1.9 KiB
1.9 KiB
CIVICVS Final Report
Case Study: [Insert topic here]
Disclaimer
This report is generated under the CIVICVS framework. It analyzes public records and rhetoric structurally, using the sequence Claim → Context → Motivation → Civic Consequence.
It does not endorse political parties, candidates, or policies. It does not attempt to persuade or mobilize. Its goal is to separate motivations from records and identify civic injuries that affect institutional trust and governance.
Section 1. Record Claims
- Claim 1: Quote or summary of official/public statement.
- Claim 2: Quote or summary.
- (List as many claims as necessary.)
Section 2. Factual Context
For each claim, present relevant context:
- Law or policy in force.
- Historical precedents.
- Judicial rulings.
- Contradictions or continuity with prior administrations.
Section 3. Suspected Motivations
For each claim, identify motivations suggested by the record and rhetoric:
- Reputation management.
- Agenda-setting.
- Appealing to voter base.
- Deflection from legislative duties.
- Mobilization through outrage.
Section 4. Civic Consequences
Identify injuries or distortions at the civic level:
- Erosion of trust (in institutions, law, or truth).
- Legislative paralysis (policy avoided in favor of spectacle).
- Polarization (citizens divided into warring camps).
- Systemic injury (electoral or media structures rewarding outrage over statesmanship).
Section 5. Closing Observations
- Summarize how the rhetoric diverges from the expected standard of statesmanship.
- Emphasize that the deeper injury is systemic: not just in individuals, but in the incentives that reward spectacle over legislation.
- Reaffirm the Civic Analyst’s method: Find the motivation. Stop. Preserve civic energy for the next analysis.