“The Wolf and the Lamb: The Rhetoric of Oppression” by Umberto Eco

Image Source: Wikipedia

Image Source: Wikipedia

I read this essay yesterday and it took a day to digest this fully, even though the impact of it was immediate. In this piece, Eco explores how rhetoric is used to justify tyranny and the oppression of others by leaders and governments. He backs up his arguments by examining speeches and documents from various sources to demonstrate how the various techniques are employed.

Eco defines rhetoric as “a technique of persuasion, and persuasion is not a bad thing, even though, reprehensibly, you can persuade someone to act against his own interests.” (Turning Back the Clock: p. 45) He then presents Phaedrus’s fable of the wolf and the lamb as the classic example of the rhetoric of oppression. In the fable, the wolf and the lamb meet at a stream to drink. The wolf wants to eat the lamb and goes through a series of arguments with the lamb until the wolf can justify his attack on the lamb.

Eco points out that these arguments become more effective when they are aligned with a shared public opinion. As an example, he uses a passage from Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf in which he argues against the inferiority of other races, specifically blacks. The quote, while disturbing and lengthy, is worth including since it demonstrates how logic can be used in an attempt to promote ideas that are clearly deranged and racist.

From time to time our illustrated papers publish, for the edification of the German philistine, the news that in some quarter or other of the globe, and for the first time there, a Negro has become a lawyer, a teacher, a pastor, even a grand opera tenor or something of that kind. While the bourgeois blockhead stares with amazed admiration at the notice that tells him how marvelous are the achievements of our modern educational system, the more cunning Jew sees in this fact evidence in support of the theory with which he wants to infect the public, namely that all men are equal. It does not dawn on the dull bourgeois mind that the published fact is a sin against reason itself, that it is an act of criminal insanity to train a being anthropoid only by birth until the pretense can be made that the being has been turned into a lawyer—while millions who belong to the most civilized races have to remain in positions unworthy of their cultural level. The bourgeois mind does not realize that it is a sin against the will of the eternal Creator to allow hundreds of thousands of highly gifted people to remain floundering in the swamp of proletarian misery while Hottentots and Zulus are drilled to fill positions in the intellectual professions. For here we have the product only of a drilling technique, just as in the case of a performing dog. If the same amount of care and effort were applied among intelligent races, each individual would become a thousand times more capable in such matters… It is indeed intolerable to think that year after year hundreds of thousands of young people without a vestige of talent are deemed worthy of a higher education, while other hundreds of thousands who possess hugh natural gifts have to go without any sort of higher schooling at all. The practical loss to the nation is incalculable.

(ibid: pp. 48 – 49)

Eco asserts that one of the most effective forms of oppressive rhetoric is to employ the conspiracy argument, positing the idea that there is a plot by another person or country that threatens one’s safety.

In general, in order to maintain popular support for their decisions, dictatorships point the finger at a country, group, race, or secret society that is plotting against the people under the dictator. All forms of populism, even contemporary ones, try to obtain consensus by talking of a threat from abroad, or from internal groups.

(ibid: p. 52)

I have seen firsthand just how effective this rhetorical tool is. In the United States, the threat of terrorist attacks against American targets has led to the loss of individual freedoms and the implementation of oppressive laws such as the Patriot Act. It is also used profusely by media groups such as FOX News or MSNBC to polarize support for a particular political side. For example, if we consider something like the controversial Keystone Pipeline, FOX News would claim that liberals have fabricated evidence of climate change to push through their agenda which could have a negative impact on jobs in this country. Conversely, MSNBC would assert that right-wing legislators are being paid off by the oil lobby and seek to benefit financially at the expense of everyone else. Without taking sides here, we can see that both sides are using the same type of rhetoric, each claiming a conspiratorial plan by the other side.

Toward the end of the essay, Eco cites a speech by Pericles included in the writings of Thucydides where Pericles justifies an Athenian assault against a neighboring city state because it is their right.

This is another figure, perhaps the shrewdest, of the rhetoric of oppression: we have the right to impose our might on others because we embody the best form of government in existence.

(ibid: p. 62)

I cannot recall the number of times I have hear it said that we are invading a country to free the citizens from a dictator or to install or protect democracy. This argument strike deep in every American because we are conditioned to believe that democracy is the best form of government. And why wouldn’t people in every country want to share in the freedom afforded by a democratic country? But if we think about it, we must accept that this is only rhetoric used to persuade us to accept the decisions made by leaders. It is a way for leaders to justify their actions so that the majority of citizens will acquiesce. As Eco points out, it is a shrewd form of the rhetoric of oppression.

There are other examples in this essay that are worth reading and considering. I strongly encourage you to buy a copy of Turning Back the Clock and read this essay in its entirety. It is powerful and sobering, and after reading it, you will notice just how insidious this form of rhetoric is.

Advertisements

10 Comments

Filed under Literature, Non-fiction

10 responses to ““The Wolf and the Lamb: The Rhetoric of Oppression” by Umberto Eco

  1. Great stuff Jeff!

    Sad state of humanity though. Power is a frightening thing sometimes.

  2. It does sound sobering. I am intrigued and will likely end up reading it.

    • Hi Christy! I hope you are well. Busy here trying to finish up a project 😉

      Eco is one of my favorite writers. I love his essays, his criticism, and his fiction. He is a genius and an artist. I’m sure you would like his work too.

      OK, back to the writing that pays the bills. Have an awesome day!!

      Jeff

  3. Alex Hurst

    This sounds like an amazing read. I’m going to have to put it in the cart now. Thanks for the recommendation, and the well-written review.

    • Hi Alex.

      Thank you so much for your kind words. Eco is a brilliant writer and all the essays I’ve read so far in the book are excellent. I hope you get as much out of them as I have.

      Have a wonderful holiday!

      Jeff

  4. Pingback: A Tragic Day for Literature: Umberto Eco and Harper Lee | Stuff Jeff Reads

  5. indeed, and sometimes the wolf even presents the lamb as the wolf – common in speeches….

    • Hi Simon. Thanks for your comment, and yes, you are absolutely right.

      • Hi. This is from 1627 London England. The man speaking has the full force of the establishment behind him. The man who is on show trail is John Etherington, in chains and in front of a crowd. Dennison, the wolf, makes out that he is the lamb!

        (Excuse own version from novel – original is recounted in Dennison’s The White Wolfe from that year but has chunks of Latin etc.]

        —Let me tell you what you see before you in the form of the innocent-looking, Mr Etherington – for this is a man who is not what he appears: a man who is not innocent for a start. He appears to us as a sheep but a sheep he is not. Oh no, friends! He is a …. wolf but a wolf wearing the fleece of an innocent sheep, such is his disguise.

        I can hear you thinking and whispering ever so quietly amongst yourselves, ‘…But there are no wolves in England!’. And you are right: there are no real wolves in England. But are there mystical wolves? …Oh yes! When it comes to mystical wolves, England has plenty of them . Indeed, it is a great breeder of mystical wolves! Plenty of wolves and plenty of different breeds of wolf: Papist wolves, Anabaptist wolves and then …. what we have here … Familistical wolves.

        …He will deny it of course, in the same way that he has already denied being an Anabaptist wolf. But let me tell you, one cannot simply say ‘I am a wolf no longer’ without repenting truly and kicking aside all the characteristics of a wolf. To do one without the latter is merely to sew a white fleece to the lupine hide. So, he has already said ‘I am no longer an Anabaptist wolf’ but what of it?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s