A Rhetorical Analysis Of Nonviolent Resistance, By Cesar Chavez

In this life, many hope for peace, but not many try to achieve it. According to Martin Luther King Jr’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, there are many ways to achieve this, but the best possible course of action would be through nonviolent direct action, which includes but is not limited to: peaceful protest, sit-ins and civil disobedience. In King’s letter, he proclaims his reasoning behind nonviolent direct action, including: the concept that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (par. 4), extremism can be used positively (par. 22), and the fact that “oppressed people will not stay oppressed forever” (par. 24). King uses literary devices including ethos, logos, and pathos to prove and reaffirm that which he is trying to convey.

By using strong pathos, Chavez is able to evoke emotion and illustrate the harm that comes from violent actions. In his passage, the author uses pathos to evoke emotion in order to deter violent actions. Chavez says, “Our conviction is that human life is a very

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.

By persuading the audience to sympathize with his point of view, Chavez develops emotional appeals through pathos. In the beginning of the article, Chavez focuses primarily on his side of the argument, but he does not forget to acknowledge the views of the opposing side. He recognizes the conflicting side’s emotions when he says, “We advocate militant nonviolence as our means of achieving justice for our people, but we are not blind to the feelings of frustration, impatience and anger…” (Chavez). By appealing to the audience’s emotions, Chavez creates an understanding relationship with the reader, making them more accepting of his

When Chavez states an argument, he then addresses the reader’s emotions to resolve any uplifting self conflict. He states, “Nonviolence has exactly the opposite effect.” Then in the next paragraph he states, “But if we are committed to nonviolence only as a strategy or tactic, then if it fails the only alternative is to turn to violence.” He does this for the people that do not completely agree with his point, to show that he acknowledges both sides, which strengthens his argument. He later uses, “Examine history. Who gets killed in the case of violent revolution?” He does this to make the reader remember the past of violent protest and how many people sacrificed their lives for a cause, which makes the reader more passionate towards supporting his argument.

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

Chavez does not wait long to dive into his argument, instead, within the first few paragraphs he makes a very clear and comprehensive claim with the very strategic use of parallel structure when he says, “Nonviolence is more powerful than violence. Nonviolence supports you if you have a just and moral cause. Nonviolence provides the opportunity to stay on the offensive, and that is of crucial importance to win any contest” (Chavez 3). It can be seen here that this use of parallel structure plays a very crucial role in conveying Chavez’s message as it repeats over and over the main idea of the article. In doing so, the main idea becomes really emphasized and in a way drills the focus of the article into the minds of his audience. This provides a very easy and understandable

For instance, “... human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause” (8-10). Through this passage, Chavez helps the reader feel part of the conversation by referring to “God”. By referring to “God”, he opens the door to the audience's emotions allowing his words in. Then, Chavez uses the emotions he created to help explain that nonviolence only works if everyone is on board. If everyone is not on board, a situation will turn violent, leading to a conflict that only brings destruction of human life. This means that human life is more important than any other reason because God gave us the right to live. Chavez also states that “ People suffer...”( 77). Chavez intelligently used the word, suffer to tug at the audience's heart strings. This sentence helps people understand why violence is bad, people suffer. Also, Chavez makes the point that people “ … learned many years ago that the rich may have money but the poor have time” (93-94). The use of the statement above is Chavez closing remark saying that nonviolence may not be a fast alternative but everybody has time no matter what you have time. In all, Chavez's use of pathos that tug at the emotions of the audience allows them to open their hearts and understand that everyone is here for a reason no matter how small, life should not be

The use of pathos that Chavez incorporated really helped him develop his argument. He says, “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, of there will be total demoralization of the workers.” He describes the end results of what violence can do which produces a sense of fear to the audience; it is also obvious that the two options he gave were both unfavorable. When talking about violence, he uses pathos to bring out the negative in using violence. Likewise, he says, “Examine history. Who gets killed in the

Cesar Chavez was a civil rights activist who organized the earliest Chicano movements. In an essay by Jorge Mariscal, Chavez’s political ideology is

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.

By depicting a sense of morals, Chavez is able to support the nature of nonviolence over any other possibility. The simplicity put into a single civil movement, allows for millions to participate from all across the country. The American people “yearn for justice,” and it is such yearning that appeals to such large crowds. Chavez also states that nonviolence “provides the opportunity to stay on the offensive.” By doing so, there is an advantage over the opposing side. Once escalated and turned violent, there is a “total demoralization” of the causae. In order to remain as morally good as the cause being fought, Chavez demonstrates how nonviolence would accomplish such.

Firstly, ethos is continuously used in Chavez's article as a rhetorical strategy. An example of ethos found in the article includes "no one has the right to take it[human life] for any reason or for any cause" (9-10). This pertains to the result of death if violent

Chavez makes the point that marches, strikes, and boycotts are not the only weapons of violence. He points out that the boycott as Gandhi taught “is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolence change.” This allowed the masses of people to participate actively in a cause. This appeal of ethos demonstrates that violence does not work, it just causes more riots. People suffer from violence, and it is unsuccessful. Chavez uses ethos to emphasize to the readers that violence gets you nowhere, and nonviolence is more

He does so by stating, “WE MUST TEACH OUR BROTHERS WHO DO NOT YET KNOW!” (paragraph 6). To clarify, Chavez’s persistence to teaching others effects the number of supporters for migrant workers to quickly achieve equality. In which, the audience is persuaded into teaching others of the inequality issue and unite more people to help solve the issue of migrant workers’ rights. Definitely, Chavez’s persistence forces the audience to understand the significance and effect that the audience has to end inequality and the atrocious treatment of migrant