Revolution and radical change seem, to many, to be intrinsically linked to violence. But as proponents of pacifism such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Cesar Chavez will tell you, nonviolence holds the true power. Revolution, in the opinion of both these civil rights leaders, should be peaceful. In Cesar Chavez’s article for a religious organization’s magazine, Chavez expresses these beliefs by arguing against the idea of a bloody, casualty-filled revolution. He masterfully develops his case against violent revolution by using the rhetorical devices of allusion, logical cause and effect, and powerful metaphor and language. In this article, Chavez makes use of allusion by referencing what is already well-known to his readers. In lines 8-11, he …show more content…
Then, in lines 22-24, Chavez paints a picture of the opposite situation: by protesting nonviolently, people can play on the human conscience and attract support. With these two scenarios, Chavez skillfully utilizes logic to make cause and effect statements supporting his claim. However, simple allusion and logic is not enough to persuade every reader; well-crafted prose is a necessary part as well. By using powerful, evocative phrases in his writing, Chavez adds polish to the article. For instance, he says that he is “not blind to the feelings of frustration, impatience and anger” (Chavez 47-48). This potent metaphor adds liveliness to his writing, eliciting the same feeling as a rousing speech. Additionally, Chavez concocts a catchy saying that rings true for many people: “The rich may have money, but the poor have time.” (92-93). His use of metaphors and idioms transforms his article from simply functional to a powerful addition to the argument against nonviolence. Violence is only the illusion of power, and this is made clear by Chavez’s well-written article. The rhetorical devices Chavez utilizes lend credibility to an already credible argument, and will be sure to convert any supporters of violent protest to a more peaceful
Martin Luther King Jr. died fighting peacefully against injustice and for equal rights. Similarly, nonviolent protests must continue to be used today because violence only leads to more violence. For the tenth anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination, Cesar Chavez illustrated the importances of nonviolence in his article, “He Showed Us the Way”. In the passage, Chavez expresses strong pathos, powerful diction, and complex syntax in order to encourage nonviolence.
To make nonviolence the more logical option, Chavez implements logos and leads readers to believe that violence takes too many sacrifices. After identifying the advantages of nonviolence, he gives the readers two possible conclusions to make about the brutal opposite: “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). Presenting these two unfavorable options uses the logos appeal and persuades the audience to see nonviolence as the more reasonable choice with more promising outcomes. At another point in the article, Chavez tells the audience to simply “examine history” (Chavez). The straightforward statement causes readers to recall violent events of the past and logically recognize them as inferior to the previously mentioned nonviolent protests. This conclusion helps Chavez achieve his purpose by persuading the audience to side with his point of view and support nonviolence. After establishing his argument on sound reasoning, Chavez uses that foundation to employ other rhetorical appeals.
Chavez achieves his main purpose to persuade to support his view on nonviolent resistance. He does this by not only using many examples, but to challenge the reader into thinking deeper into the lines of his speech. By doing so, as well as using his many rhetorical strategies throughout, Chavez becomes very effective in his
Multiple times, throughout the text, Chavez uses pathos to appeal emotionally to his audience. Chavez builds a connection and empathy with the readers and persuades them to be people who fight for causes nonviolently. In the sixth paragraph Chaves states that, “men and women who are truly concerned about people are non violent by nature. These people become violent when the deep concern they have for people is frustrated and when they are faced with seemingly insurmountable odds.” Chavez states that everyone who actually cares about people should be nonviolent, that they shouldn’t have to resort to violence because they don’t need it. This quote builds a connection and causes self-reflection for the
In enjoying, as well as closely examining, an article written by Cesar Chavez on the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., which was published in a magazine of a religious organization devoted to helping those in need, it becomes evident that Chavez, through the use of many rhetorical devices and literary tools, feels very strongly on the thought of nonviolence being superior to violence. According to the labor leader and civil rights activist, nonviolence will always conquer violence, which Chavez makes clear through the use of rhetorical tricks such as allusions, specific word choice and sentence structure, strategic tone and by appealing to the values of his audience.
Acknowledging his consideration for both sides of the argument and providing his definition of nonviolence allows Chavez’s listeners to trust him because he has carefully described his own ideas while also considering perspectives contradictory to his own. Violence is described to result in “...many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides…” as well as “...total demoralization of the workers” (ln 19-21). Nonviolence is described as the opposite of violence. Nonviolence will be there to “...[support] you if you have a just and moral cause” (ln 13-14). Providing a clear
Chavez uses rhetorical choices such as pathos in his speech to obtain sympathy from his audience. He wants people to understand that supporting violence will lead to the deaths of innocent lives. Chavez uses words like “injury” and “death” to evoke the readers while he explains how violence can end a life. These words are strong terms which provokes the audience’s emotions. For example, “violence will escalate… many injuries and deaths…” (Chavez). Chavez wants the readers to know that violence isn’t the only solution to problems because eventually
When appealing to the reader’s reasoning, Chavez uses ethos to state that nonviolence has a tactical advantage against oppression. At the same time, he provides explanations as to how violence is detrimental to their cause. He states that nonviolence “provides the opportunity to stay on the offensive” (Chavez, 14-16) and responding with nonviolence “will attract people’s support” (Chavez, 22-24). He also states that resorting to violence will either “cause the violence to be escalated” or create “total demoralization of the workers” (Chavez, 18-21). He contrasts the two points of view to emphasize the positives of nonviolence, while
Cesar Chavez, a labor leader and civil rights activist, wrote an article that discusses his strong stand on how using nonviolent resistance is the better way to go rather than using violent acts. Inspired by the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Chavez writes an article about his argument on nonviolent resistance; he accomplishes that by using rhetorical choice like allusions, pathos, and tone.
Cesar Chavez was a civil rights activist who organized the earliest Chicano movements. In an essay by Jorge Mariscal, Chavez’s political ideology is
King defends the protestors’ decision for direct action over negotiation by saying “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has consistently refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks
Cesar Chavez once explained the horrors of society when he said, “When the man who feeds the world by toiling in the fields is himself deprived of the basic rights of feeding, sheltering and caring for is family, the whole community of man is sick.” (ufw.org) That means that the whole of humanity is sick and cruel when the man who works the fields all day long to feed the all of the citizens of the entire world can’t even provide for himself. It was not a small amount of people it affected, it was millions, and millions of citizens across the world. Chavez was a large factor in beginning to abolish racism, or also called the Civil Rights Movement.
César Chavez once said, “Nonviolence is not inaction. It is not discussion. It is not for the timid or weak. Non-violence is hard work. It is the willingness to sacrifice It is the patience to win.”. His words inspired one young man to turn his life around and become a man of character who used his experiences to help others. In his essay “César Chávez Saved My Life” Daniel “Nene” Alejandrez tells his story of the struggle and anger towards many injustices that happen around him and his journey from channeling that anger through crime to using it to start a foundation Barrios Unidos, to help men in prison overcome poverty, and the drug and violence culture surrounding them. In his essay, Alejandrez uses key scenes from his life to convey his main theme of spiritual connection to overcome the many hardships the Latino community faces in this country.
The article “Cesar Chavez Saved My Life,” written by Daniel “Nane” Alejandrez reflects on Mr. Alejandraz’s past, covering some very unfortunate events, but with a purpose of pulling emotion from the reader. While reading some parts of the article, I had to reread it over a few times to comprehend the point that the author was trying to make. The most important thing about knowing his past is that it is significantly different, and much more positive in the future because of one person, Cesar Chavez.
In paragraph five and six he describes what effect nonviolence can have on people to how it can change. Chavez uses pathos to show how the poor are struggling. Chavez uses detail to consider who the people are and what they’re feeling. The speaker observes that, “a direct appeal from the poor struggling nonviolently against great odds, they will react positively.” He uses detail on describing people; giving examples and explaining emotions by making connections. The speaker argues that, “If we resort to violence then one of 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.” This analyzes imagery used to appeal to emotions, and determine the consequences of