imed Essay Revision
Throughout the course of history, many people struggle to have their voices heard by the public. Considering many contributing opinions in regards to any topic, various people tend to be obstinate to accept any kind of perception from the opposing side of an argument. Through rhetoric, however, many people are willing to listen to another person’s point of view if the speaker has the ability to captivate their audience with their fluency in speech as well as relatability to attract the speaker’s audience. During the civil rights era, many people had their unique opinion on how society should act towards their own community. In this speech, Cesar Chavez explains how nonviolent practices are the best tactics to make change
…show more content…
Ever since they set foot in America, they sought to gain liberty and freedom by working in the fields to make a decent living in a “free land”. Through time, however, the passionate immigrants saw how bad they were treated just because they practiced a different culture than the Americans, or/and the fact that many immigrants were still communicating to others in their native language (mainy spanish). In the Civil Rights era, a time where people of different color were attempting to receive the same rights, practiced in nonviolent acts, in which these protesters were rewarded with violent punishments. Witnessing all of these horrendous acts from the white-filled society, the foreigners saw how morally unjust this system of segregation was, which made them believe that they have to attack to “fight fire with fire” to get some justice. Chavez debunks their perspective on “getting justice” by saying that if violence were to take place in this system,”then one of the two things will happen: either the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides, or there will be total demoralization of the workers,”(Chavez, Lines 17-211) which will only show how barbaric this act will seem to everyone else. Chavez uses ethos to explain how morally unjust these acts will appear to be, which will only make the revolters look as terrible as society already placed them as. By showing his foreign audience the lack of morals behind violence, this will make the audience believe that they are no better than the cruel, prejudice society if they would react in violence. This in turn, will make the audience feel primitive and morally unintelligent for even considering violence as an action to take. Ultimately, this will force the foreigners to completely disregard violence altogether, where they
Former civil rights leader Cesar Chavez justifies nonviolent protest with the use of several appeals to logic and ethics in his contribution to a magazine for a religious organization. His goal being to convince the audience into realizing that nonviolent protest is the more effective option when working towards a change. His optimistic tone helps the reader connect to the cause of nonviolent protest with the help of rhetorical devices like figurative
This struggle involved all Mexican Americans and not just farmers and by including religion, it
We would lose regard for human beings. Then the struggle would become a mechanical thing. When you lose your sense of life and justice, you lose your strength,” the text talks about how if we decide to use violence it comes with other unforeseen repercussions and goes into detail of what these consequences are. The references to time provide a contrast and traits of similarity in order to further reinforce Chavez's supportive stance on nonviolence. The use Dr. King, Gandhi and mentions of history in itself provide an ethic to the writer by point out past examples that have proved to be key in rebellions and
The Gospel of Cesar Chavez: My Faith in Action, by Mario T. Garcia, uses Cesar Chavez’s own words to express his spiritual and religious personality and how it led him to organize a movement for a change in the farm workers’ lifestyle of America. Through his experiences and observations with religion and spirituality growing up, Cesar created his own myth by conveying nonviolence and self-sacrifice as the basis of his American religious experience. Thus, paving the way towards reform for farm workers. To be able to understand Cesar’s motive behind his movement, violence and nonviolence needs to be distinguished. A violent movement is a protest that is set up to achieve a goal by using violent acts (riots, house raids, etc.).
To begin with, Chavez uses logos in his speech through a rhetorical question, “Who gets killed in the case of violent revolution? The poor, the workers.” The people who are arguing for violent revolutions are mostly poor workers whom Chavez refers to. Chavez uses logic to show these people that if they use violent revolts, they are most likely the ones going to be killed which for the most part will deter the people who are aiming for this. Another appeal Chavez uses is ethos to show everyone as people we are expected to do the right thing.
(Chavez 1) His nonviolent approach to difficulties still have a huge aftermath in our world and change it for the better. The author really emphasizes the trueness of King’s character and his example to our struggling lives to make a better world. Additionally, Chavez uses emotion to change the readers view to the capability nonviolence has. For example, “We are convinced that when people are faced with a direct
In a magazine article by Cesar Chavez on the 10th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Junior, Chavez discusses the advantages of nonviolent resistance versus violent resistance, arguing that “nonviolence is more powerful than violence.” Chavez successfully develops his argument for nonviolent resistance by utilizing the rhetorical strategies of repetition and allusion. Chavez utilizes the rhetorical strategy of repetition throughout the article, repeating words like “nonviolent” and “we” to develop his and others’ stance on nonviolent resistance. Whenever Chavez states the word “nonviolent”, it is usually followed by its positive effects. For example, in the quote “nonviolence supports you if you have a just moral cause,” the word nonviolence is stated and is followed by its positive effect of supporting those with a righteous reasoning,
Chavez begins his argument by saying that a human life is an irreplaceable “possession given by God”. By resorting to violence, it has the grim possibility of being taken away. Chavez further expands his use of ethos by providing examples of ethics and morals. Nonviolence gathers support for moral causes, whereas unethical actions create discouragement among followers. Violence is merely the result
Sometimes authors use words to bring up strong feelings in others. They can be used to inspire action, provoke or calm people, or even persuade people to make changes and view things differently. Writers use methods such as: analogy, allusion, pathos, or charged language. Starting in 1962, Americans started a movement to try to end the use of pesticides. There were many activists throughout that time who stood up against farmers who were using dangerous pesticides.
Chavez asserts repeatedly that nonviolence is the only way for change to happen. The repeated use of “we”, “us” and “our” conveys the message to the audience that he is one of them. Chavez can relate to the farm workers based on his credibility (ethos) because of his past. Chavez went to work on the farm fields at a young age and knew exactly how the frustrated workers felt.
The audience that Chavez is addressing is very familiar with Dr. King, and the troubles he went through so it is not hard at all to relate to the audience with ideas of Martin Luther King. “ Nonviolence provides the opportunity to stay on the offensive, and that is a crucial importance to win any contest.” With subject of violent an nonviolent means is so important to almost everyone that it makes almost everyone stand on their toes. With the subject Chavez does a good job of stating “we” instead of “I” because of
Throughout the writing of “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau often referred back to his idea that he supported which was “That government is best which governs not at all.” (Thoreau) In the passage, Thoreau believed that the government does not have a conscience. He talked about not wanting to pay the government poll tax, which in result, caused him to be thrown into jail. A poll tax is just a tax on a person for existing, therefore, everyone had to pay the same amount regardless of the value of their possessions.
Chavez concludes his logical appeal by giving his audience an example of the most vicious type of oppression and violence: war. He says that to force men to leave behind their wives and children to protect America and make them many promises for after the war, and then not
In order to achieve true freedom one must discover that you can break unjust laws through peaceful protest. In “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr and “The Speech at The March Washington” by Josephine Baker each article passionately argues about the disadvantages of the black community, the equality and power of education. We must learn to act with patients and not guns we must protect are self’s with a pen and paper not violence. Dr. King once4 said “Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. It is unique in history which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it.
In this article, Chavez uses rhetorical strategies to develop an argument and his point of view of the subject to the audience. In the first sentence Chavez says that “Dr. King’s entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings to bear in the real world.” Chavez brings this up to say that one doesn’t need violence or force to make a difference. One example of a rhetorical device that Chaves uses in his writing is the Epitaph. This device is shown when in the beginning of the work Chaves states “Dr. King’s entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings to bear in the real world.”