Analysis Of The Siege Mentally Problem By David Brooks

Society is stocked full of various trends and epidemics. To many, the way in which these trends start is a mystery. As members of a society, we often subconsciously take part in these patterns without questioning our participation. Therefore, people continue to ignore the drastic changes in society, and the reasons why they occur so swiftly. There is a lack of motivation to take a step back and inquire about society as a whole, and rethink one’s actions. In The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell effectively discusses and analyzes how and why ideas spread throughout societies using the rhetorical appeals, ethos, pathos and logos.

The debate between Baldwin and Buckley was a very captivating event, with both speakers being professional authors. While Baldwin’s commentary displays the skills of a professional persuader, attending to both emotional argument and credibility, it lacks a certain aspect found in Buckley’s argument. Buckley’s argument is rooted in values and statistics, which are unchangeable. In the end, the turnout for the vote of the debate is five hundred forty-four to one hundred sixty-four, with Baldwin winning against

The expert testimony of his editor friend backs up Buckley’s argument and gives the audience a valid reason to believe him. Buckley states that the weekly news magazine editor explained to him that “the volume of mail has noticeably decreased, even though the circulation of his magazine has risen” (562). This shows that although the audience of the magazine has increased over the years, the initiative of the readers has gone down. In this evidence I have presented, Buckley shows the negative correlation between the readers and protestors of the magazine and would reach an audience that cannot be easily persuade without hard facts. Buckley’s persuasive effort was successful by showing his audience that his argument is backed up by expert facts and it is not just his word that they have to believe.

Gail Collins, an American writer known for writing under the opinion pages for the The New York Times, has turned the recent presidential debate, into something comical. In Gail’s most recent articles, “How Could Anyone Vote for Trump”, “The Dark Days of Donald Trump”, “Don’t Take Donald Trump to Dinner”, and “The Debate in One Scary Answer”, her purpose is to show that Donald Trump is not qualified to become the next president of the United States. In these four articles, her audience is the general educated reader that will be voting in the 2016 presidential election. Gail Collins has a recurring pattern of using the rhetorical modes; illustration and description. In addition, she uses the rhetorical strategies; metaphor, dialogue, and contrast

Published by the New York Times under the Opinion section, the audience for this article is any interested reader. At the time it was released, November 18th, 2016, this article arrived during last year’s elections, in which a large, but surprising number of Americans voted for candidate Donald Trump, shocking many forecasters who had predicted otherwise. Therefore, after the election, many people may have been researching the demographics of the election, and this article, which briefly shared Brooks’ opinion on the nature of the election and how viewing others through the lens of a dominant identity influenced how the votes fell where they did, may have caught a keen reader’s eye. Also, this article came at a time where racism and prejudice caused many problems, leading some to view others as one-dimensional, represented only by a skin color or religion. Since prejudice and hate is still a large issue today, tackling this problem helps make this article relevant, nearly a year after its release.

David Brooks is a conservative political Op Ed writer who writes for the New York Times. His first experience as a writer was after his graduation, when he received a job as a writer for the City News Bureau of Chicago where he developed his conservative ideology and began utilizing writing to evangelize his values as a conservative writer. He has had many other jobs after that, all of which have strengthened his ability as a writer and brought him closer to his job at the New York Times. He artfully crafts intense and persuasive arguments through his use of Pathos through his historical evidence and quotes while establishing complex tone through diction. He trapps readers with well crafted hooks and releases them into the world with a different

The appeal to the character of the writer is known as ethos. Writers need to be informed, intelligent, honest, and respectful. Ethos is present in this essay through the writing technique of Kayla Webley. I would assume she is a credible source because she is published in Time magazine. Also she did her undergraduate work at University of Washington studying political science and journalism. Her graduate work was done at Northern University in new media. Webley is informed because she gives solid evidence that support her validations and main argument. I would consider her to be intelligent because she has detailed reasoning and uses successful tactics to persuade her readers. Honesty can be seen through Webley’s realistic point of view. She does not try to beat around the bush she gets straight to the problem in Applebaum’s proposal. Finally, she challenges peoples in a respectful way,

Working people understand what it is like to be jobless or understand the effects of being jobless; Hedges wisely presents the audience with emotion-filled information that writers are losing their jobs. The newspaper’s companies are losing revenue because corporations are switching from print to online, and the newspaper industry is going downhill. The newspaper industries will eventually be forced to close down. Hedge’s excellently uses pathos to invoke emotion of anger at corporations who are causing the newspaper industries to close down. Hedges says, “Our democracy will suffer a body blow” (534). Hedges understands that Americans are proud of their democracy and their freedom that their ancestors fought for. By Hedges saying “democracy will suffer a body blow,” he is provoking his audience’s anger because the newspapers give democracy to the people of America. He follows with an extended definition of what newspapers mean to the

As I scroll through various column pages, I was exhausted from seeing the grinning tanned face of a man, namely Donald Trump. Opinions of this man and the U.S. elections blasted throughout the media. I was tired of it. Luckily, I found Arthur C. Brooks - who did write a few articles about the elections, but I forgave him since he didn't write so many compared to other writers. The three articles that I have read are, "Narcissism is Increasing. So You're Not So Special," "Nice People Really Do Have Fun," and, "To Be Happier, Start Thinking More About Your Death." In these articles, Arthur discusses his opinion on human behavior and gives tips on how to re-evaluate them. I will analyze the rhetorical appeals Arthur has used to convince to his

After a care reading of “The most dangerous game”,by Richard Connell, it is clear that the theme for this story is determination is needed when facing a difficult task ; this is achieved by the authors use of conflict. Authors use the element of conflict in order to describe the main problem in the story and get the reader hooked. Throughout the text, the element of conflict is present, yet it is most clear when the general gives Rainsford the choice to be haunted by him and if he wins he gets to leave but if he loses he dies or if he does not play then Ivan will kill him. One instance of conflict is seen when the general states (the choice is yours #35).What is happening right now is that the general is giving him a chance to survive or to die

On November 15th, 2016, in the opinion-editorial, I’m not in the Mood for ‘Unity.’ At The End of the Day, Trump’s Still a Bigot, Leonard Pitt, Jr, an acclaimed Black American liberal columnist for the Miami Herald, asserts that Donald Trump’s presidency is irreconcilable with American democratic values and that there is no unity with bigotry. Pitt challenges the conceptions Americans must “heal” and “come together” to concede to Trump’s victory in the presidential election; he establishes Trump as “fundamentally unsound, unserious, and unfit” and refuses to “cooperate in normalizing a man who stands for everything American should not.” Pitt argues that Americans must mobilize together through protest and support of activist organizations in

Democrats must point out to voters the misogynistic, racist, and classist comments that these groups are making. While Democrats shouldn’t focus entirely on race/gender/inequality or even use it as a front-and-center issue that they deem most important, they must bring these concepts to the minds of the rightwing voters who are listening to the demagogues within the rightwing. Take for instance the 2016 election. While Donald Trump’s comments on misogyny were widely attacked and criticized within the media and those who supported Hillary Clinton, these comments and the clues they held regarding Trump’s way of thinking were not explicitly brought to the public’s attention through political candidates who may have had some sway on voter’s opinions. They were instead only reported on by media that Trump’s supporters would never see anyway. Had Donald Trump’s outlandish claims and quotes been tackled more directly and been analyzed for the public, many may have backed out of his support for him. Many of Trump’s supporters don’t realize that they are being played on the idea of race and that their fears are being widely exploited for the power gains of the few. This is especially prevalent in the white families that Donald Trump secured in his election who voted for him based on economic security, but who

Throughout history, when it comes to a national crisis, many leaders and politicians tend to advance towards what the people want to hear. In order to gain their audience’s support, most political leaders and public speakers use the practice of demagoguery to have useful influence held towards their argument. In Patricia Roberts-Miller’s article “Democracy, Demagoguery, and Critical Rhetoric,” analyzes what demagoguery is and how it affects the audience. Speakers or authoritative figures that engage with demagoguery use strategies such as scapegoating and polarization in order to establish a separation between in-groups and out-groups; in-groups tend to form hateful discrimination on out-groups and define them with negative features. An example of demagoguery that Roberts-Miller uses is in Adolf Hitler’s speech about how he wanted German people to change their views and beliefs on the Jewish. Her article however, also consists of several fallacies and may seem somewhat unethical. Throughout Wayne LaPierre’s speech on the Newtown Tragedy in 2012, there is usage of what Roberts-Miller claims to be demagoguery. Wayne LaPierre is the Vice President of the National Rifle Association (NRA). After the shooting that occurred at Sandy Hook elementary, LaPierre expresses his sympathy for the families of the loss and he then gathers the attention of parents who may be uneasy about their children’s safety at school. Throughout

Demagoguery attempts to simplify an argument so much so that it effectively shuts down any discussion. Through the use of rhetorical fallacies and other techniques, demagogues persuade the masses to support them. Although it can be successful, demagoguery is usually associated with a negative connotation because it plays on prejudices and emotions rather than rational. In Patricia Roberts Miller’s brief article, “Characteristics of Demagoguery,” she defines the various concepts of demagoguery, and using her article as a lens, both Wayne LaPierre’s transcript of his speech on Newtown Tragedy and Donald Trump’s presidential announcement contain different aspects of demagoguery like scapegoating, polarization,

The purpose of her article is to convince the readers of her own interpretation on political views. For instance, she asks questions such as “Who is telling the Tea Partiers and Trump voters to empathize with the rest of us?” and “Why is it all one way?” The author voices her personal opinions making statements like “Sorry,