{"id":25854,"date":"2026-08-03T07:51:49","date_gmt":"2026-08-03T01:21:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/?p=25854"},"modified":"2026-08-04T08:34:36","modified_gmt":"2026-08-04T02:04:36","slug":"democracy-and-the-art-of-rhetoric","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/democracy-and-the-art-of-rhetoric\/","title":{"rendered":"La democracia y el arte de la ret\u00f3rica"},"content":{"rendered":"

More than any other regime, democracies rely on the power of public speech or what used to be known as the art of rhetoric.  Democratic governments have rightly been called \u201clogo-centric\u201d or talk-centered because most of what goes on, whether on the floor of Congress, in town hall meetings, or in the jury room, takes place in and through language. Drawing on an idealized image of ancient Athens, John Stuart Mill once described democracy as government by discussion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The American polity has become a rhetorical democracy, that is, increasingly dependent on the power of speech. Ever since Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, the office of the presidency has increasingly become a vehicle for the mobilization of mass opinion. What was once regarded as a limited constitutional office has now become a kind of plebiscitary office with a direct line of communication between the president and the people.  From Reagan to Clinton to Obama and Trump, we expect the president to be a \u201cgreat communicator\u201d \u2014 or tweeter \u2014  and we think less of presidents who are not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

La capacidad de distinguir entre el discurso persuasivo y la demagogia sigue siendo una de las tareas m\u00e1s urgentes de las democracias modernas.<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

En mi libro reciente, On Statesmanship<\/a><\/em>, sostengo que la ret\u00f3rica sigue siendo una parte indispensable del arsenal del estadista. Dada su expresi\u00f3n can\u00f3nica en la Ret\u00f3rica<\/em>, Arist\u00f3teles distingui\u00f3 tres rasgos del discurso persuasivo que denomin\u00f3 logos<\/em>, ethos<\/em> y pathos<\/em>. Podemos llamar a esto el tri\u00e1ngulo de Arist\u00f3teles. Examinemos cada uno de ellos por separado.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

La pol\u00edtica como decir la verdad<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

El primer rasgo de la persuasi\u00f3n es el logos<\/em>, un t\u00e9rmino que remite a la raz\u00f3n o la racionalidad, pero que prefiero entender como una capacidad de decir la verdad. La pol\u00edtica consiste en dar y compartir argumentos sobre cuestiones de justicia, el bien com\u00fan y qui\u00e9n debe gobernar.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Demo_Book<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

La comunidad pol\u00edtica constituye un todo racional en el sentido de que presupone un mundo de hechos y experiencias compartidos del cual los estadistas y los ciudadanos pueden extraer su arsenal de argumentos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Este es un antecedente lejano de lo que fil\u00f3sofos contempor\u00e1neos como John Rawls y J\u00fcrgen Habermas han llamado \"racionalidad p\u00fablica\", seg\u00fan la cual solo aquello que apela a evidencia verificable p\u00fablicamente puede contar como raz\u00f3n en el foro de la deliberaci\u00f3n pol\u00edtica.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

La primera responsabilidad del estadista consiste en la capacidad de decir la verdad, es decir, en la adhesi\u00f3n a los c\u00e1nones de lo que Jonathan Rauch ha llamado \"la comunidad basada en la realidad\". Esto constituye la base de un mundo compartido de hechos en el cual pueden tener lugar el debate pol\u00edtico y la toma de decisiones.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To be sure, there will always be disagreement about the meaning of the facts, but without some basic consensus on what the facts are, political life will devolve into a Hobbesian state of nature in which every person is simply entitled to their own truth.  It is precisely this kind of epistemic anarchy that is sown today by conspiracy theorists, internet trolls, and other purveyors of disinformation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pol\u00edtica y confianza<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u00bfQu\u00e9 hace que un argumento resulte convincente? No es solo la raz\u00f3n y la l\u00f3gica, sino el car\u00e1cter de quien habla. Los argumentos pol\u00edticos no se desarrollan en un laboratorio<\/a> ni en una sala de seminario, donde podr\u00edan juzgarse por la fuerza del mejor argumento. Los argumentos pol\u00edticos son de naturaleza ad hominem<\/em>. Son actuaciones dirigidas por un orador particular a una audiencia particular en circunstancias particulares. Qui\u00e9n formula el argumento determinar\u00e1, en parte, su \u00e9xito.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

El poder de la narrativa es a la vez necesario y peligroso.<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Aqu\u00ed es donde entra en juego el ethos<\/em>. El ethos<\/em> es un t\u00e9rmino que a menudo se traduce como car\u00e1cter<\/em> o h\u00e1bito<\/em>, pero que concibo como una forma de confianza p\u00fablica. Debe existir un cierto nivel de confianza entre quien habla y su audiencia, y esta solo puede garantizarse cuando el car\u00e1cter del orador exhibe cualidades que la audiencia considera dignas de estima. Esta capacidad de generar confianza es una cuesti\u00f3n de ethos<\/em> o car\u00e1cter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trust is not intended simply as a supplement to reason-giving but is a precondition for it. We speak of taking arguments \u201con faith\u201d largely because we have a prior inclination to believe what a speaker is saying. Why? Presumably because the speaker must possess certain character traits that we find admirable, which may include courage, practical wisdom, a reputation for success, a willingness to challenge dogmas, or even such things as a fiery temperament or a capacity for indignation.  Any or all of these may provide an incentive to believe what they say. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pol\u00edtica y narrativa<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

La \u00faltima cualidad necesaria para el discurso eficaz es el pathos<\/em>, palabra que se traduce como pasi\u00f3n o emoci\u00f3n. No basta con que el estadista presente argumentos racionales y posea un buen car\u00e1cter moral; es necesario tocar el coraz\u00f3n de las personas, persuadirlas de que \u00e9l no solo piensa sino que tambi\u00e9n siente como ellas. Es importante involucrar las simpat\u00edas morales de un pueblo. El pathos<\/em> tiene un tono claramente teatral. Es necesario establecer un cierto grado de empat\u00eda entre los l\u00edderes y el p\u00fablico.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

El arte de la ret\u00f3rica fue considerado alguna vez el n\u00facleo de todos los estudios human\u00edsticos.<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The idea that politics is a matter of affective behavior has always been understood by great political leaders who know how to connect with their audiences.  This is why they speak not only in terms of reasons and arguments but in narratives and stories that connect a people to their history, traditions, and collective memories. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

No somos solo animales racionales, sino seres narrativos que nos concebimos a nosotros mismos a trav\u00e9s de las narrativas y mitolog\u00edas que creamos para dar sentido a nuestra experiencia. Cuando Lincoln apel\u00f3 a \"las cuerdas m\u00edsticas de la memoria\", o cuando John Kennedy dijo \"no preguntes\", o cuando Ronald Reagan hizo referencia a la \"ciudad resplandeciente sobre una colina\", estaban invocando im\u00e1genes capaces de conectar a la gente con sus m\u00e1s altas aspiraciones. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The difficulty comes when we attempt to translate reason-giving into narrative forms.  Argument is one thing; storytelling another.  Stories may have an immediate \u201cfeel good\u201d effect, but overdone, they can have a corrosive influence on truth. Emotionally charged stories can provide a temporary moral high for an audience but can end up increasing feelings of anger and frustration.  Stories are intended to illustrate arguments, not to replace them. Inevitably, the process of translation involves a simplification and therefore a distortion of the truth. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is easy for stories to become unmoored from fact and evidence and take on a life of their own. Conspiracy theories are one form of storytelling.  It is enough to claim \u201ca lot of people are saying\u201d to make something seem true. This arises from the very human need to turn apparently random acts into a plan or a pattern. It is the feature of the conspiratorial mind to be able to prove that all events, however seemingly random or contingent, form part of the same design manipulated, generally, by a single malign force. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The power of narrative is both necessary and dangerous. Some narratives, like the American Dream may speak to a people\u2019s highest ideals, while others, like the myth of the master race or the myth of the classless society are apocalyptic doctrines that have morphed into spectacles of terror and violence. It is important that a statesman be able to invoke the power of narrative, but this must always be guided by an ethic of restraint, responsibility, and a concern for truth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusi\u00f3n<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The art of rhetoric was once considered the core of all humanistic studies. In the ancient world, rhetoric was considered a necessary component for participation in political life. Today, rhetoric is too often regarded as \u201chot air\u201d or a cynical mask for the speaker\u2019s hidden motives and ambitions.  But this is to simplify. The ability to distinguish between persuasive speech and demagoguery remains one of the most pressing tasks of modern democracies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The greatest statesmen \u2014 Pericles, Lincoln, Churchill \u2014 have all been masters of persuasion. They were able to set a course for their countries through powerful narratives and symbols and communicate it to others through rational speech and images. To master the art of public speaking was and remains a requirement for effective citizenship. The neglect of this art is in part responsible for the degradation of our contemporary public culture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

More than any other regime, democracies rely on the power of public speech or what used to be known as the art of rhetoric…\u00a0 <\/p>","protected":false},"author":197,"featured_media":25863,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":35,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[72,950],"ppma_author":[1225],"class_list":["post-25854","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-books","tag-democracy","tag-philosophy"],"pp_statuses_selecting_workflow":false,"pp_workflow_action":"current","pp_status_selection":"publish","authors":[{"term_id":1225,"user_id":197,"is_guest":0,"slug":"steven-b-smith","display_name":"Steven B. Smith","avatar_url":{"url":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/Steven-Smith.webp","url2x":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/Steven-Smith.webp"},"author_category":"1","user_url":"","last_name":"","first_name":"","job_title":"","description":"Alfred Cowles Professor of Political Science at Yale University, where he also co-directs the Center for the Study of Representative Institutions. His research focuses on the history of political philosophy, the relation between religion and politics, and theories of representative government. He is the author of several books, including Reading Leo Strauss<\/em> and Modernity and Its Discontents<\/em>."}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25854","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/197"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25854"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25854\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25880,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25854\/revisions\/25880"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/25863"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25854"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25854"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25854"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicsrights.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=25854"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}