In “Kyoto Climate Change Conference”, Al Gore, The Former

In his first large protest, Cesar went on a long march. When reflecting upon the march Chavez remarked that, “We marched alone at the beginning, but today, we count men of all creeds, nationalities, and occupations in number.” (Chavez, 2) From the very beginning, Chavez brought groups of people together by uniting his small group of protesters with a group of Filipino strikers to create the United Farm Workers. Uniting his group of protesters with the group of striking Filipino workers allowed the protest to become bigger, and therefore more successful. The large numbers also attracted more attention from the media. By uniting groups of strikers, Chavez created a strong protest organization that lasts even today. Another essential group of people Chavez got to join his cause were the consumers. Chavez and his partner Dolores Huerta once wrote, “We called upon our fellow men, and were answered by consumers.” (Chavez, Huerta, 1) Consumers helped the protest by participating in a grape boycott, and did not buy grapes until the grape workers’ needs were met. With this boycott, Chavez tried to weaken the business of the grape growers until they complied, and it worked. When thousands of citizens would not by grapes, the media covered the issue. Through the media coverage, the boycott spread rapidly, uniting people from all over the United States. With the popularity of the boycott, the protest evolved into not just a protest, but a civil rights

Cesar Chavez addresses a speech that marks history known as the “Wrath of the Grapes Boycott, 1986” in which he expresses his feelings towards farmwork and the worth of humanity. Cesar Chavez main argument was to regulate the use of pesticides in the agricultural industry. The pesticides that were being used in the farms were detrimental to the health of many of the laborers. They polluted the air, water, earth and the health of the people. In no way was this beneficial to anyone 's health. Chavez objective was to boycott the grapes and show the agricultural industry that they deserved to be treated better. Chavez speech was meaningful because he was one of the first mexican american leader who fought for equality amongst farm laborers.

As a whole, Gore’s argument in “Climate of Denial” is powerful, persuasive, and effective. The points that he communicates are easily understandable, due to his straightforward language and moderately informal tone. Even more importantly, the analogies and imagery that he employs make his argument relatable and vivid. In his goal of persuading the reader, this emotionally compelling narration is invaluable. However, despite its many strengths, Gore’s composition does contain several weaknesses. First,

Throughout Chavez’s speech, he uses the rhetorical strategy of logos to provoke farmers and consumers of grapes to join the movement for farmers rights and against rights. For example, when listing facts about the negative effects of pesticides, Chavez states “And a new study shows pesticides used in growing may be responsible for the illness of over 300,000 of the nation's 4 million farm workers.” (Chavez, Wrath

In 2010, Al Gore wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times claiming that global warming is a matter our generation must concentrate on in order to halt the rapid increases of change to our planet’s climate. He creates a strong, convincing argument by addressing and exemplifying issues pertaining to global climate change.

The Cesar E. Chavez Foundation describes farm worker’s living conditions as, “thousands of farm workers living like savages, beneath trees and amid garbage and human excrement--near tomatoes fields in San Diego County, tomatoes fields which use the most modern farm technology. They walk miles to buy food at inflated prices and they have to carry in water from irrigation pumps” (Chavez Foundation 1). It is unbelievable that Farmers treat their workers as agricultural implements or plow animals to be used and then discarded. Furthermore, is it vexing that farmers can afford expensive technology for their tomato fields, yet lack the insignificant amount money required to provide their workers with drinking water that is clean and doesn’t come from an irrigation water

Cesar Chavez had a view that all races work together for one goal, he had the strikers of Delano take a “solemn vow of nonviolence” (Cesar Chavez Foundation, chavezfoundatio.org, ‘Against All Odds’: Cesar Chavez & the Delano Grape Strike). Chavez followed the examples set forth by M.K. Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by using the nonviolence strategy. However for the first time in American History, Chavez used an untested method when he boycotted using California table grapes. The outcome surfaced an exceptional result of major support from outside the Central Valley. The UFW received support from other unions, church activists, and students and civil rights groups. The step was initiated when Cesar Chavez led a 300-mile march that started in Delano and ended at the State Capital of Sacramento. The union garnered National attention across the country and it gave birth and served as the UFW’s stand against unjust treatment against minority

From the start, organizers of the grape boycott aimed at using non-violence to gain the patronage of consumers. In the Proclamation of the Grape Worker, Dolores Huerta states, “We mean to have our peace, and to win it without violence, for it is violence we would overcome-the subtle spiritual and mental violence of oppression, the violence subhuman toil does to the human body”(Huerta). In other words, growers although wrong, often exhibited violence to scare insubordinate workers into complying, yet farmworkers would not succumb to the same wrong by using violence. The most compelling evidence of the violence used against farm workers is described in a new article written by Andrea Castillo. Castillo interviews song writer Augustin Lira, who

In a source by U.S. News and World Report, it was said that the boycott’s effects made grape shipments decline drastically. In some parts, it was enormous, like in New York City, the grape sales were down 50 percent (Doc D). Chavez helped and lead boycotts against the grape workers, so the sales went down, like they wanted it to be. Their goal was to stop people from buying grapes grown by the mean grape growers. Gleeful, in August 1970, Chavez signed a contract with 26 major grape growers. This contract stated that about 75 percent of the state’s grape growers were now organized by the UFW. The contract also states that the workers be paid more, and 20 more cents a box during their harvest time (Doc D). Chavez fought so well and strong that they eventually achieved the rights that they deserve, thanks to him and the people involved in his master plan for equality and fair rights. Not only did they organize lots of major grape fields, but they gave the workers more money so they can live better. Chavez fought for the right thing, that made him an effective

Throughout the era of the great depression, migrant farm workers were put at unfair labor. A man named Cesar Chavez helped migrant farm workers by boycotting the fruit companies they worked for and forming unions for them. The beginning of Chavez’s life, striking and boycotting fruit companies, and his new projects were the biggest impact in changing farm worker’s lives.

Cesar Chavez championed for unionization of grape farm workers. Chavez employed strikes, fasts, and boycotts to raise awareness for their cause. Violent retaliation was needless to Chavez so much he believed that the most audacious thing to do was to “sacrifice” one’s self “for others” in the name of justice (Alarcon). Cesar Chavez and his associates were targets of increasing acts of violence. By not meeting violence with violence, their cause fell on listening ears. Cesar and the farm worker’s retaliation consisted of increased dedication and more strikes. Drawing from peaceful protest historical figures such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., Cesar Chavez was successful with many labor strikes. Chavez could have raised awareness much more rapidly by using violence. However, he “fasted for twenty-five days” for the unerring choice of peaceful protest (Cesar Chavez Gains Grounds for Farmers). Belief in their cause fueled each protester. A single violent outburst from the workers would ripple outward and cause them to lose ground. The farm workers did not make gains without facing hardships. Cesar Chavez’s fast was the result of “increasing advocacy” calling for “violence” among fellow strikers (History.com Staff). As a leader, one must take responsibility for the actions of their supporters. The strikes were beginning to strain. Careful steps were to be taken in order to preserve the strikers’ reason and renew support. Cesar had to challenge their oppressors

Even when it looked tough from when people fought the United Farm Workers, “Chavez remained personally committed to nonviolence despite...outbreaks of violence during UFW strikes" (Ribera 390). This showed true determination from César even during the dark times because he kept pushing forward. A famous activist quote made by him about putting himself in front of others was when he “declared that the ‘truest act of courage ... is to sacrifice ourselves for others in a totally nonviolent struggle for justice.’” (Ribera 389). This quote helped make Chávez’s true goal known, a non-violent way to achieve fairness for others by putting oneself before another with determination. In order to have their voice heard to the public, the United Farm Workers, with César, launched a “national TV special, ‘The Harvest of Shame’” ("César E. Chávez Middle Level Biography"). The purpose of the special was to have the cruelty of the unfairness the farmers dealt with as it “showed America the miserable working conditions that the migrant workers had to endure" ("César E. Chávez Middle Level Biography"). César wanted to make known of what the farm workers had to go through, Chávez proves to be a role model of true leadership and determination through his tireless efforts as he fought for the rights for others and never gave

Way before Cesar Chavez even existed, the Southwestern United States, where there was a significant amount of agriculture work, was in desperate need of agricultural unions. The life of the average farm worker wasn’t a luxurious one. Working in crops often involved harsh working conditions which were filthy or dangerous and negligible pay.(Source N) With over 3 million farm workers in the United States, 72% were from a foreign

However, Gore does not just present the problem. He issues the challenge for the scientific community to seek ways to solve the problem, but he points out that these measures must be taken now. The problem is so severe that actions must be immediate in order to be effective. Comparing today’s environmental problems to the wartime challenges faced by the World War Two generation, Gore urges today’s citizens and scientists to rise to the occasion and be willing to sacrifice, if necessary, to solve the problems that society has created.

El documental una verdad incomoda por Al Gore nos presenta el calentamiento global que cada día va aumentando por acciones que hace el hombre debido a la contaminación.