{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/83827"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/83827","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"The Discursive Construction of National Security Threats from 2001-2018","abstract":"This thesis seeks to explain the discursive construction of national security threats facing the United States from 2001-2018. The driving argument is that the nation's perception of threats and conceptualization of itself are vulnerable to Presidential rhetoric. Presidents convey threats through rhetorical frameworks, a simplified means to present a manipulated perception of reality to a wider audience, which intentionally provoke reactions from the nation to garner consensus towards executive decision-making. Presidents apply frames from prior administrations as well as new frames to define adverse states, organizations, groups of people, etc., and to justify disciplinary practices, military action, or policy implementation against threats. Primarily, they portray threats as the binary opposite of the American national identity to reinforce the country's legitimacy in national security decision-making. This discourse influences how the public internalizes major issues facing the nation and triggers emotions that can either unite or divide the national identity. This research maps variation among the rhetorical frameworks and strategies of President George W. Bush, President Barack Obama, and President Donald J. Trump to evaluate: how national security threats are constructed, how the nation interprets threats, and the resulting social and political effects.","abstract_html":"This thesis seeks to explain the discursive construction of national security threats facing the United States from 2001-2018. The driving argument is that the nation's perception of threats and conceptualization of itself are vulnerable to Presidential rhetoric. Presidents convey threats through rhetorical frameworks, a simplified means to present a manipulated perception of reality to a wider audience, which intentionally provoke reactions from the nation to garner consensus towards executive decision-making. Presidents apply frames from prior administrations as well as new frames to define adverse states, organizations, groups of people, etc., and to justify disciplinary practices, military action, or policy implementation against threats. Primarily, they portray threats as the binary opposite of the American national identity to reinforce the country's legitimacy in national security decision-making. This discourse influences how the public internalizes major issues facing the nation and triggers emotions that can either unite or divide the national identity. This research maps variation among the rhetorical frameworks and strategies of President George W. Bush, President Barack Obama, and President Donald J. Trump to evaluate: how national security threats are constructed, how the nation interprets threats, and the resulting social and political effects.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Stieper, Erica Marie"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Arts","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Political Science","degree_department":"Political Science","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Zanotti, Laura"],"committee_members":["Dixit, Priya","Caraccioli, Mauro J."],"year":2018,"date_issued":"2018-06-29","date_published":"2018-06-29","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:56:46Z","subjects":["Presidential Rhetoric","National Security Threats"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["vt_gsexam:15946"],"render_values":[{"text":"vt_gsexam:15946","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/83827","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Zanotti, Laura"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Dixit, Priya","Caraccioli, Mauro J."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Stieper, Erica Marie"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2018-06-30T08:04:03Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2018-06-30T08:04:03Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2018-06-29"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Presidential Rhetoric","National Security Threats"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["vt_gsexam:15946"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/83827"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This thesis seeks to explain the discursive construction of national security threats facing the United States from 2001-2018. The driving argument is that the nation's perception of threats and conceptualization of itself are vulnerable to Presidential rhetoric. Presidents convey threats through rhetorical frameworks, a simplified means to present a manipulated perception of reality to a wider audience, which intentionally provoke reactions from the nation to garner consensus towards executive decision-making. Presidents apply frames from prior administrations as well as new frames to define adverse states, organizations, groups of people, etc., and to justify disciplinary practices, military action, or policy implementation against threats. Primarily, they portray threats as the binary opposite of the American national identity to reinforce the country's legitimacy in national security decision-making. This discourse influences how the public internalizes major issues facing the nation and triggers emotions that can either unite or divide the national identity. This research maps variation among the rhetorical frameworks and strategies of President George W. Bush, President Barack Obama, and President Donald J. Trump to evaluate: how national security threats are constructed, how the nation interprets threats, and the resulting social and political effects."]},{"key":"dc:description.abstractgeneral","label":"General Abstract","values":["This thesis seeks to explain how presidential language contributes to the construction of national security threats facing the United States from 2001-2018. The driving argument is that the nation’s perception of threats and conceptualization of itself are vulnerable to Presidential rhetoric. Presidents intentionally portray threats as the binary opposite of the American national identity to justify the country’s retaliation. This language impacts how Americans conceptualize themselves and triggers emotions that can either unite or divide the national identity. This research maps how President George W. Bush, President Barack Obama, and President Donald J. Trump have used language to construct national security threats and the American national identity. Further, it evaluates the resulting social and political effects and the implications moving forward."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["ETD"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Discursive Construction of National Security Threats from 2001-2018"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Zanotti, Laura"],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Dixit, Priya","Caraccioli, Mauro J."],"dc:contributor.department":["Political Science"],"dc:creator":["Stieper, Erica Marie"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2018-06-30T08:04:03Z"],"dc:date.available":["2018-06-30T08:04:03Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2018-06-29"],"dc:description.abstract":["This thesis seeks to explain the discursive construction of national security threats facing the United States from 2001-2018. The driving argument is that the nation's perception of threats and conceptualization of itself are vulnerable to Presidential rhetoric. Presidents convey threats through rhetorical frameworks, a simplified means to present a manipulated perception of reality to a wider audience, which intentionally provoke reactions from the nation to garner consensus towards executive decision-making. Presidents apply frames from prior administrations as well as new frames to define adverse states, organizations, groups of people, etc., and to justify disciplinary practices, military action, or policy implementation against threats. Primarily, they portray threats as the binary opposite of the American national identity to reinforce the country's legitimacy in national security decision-making. This discourse influences how the public internalizes major issues facing the nation and triggers emotions that can either unite or divide the national identity. This research maps variation among the rhetorical frameworks and strategies of President George W. Bush, President Barack Obama, and President Donald J. Trump to evaluate: how national security threats are constructed, how the nation interprets threats, and the resulting social and political effects."],"dc:description.abstractgeneral":["This thesis seeks to explain how presidential language contributes to the construction of national security threats facing the United States from 2001-2018. The driving argument is that the nation’s perception of threats and conceptualization of itself are vulnerable to Presidential rhetoric. Presidents intentionally portray threats as the binary opposite of the American national identity to justify the country’s retaliation. This language impacts how Americans conceptualize themselves and triggers emotions that can either unite or divide the national identity. This research maps how President George W. Bush, President Barack Obama, and President Donald J. Trump have used language to construct national security threats and the American national identity. Further, it evaluates the resulting social and political effects and the implications moving forward."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Arts"],"dc:format.medium":["ETD"],"dc:identifier.other":["vt_gsexam:15946"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/83827"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["Presidential Rhetoric","National Security Threats"],"dc:title":["The Discursive Construction of National Security Threats from 2001-2018"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Political Science"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:56:46Z"}