to more conflict. In counteracting the effective use of power by American in Vietnam, the author uses the similes: “we are still acting like boy scouts.”  Explaining why America has faced resistance from Southeast Asia nations. One of the reasons is the use of excessive use of power in restoring peace. The author in his explanation provides a solution to this effect by stating that Vietnam society cannot be restored through excess use force by the American defense personnel but, from the countries involved.
The author acknowledges that American state has an obligation to extend its help to other nations though donations, defending freedom and promoting democracy. However, the move by American state to send its military personnel to restore democracy in South Vietnam creates a controversial scene. William argues out that if America advocates for peace and democracy in the world, it should provide an excellent example to other nations. The fact that America is excessively involved in other states internal affairs, infers that it uses its citizens money and other resources to fund these activities; an idea that prevents American people to enjoy the outcomes of their democracy. The author emphasises that, not only does excessive involvement of American in international affairs affect its resources but also the states’ democracy. America should set an example through the way it conducts its affairs (Brown, 90). It should form mutual relations with China, countries in Europe, resolve conflicts with Russia and establish material partnership with Western nations without any form of apprehension. The author articulates that this is the only way America can show democracy in the entire world.
The author has capitalized on the use of pathos; an argumentative strategy to emphasise the reaction of citizens towards excessive use of power by the American state (Miller, 310). South Vietnam citizens were opposition of American move to take part in war in North Vietnam. This is because such a move would violate and deny South Vietnam people to enjoy their independence as Free State. Additionally, presence of America in South Vietnam was to affect negatively the peoples’ way of living through cultural diffusion. The American government would have used this chance to persuade South Vietnam government to subscribe to American political, social and economic ideologies. The author has used audience emotional reactions to develop the argument. This is illustrated whe