I will be using AFI 36-2903 For my discourse assignment. It is the first set of guidelines that new members must adhere to continue their initiation and membership within my chosen discourse of the Air Force.

Assignment Three Draft

I was watching the streetlights pass one by one as I anxiously stared out of the bus window I was riding. I was twenty years old and I was on my way to Lackland Air Force Base to begin my initiation into the discourse community I just became a part of; the US Air Force. It was a surreal moment at around 5a.m. as I watched the familiar glow of lights from restaurants, hotels, and grocery stores give way to unfamiliar buildings, colors, and drab uniformed lights. I had made it onto the base and my daily life wouldn’t be the same for the next fifteen years. The Air Force is a discourse community that is joined by it’s sister services to achieve the goal of national security. Each branch has it’s own community and they sometimes differ greatly but in general, the ending guidelines are similar. The initiation I was about to encounter was Basic Training or “boot camp”. This is a very real physical and mental indoctrination into this discourse and it bonds all who have gone through it on a higher level than most other discourse communities. The Air Force broke apart and reshaped my old ways of thinking and conducting myself to how they wanted. Every aspect of physical appearance is also scrutinized. Uniforms had to pressed with crease marks in all the right places, hair had to be within regulations, and shaving was a mandatory daily to sometimes twice a day requirement.

Fig. 1 an excerpt from AFI 36-2903

The above figure is a sample from the 185 page document known as the Dress and Appearance Air Force Instruction, or better known to those in the discourse as AFI 36-2903. This is the most basic AFI and it is the first of many that is given to initiates with the expectancy of immediate compliance. This AFI covers a broad range of topics from how each uniform is to be worn and how all accoutrement is to be placed, to fitness standards that ensure the physique requirements are also met. This AFI also helps lays the groundwork for the numerous customs and courtesies that are frequent within the military. An easy example of this is the custom of saluting an officer; right hand up, middle finger to corner of eyebrow, five feet away, maintain salute until officer drops theirs. But there are many others that seem odd at first but become common after time. Some examples are; taking hats off inside buildings, not walking on grass if it can be helped, stopping your car at 1700 during the National Anthem if your driving on base, and not holding hands or showing signs of affection while in uniform. These standards I have explained are really just the very tip of an extremely large and jagged iceberg but it’s easily enough to meet Swales criteria of a discourse community.

            Five years after my initiation I would make the rank of Staff Sergeant and while my own understanding and compliance of the most basic AFI was innate to my existence at this point, my engagement with it was just about to begin. I had just made the rank that is primarily the front line for enforcing these standards among the newly initiated. This is where the rhetorical aspect comes into play. Every Airman that goes through training is aware of the numerous standards placed upon them. When an Airman breaks a regulation everyone around that person is conscious of it. There is a stigma about doing anything imperfect in the Air Force. Leadership will swarm a problem until it is fixed and this fixing was all done at my new level. AFI 36-2903 was a frequently used source of correctional documentation by myself and my peers. I was charged with ensuring those under me were compliant, if they weren’t, then ultimately I wasn’t and that was something I couldn’t have. Policing of regulations is done primarily on a rhetorical scale in the daily life of an Air Force sergeant. For example; I run a shift of aircraft maintainers, I need to ensure production is met and the squadrons have their fighters for the next morning’s sorties. Airmen Snuffy is on my shift and his hair is touching the top of his ear. I notice my boss who just walked in look at him and make a certain “look”, I now feel embarrassed that I did not notice and correct it first. Now I need to step away from my work to correct a nineteen years olds hair being ¼ inch too long.

            While the above infraction scenario was negative and perhaps too common, it hardly detracts from the unity members of this discourse have for each other. We were all there for a certain goal that we felt passionately about in some form, be it belonging to something great, patriotism, or tradition. Air Force members have their own way of speaking to each other, whether it be in acronyms, or foul language. We all paid our due by getting through Basic Training and feedback to one another isn’t just encouraged, its required annually. The Air Force maintains hundreds of genres in the hundreds of different Air Force Specialty Codes or “jobs” that one could perform, from avionics to pararescue. All of which are constantly evolving to meet today’s requirements. Lexis that are unique to each Airman are established quickly and used daily. Acronyms are the Lexi of choice for the military but there are others. An F16 fighter jet could be called a “lawn dart” or a lieutenant could be a “butter bar”. Finally the Air Force meets a certain membership number determined by congress. Members filter out through attrition or by choice but there is a steady flow of new initiates. There is a healthy balance of novice and expert at all times to ensure the mission is met. All of these aspects would earn Swales’ seal of discourse community approval.

I was twenty years old when I decided that I was going to join the Air Force. I was not fitting with college at the time and I felt restless for something outside my hometown. I knew the military would be something new and exciting but I didn’t know at the time how foreign it would be either. I had signed up for an extreme case of discourse community. My own clothes were removed and I was given a uniform that everyone in my new community must wear. The uniform is marked with a rank to show your place in the hierarchy. I was instructed how to conduct myself and how to speak to effectively to communicate. Everyone volunteered to be in this community and all were there for a clearly defined purpose. A member of this discourse would quickly be removed if they did not adhere to its many rules and regulations. We also had additional judicial guidelines called the UCMJ or Uniformed Code of Military Justice. I would elaborate more on how this applied to daily life in a coming draft. The UCMJ is a legally binding set of of regulations that all in the discourse of the military must adhere to and they are supplemental to civilian laws.

1.) I feel I understand the assignment fairly well. We have been studying discourse communities and how they operate and now we are applying these concepts to our own personal experiences.

2.) Mirabellis concept of multiliteracies could be applied to my own past discourse with additional training but I do believe there are already multiliteracies in place.

3.) The discourse I was in required uniforms, a clearly defined goal, unique way of communicating, hierarchy, and everyone one was there for a clearly defined purpose.

4.) List of rules and procedures and rules.

I will be using the discourse community of the military, specifically the Air Force for assignment three. I will use the Air Force Instruction AFI 36-2903(dress & appearance) and my Airman’s Manual as documents for this discourse.

             Birth of a Nation is a film made by a man named D.W. Griffith in 1915. This film is highly controversial due to its historical inaccuracy of the Civil War time period and it’s racial stereotyping. Birth of Nation attempts to portray the South in a positive light for all who lived there while ignoring the plight of African Americans who were denied the same civil liberties of White Americans. The film strives to persuade the viewer that the south was in danger of being forever changed by the “wicked” progressive thinkers who wanted to reunify the Nation with equal civil rights for all.

 D.W. Griffith’s message is similar to another man’s named Ludwig Hoffman. In 1896, Hoffman published his book titled; “Race Amalgamation”. The intent of Hoffman’s work is to persuade his readers to believe his notion that different races interbreeding with whites should be viewed as wrong. Unlike Griffith, Hoffman backs up his claims with the pseudoscience of the time. Hoffman believed that whites were superior and interbreeding led to weaker offspring due to white blood being diluted. Both of these men were clearly misguided but their infiltration of their respective discourse communities demonstrates a real danger to all of society. Film and Science have very tangible effects on a nation, but which has the most potential to do lasting harm or the most persuasive effect on America? Given these two examples, I would say Birth of a Nation had the largest felt effect at that time.

            “Race Amalgamation” is a good example of the Science community falling victim to rhetorical topics. I believe the field of Science should be above the society that it is serving. Scientific fields have to be above reproach. This idea is inherent by use of the scientific model. Experiments and research will be quickly invalidated without proper methods and controls. I also believe that society does not question the field of science. This could be due to the seemingly dauntless challenge to be a member of the scientific community. Surely someone who obtains the title of doctor or professor is above questioning by the layman right? This is why the work of Ludwig Hoffman was so damaging. People who read his book might very well have believed it simply because it came from the scientific community. 1986 was not a time in which everybody had easy access to information like today. But similar to today, ease of access to information does not make it credible. Race Amalgamation also worked to further the misguidance of others within the scientific discourse community. But I feel that Hoffman’s work mainly galvanized others in his own discourse more than the public. Not everybody will read a science book but almost everybody will go see a film.

            Birth of a Nation had enormous rhetorical appeal at the time of it’s release. Many in the north wanted equal civil liberties for African Americans after the Civil War. While many in the south did not want to change their lives, heritage, or “values”. America was divided by the idea of civil right progression after the war and Birth of a Nation further drove the wedge between the two different ideologies. W.E.B. Dubois and other likeminded individuals were a voice for progressive thinking but progress came at great cost and resistance. The voice of the resistance for change were men like Ludwig Hoffman and D.W. Griffith. It was a battle of discourses and unfortunately for Dubois, the resistance to progress had the more powerful communities of law, science, and film. Hoffman used his discourse to persuade readers that science and nature were the forces behind white supremacy. D.W. Griffith used film to propagandize African American stereotypes and to display his desire for a united white supremacist America.

            Ludwig Hoffman, the man who wrote “Race Traits and Tendencies of the American Negro” Used the veil of scientific methods to garner his results that whites were mentally and physically superior to other races. He mixed numerical values, data columns, and educated verbiage to appear scientific throughout his work. He demonized whites breeding with other races for sake of the afflicted offspring. His message comes off as a fearful warning to other likeminded whites that times are changing and the status quo is in danger.

 D.W. Griffith, the man who made the film has been credited for being a brilliant technical film maker. He used colors in his film to show emotion and sway his audience to feel certain ways about different characters, locations, and events. An example of this was when he used blue or green during scenes of the south to show sadness and prosperity respectively, while using red during scenes of dread or violence. Costumes were used to show the dignity of white southern men and the depravity of African Americans, white sympathizers, and bi-racial individuals. These film techniques were weaponized for a rhetorical attack on an already unhinged society. The film opened city after city to thousands of people who lined up to see it. Even the President of the USA praised the film stating; “It is like writing history with lightning, and my only regret is that it is all so terribly true.” With the film obtaining sanction from the highest office in the country, those who disagreed must have felt utterly defeated. I believe this film was a much more persuasive rhetorical piece based off it’s sheer ease of access by the public at that time. Everybody was talking about, even the President. Film uses music, images and draws upon the viewers emotion. There is no greater propaganda weapon in my opinion than film. D.W. Griffith recognized this and utilized it to spread his beliefs. Unfortunately for society at that time, it was hateful and inaccurate, leading all those who accepted the message into hate and ignorance. This is evidenced by the record recruitment numbers of KKK members following Birth of a Nations release.

Hoffman and Griffith have given us examples on how damaging discourse communities can be. When powerful people join voices for a common cause, the effects can be felt throughout societies and even generations. The clandestine way in which some discourses operate gives rise to concern and these two examples prove that. Luckily hindsight is 20/20 and we can right the wrongs of the past but what of the present? How can we be sure that current authoritative discourses are not swaying us to believe ignorant or inaccurate ideas? History is a powerful teacher.

 Birth of a Nation is a film made by a man named D.W. Griffith in 1915. This film is highly controversial due to its historical inaccuracy of the Civil War time period and it’s racial stereotyping. Birth of Nation attempts to portray the South in a positive light for all who lived there while ignoring the plight of African Americans who were denied the same civil liberties of White Americans. The film strives to persuade the viewer that the south was in danger of being forever changed by the “wicked” progressive thinkers who wanted to reunify the Nation with equal civil rights for all. D.W. Griffith’s message is similar to another man’s named Ludwig Hoffman. In 1896, Hoffman published his book titled; “Race Amalgamation”. The intent of Hoffman’s work is to persuade his readers to believe his notion that different races interbreeding with whites should be viewed as wrong. Unlike Griffith, Hoffman backs up his claims with the pseudoscience of the time. Hoffman believed that whites were superior and interbreeding led to weaker offspring due to white blood being diluted. Both of these men were clearly misguided but their infiltration of their respective discourse communities demonstrates a real danger to all of society. Film and Science have very tangible effects on a nation, but which has the most potential to do lasting harm or the most persuasive effect on America? Given these two examples, I would say Birth of a Nation had the largest felt effect at that time.

            “Race Amalgamation” is a good example of the Science community falling victim to rhetorical topics. I believe the field of Science should be above the society that it is serving. Scientific fields have to be above reproach. This idea is inherent by use of the scientific model. Experiments and research will be quickly invalidated without proper methods and controls. I also believe that society does not question the field of science. This could be due to the seemingly dauntless challenge to be a member of the scientific community. Surely someone who obtains the title of doctor or professor is above questioning by the layman right? This is why the work of Ludwig Hoffman was so damaging. People who read his book might very well have believed it simply because it came from the scientific community. 1986 was not a time in which everybody had easy access to information like today. But similar to today, ease of access to information does not make it credible. Race Amalgamation also worked to further the misguidance of others within the scientific discourse community. But I feel that Hoffman’s work mainly galvanized others in his own discourse more than the public. Not everybody will read a science book but almost everybody will go see a film.

            Birth of a Nation had enormous rhetorical appeal at the time of it’s release. Many in the north wanted equal civil liberties for African Americans after the Civil War. While many in the south did not want to change their lives, heritage, or “values”. America was divided and Birth of a Nation further drove the wedge between the two different ideologies. D.W. Griffith, the man who made the film has been credited for being a brilliant technical film maker. He used colors in his film to show emotion and sway his audience to feel certain ways about different characters, locations, and events. An example of this was when he used blue or green during scenes of the south to show sadness and prosperity respectively, while using red during scenes of dread or violence. Costumes were used to show the dignity of white southern men and the depravity of African Americans, white sympathizers, and bi-racial individuals. These film techniques were weaponized for a rhetorical attack on an already unhinged society. The film opened city after city to thousands of people who lined up to see it. Even the President of the USA praised the film stating; “It is like writing history with lightning, and my only regret is that it is all so terribly true.” With the film obtaining sanction from the highest office in the country, those who disagreed must have felt utterly defeated. I believe this film was a much more persuasive rhetorical piece based off it’s sheer ease of access by the public at that time. Everybody was talking about, even the President. Film uses music, images and draws upon the viewers emotion. There is no greater propaganda weapon in my opinion than film. D.W. Griffith recognized this and utilized it to spread his beliefs. Unfortunately for society at that time, it was hateful and inaccurate, leading all those who accepted the message into hate and ignorance. This is evidenced by the record recruitment numbers of KKK members following Birth of a Nations release.