Rhetorical Analysis: Proclamation of Rebellion

Proclamation of Rebellion On August 23rd of 1775, King George III issued A Proclamation for Suppressing Rebellion and Sedition later hearing news of the Battle of Bunker Hill. The document declared that the colonies were in an open state of rebellion and requested that all subjects of Great Britain report disloyal correspondence by anyone who may be involved so they could be punished. King Georges proclamation acted as an antithesis and undermined his remaining colonial moderate support.The draw a bead on of the proclamation was obvious King George III wanted to thwart the colonial rebellion by coercing them by means of intimidation, which is a form of an ethos appeal. However, the timing of the progeny of the proclamation and its diction reveal a seemingly desperate King George. King George III opened the proclamation with the use of a self-sealing conspiracy argument against the leaders of the rebellion when he referred to them as ill designing. He tried to create an outlet for the average colonial subject by work them misled. This also played into the conspiracy argument by making those same subjects doubt the American leadership they had followed up to that point. It seems as though he called the colonists to afterthought their position by portraying Great Britain as their protector and guardian while labeling the colonial leadership as avaricious conspirators. These claims that Britain was still an excellent start figure to whom the colonists owed respect and deference were arguments of principle.However, it was clear that many colonists found incidences such as The Boston Massacre and The Battle of Bunker Hill indicated otherwise. Not whole did The Battle of Bunker Hill display that Great Britain was not the colonists protector, but also that the British could be beaten. This loss painted a much weaker picture of King George. The proclamation was released just before King George would decline to receive the colonists Olive Branch Petition.By de clining to receive the petition, it was assumed that the Kings proclamation was his response. With that in mind, the remaining colonial moderates retained little hope that Great Britain and the colonies would remain united. King Georges proclamation labeled the leaders of the colonial resistance dangerous and ill designing men and listed the ways they had violated royal law. He also posited all the ways the Empire had correctly administered formation and rule over the colonies.It said that those who aided Britain in finding conspirators would be protected for their loyalty and zeal and that ignorance was not an option. Up to this point, ignorance of the relations between the colonies and Britain was the way chosen by many moderates who hoped reconciliation would be made. In his proclamation King George identified these moderates as well as Tory supporters and attempted to pit them against the conspirators. This rhetorical act on the part of King George III and the British was an utter failure at achieving its intended goal.By that point, the relationship between the two parties had been violent for quite a some time and colonial confidence in the King by his shrinking supporting minority was waning. He used self-boasting ethos appeals to the colonists (many of whom had already come to the demonstration that they didnt like him) and hoped that they would essentially turn themselves in and give up. The worst part about the entire proclamation was that it completely crushed moderates who supported the desire that independence wasnt the answer.