No Paper Title Author Name Page No

MERICAN Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies
www.
 grnjournal.us 
 
Traditionally, following Aristotle, there are three main ways, three sources of argumentation: 
appeal to reason, to morality, morality (these are appeals ―based on the qualities, reputation, 
prestige of the speaker‖) and emotional and psychological calls . 
The well-known American political rhetorician Theodore Wind explains: ―By logs, Aristotle 
meant arguments of a rational order in relation to a proposed course of action or a position taken. 
No one can convince others without offering some kind of reason, whether they are real or 
imaginary reasonable. People want to have an argument for what they believe, what they do, or 
what they are called to do. The idea of logos should not be confused with formal logic in its 
philosophical or academic form, and also with a rigid system of premises tested for truth. 
Rhetorical reasoning comes from personal opinions, from public opinions, values, laws, customs, 
deviations from evidence, and from a variety of other sources. Developing his thoughts, 
reasoning, a political orator who seeks to convince the public has two goals:
1.
to present the best possible arguments and arguments in favor of his position;
2.
Choose from these arguments those that will be most understandable for that part of the 
audience that the speaker seeks to influence and convince. 
Aristotle meant the character, prestige, authority of the speaker, and the level of audience 
confidence that the speaker has. "... The way you are speaks so loudly that it's hard to hear what 
you're actually talking about." Listening, reading a speech, the audience always takes into 
account who is speaking. People remember the opinions of those they consider to be authorities. 
They respect those who have character, even if they don't agree with them. They trust those who 
are trusted." 
However, convincing the audience that the politician is right is not all. A politician does not need 
a sympathetic but passive audience. If in ancient Athens, at the Roman Forum, persuasion was 
the main goal of the orator, since the decision was made right there, at the Forum, then it is not 
enough for a modern politician to convince. He needs the listener or reader to leave not only 
convinced, but also ready for action in the future; for example would vote as it is necessary for a 
politician. He needs to mobilize the audience in his support, in support of his position. It is 
necessary to ensure that the reader, listener - a member of a potential political audience - not 
only understands that the author of a political text is right, but also supports his position, his 
party in a conversation with friends, at a polling station, at a demonstration or in a picket. The 
need for mobilization was often forgotten by Russian politicians at the beginning of the 
economic and political reforms of the 1990s. Focusing on a rational educational paradigm and on 
the politically engaged part of society, many democratic politicians professed the thesis: to 
convince is what it means to mobilize. And this, of course, is far from the case. And so far in the 
speeches and texts of many politicians there is no bright mobilization principle. An illustrative 
exception is Vladimir Zhirinovsky. In a certain sense, the weakened mobilization function of 
modern political texts testifies to the deformity of our democracy: it exists outside and without 
active interaction and mutual interest between the audience and politicians. Politicians, at best, 
conscientiously inform the population about their plans and intentions, leaving mobilization at 
the mercy of political technologists, and sometimes simply relying on direct administrative 
pressure. 
A political career can be measured in terms of how effectively a politician uses this political 
capital, or, conversely, how much he abuses it. By rhyme, Aristotle meant two things: personal 
emotions that influence people's actions and their ideas, and the psychological characteristics of 
the various groups that make up the target audience (meaning the characteristics of age, gender, 
occupation, etc.).
From the fact that the main functions of a political text are persuasion and mobilization, for 
example, the following conclusion follows: a political text must be completely understandable, 
transparent for the potential audience for which it is intended. Rather, it should not contain 

---

61
A