Author
Dominick Bartels
"Rhetorical Analysis of How the Pandemic Defeated America"
College Writing 2, Mr. Kevin Meek
When writing this piece, I had a very straight forward approach. First, I printed the entire article, annotated it, synthesized the main ideas, and then began to organize my thoughts. From there, I made an outline, which served as my road map for writing the rough draft and final submission.
Excerpt from "Rhetorical Analysis of How the Pandemic Defeated America"
“While his critiques do have significant weight, the fact that his only connection to the United States is the company he works for must be noted. In being a British citizen, his argument can be seen as a lecture from a disconnected third party rather than genuine concern from a fellow American citizen. The rest of the article is filled with selective inclusion of facts and overbearing and, somewhat elementary, language. For example, when addressing the shortages in the Strategic National Stockpile caused by President Obama’s appropriate deployment of 100 million respirators and masks during 2009 H1N1 Pandemic and subsequent lack of restocking, Young accuses President Trump of failing to “mitigate” the shortages by “buying supplies at economies of scale” while failing to even acknowledge that President Obama had 7 years to refill the stockpile (Young 8). Had Young qualified his statement by mentioning Obama’s failure, he would have made an iron clad case against Trump, however this discrepancy weakens his argument and exposes his obvious bias against the current President.”
Rhetorical Analysis of "How the Pandemic Defeated America"
by Dominick Bartels
Ed Young, a Malaysian immigrant to the United Kingdom and British citizen, whose only connection to the United States is the magazine he works for, pushes his own aspirations and political beliefs in his article, “How the Pandemic Defeated America.” The Atlantic, the publisher of this article, has a left leaning bias, and it endorsed Hillary Clinton in 2016 calling Trump, “an appalling sexist” (Editors 1). It is no secret that The Atlantic, and in turn its writers, has severe disdain for President Trump. Young knows his audience shares his belief system, so he encompasses this theme by vocally and, at times, overbearingly, critiquing the American government’s response to COVID-19 while attempting to convey to Americans why he, a British citizen, is qualified to comment on the American social construct.
Throughout his article, Young does indeed succeed in his attempts to display the failure of the American government. He begins with overbearing declarations that the United States has “failed to protect its people… lost its status as a global leader” (Young 1). These strong declarations efficiently draw in his liberal audience, creating a thirst for answers. From here, Young inundates his readers with scientific background and statistics highlighting past pandemics and information specific to COVID-19. Once he familiarizes his audience with pandemics and COVID-19, Young presents cold hard facts against the Trump Administration, highlighting the defunding of the CDC in China in 2017, intelligence communities sounding the alarm in January, and a “woefully inefficient” travel ban, which caused “a surge of travelers” to pack the airports despite social distancing (Young 3-4). From there, Young makes organized critiques against health departments and hospitals tying anything and everything back to President Trump. Laying out his critiques in sections based on topics, his argument is easy to follow and allows the reader to comprehend what is happening. For example, Young has a section dedicated to health departments and the healthcare system where he discusses how unprepared for a pandemic they were. From there, he moves to discrepancies in COVID-19 testing and the issues that come with. Backing up these claims with input from top scientists and statistics bolsters his argument and successfully portrays the failure of the American government’s response to COVID-19. Despite his success, Young continues to write.
After his brilliant success, Young begins to dissect the social construct of the United States and the role it has played in the pandemic. Again, he takes the logical approach, laying out statistics and data portraying the plight minorities are facing during the pandemic. Beginning with African Americans, Young explains excellently, without oversimplifying, how slavery and Jim Crow have caused Black Americans to face a COVID-19 death rate twice that of their white counterparts (Young 9). He addresses counterarguments made by Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and State Senator Stephan Hoffman (R-OH) by highlighting the systemic racism that plagues the United States (Young 10). Young once again, in logically laying out facts and refutation, successfully hits his mark. That being said, Young does lose quite a bit of credibility by not being an American citizen. While his critiques to have significant weight, the fact that his only connection to the United States is the company he works for must be noted. In being a British citizen, his argument can be seen as a lecture from a disconnected third party rather than genuine concern from a fellow American citizen. The rest of the article is filled with selective inclusion of facts and overbearing and, somewhat elementary, language. For example, when addressing the shortages in the Strategic National Stockpile caused by President Obama’s appropriate deployment of 100 million respirators and masks during 2009 H1N1 Pandemic and subsequent lack of restocking, Young accuses President Trump of failing to “mitigate” the shortages by “buying supplies at economies of scale” while failing to even acknowledge that President Obama had 7 years to refill the stockpile (Young 8). Had Young qualified his statement by mentioning Obama’s failure, he would have made an iron clad case against Trump; however, this discrepancy weakens his argument and exposes his obvious bias against the current President. From there, Young continues on the offensive by making 6 elementary and offensive jabs at the President calling him a liar, racist, xenophobe, narcissist, armchair polymath, and an egotist (Young 12). While he does provide minimal context, Young further weakens his argument here by losing his cool and further exposing his liberal bias. Had Young purely analyzed facts and evidence against the President, his argument may have been able to reach moderates and conservatives. However, Young knows his audience shares his belief structure and must cater to their emotions and frustrations. That being said, his elementary attacks, which would have greatly weakened his argument in a traditional setting, go largely unnoticed since his audience shares those same beliefs.
Throughout “How the Pandemic Defeated America,” Ed Young successfully demonstrates the failure of the United States government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic by utilizing a logical, organized approach, filled with an abundance of supporting scientific data and statistics. However, in being a British citizen, Young’s credibility is challenged, and many Americans may view this piece as a lecture from a foreign national rather than genuine concern from a fellow American. From there, Young’s message is further weakened by his unprofessional insults directed at President Trump and lack of qualifications on his argument. However, Young’s message is still received well by The Atlantic’s liberal base as they share the same belief system as him.
Works Cited
Editors, The. “Against Donald Trump.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 11 Oct. 2016, .
Young, Ed. “How the Pandemic Defeated America.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 6 Aug. 2020,
Share ➤