Pros Of Nonviolent Activism

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.

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.

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.

In the excerpt, Cesar Chavez, labor union organizers and civil rights leader, discusses how nonviolent resistance to problems in society easily resolves a situation better than violent protest. Throughout his speech, he uses many rhetorical strategies to argue his view on nonviolent resistance. Chavez’ use of ethos, logos, and pathos, creates his passionate attitude towards nonviolent resistance.

Cesar Chavez, a civil rights leader fighting for improving pay and working conditions of farmers, employs the use of nonviolence resistance in his role as a leader of the United Farm Workers. As a child, Chavez and his family worked as farmers on a field as migrant workers who were most likely treated in an unjust manner and thus, he dedicated his life to improving the conditions for all farmers. To honor Martin Luther King Jr. on the 10th anniversary of his death, Chavez wrote to a religious magazine that helps people in need about the benefits of nonviolent resistance. Throughout his letter, Chavez applies rhetorical devices such as pathos, diction, and juxtaposition to persuade and inform people about how powerful and effective nonviolence techniques can be for civil rights.

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.

While when discussing the history of the world’s power forces, violence makes for stimulating discussion, other tactics were put to good use, one of these alternatives being non-violence. With the guidance of three worldwide heroes - Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela - with contagious optimism and high spirits, it became apparent just how much of a difference could be made carried out through non-violent terms. Mankind was introduced to another way to resolve major problems just as effectively, if not more, than violence could.

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

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

When caught in an injustice, protesters tend to use various strategies in attempt to successfully convey their opinions. In an article published by Cesar Chavez, he describes his fight for civil rights by using Martin Luther King Junior’s methods to show how violence fails to promote victory. Chavez appeals to his audience by using ethos, pathos, and allusion to highlight how nonviolence is more of an effective form of protesting.

Cesar Chavez published an article on the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. This article consisted of the importance of nonviolent change, and how the outcome will always be for the better. Chavez effectively justifies the morality of nonviolence, as well as demoralizing “senseless violence.”

The success of the fight for racial equality, also known as the Civil Rights Movement, in the United States was characterized by major campaigns of civil resistance. Between the 1950s and the 1960s, civil rights activists practiced non violence in hopes to end racial segregation and discrimination across the country and worldwide. Leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr., Jim Lawson, and John Lewis believed strongly in this philosophy of nonviolence as the key of success for the Civil Rights Movement.

The contemporary scholar of political perspective on passive protest Gene Sharp views that nonviolent struggle may reflect a moral commitment to pacifism by leaders or activists in a movement such as Martin Luther King Jr and Mohandas Gandhi.

Peaceful resistance is a successful means of initiating positive social change and transformation. It can be argued that any action that invites discourse, or any action that causes individuals to pause and reflect on the truths that they hold to be self-evident, serves to advance humanity and stimulate the world’s continued evolution towards a more humane and just society. In the context of a free society, peaceful resistance to unjust laws almost exclusively yields a positive impact that often manifests as the successful repeal of oppressive legislation, the enhancement of human social interaction, and the dismantling of the restrictive and socially constructed institutions that govern people’s lives. If individuals

I will begin this by saying that I am an openly gay man and that there have been one too many laws trying to tell me how I can live my life, so I know exactly why some people peacefully protest and I understand their reasoning behind it. Throughout history, there have been many peaceful protests regarding certain laws and bills that have passed. They are definitely not a waste of time because many of those laws end up getting repealed or put on hold. In recent years, I've turned on the news and seen some new law about to be passed and then a bunch of people with signs attempting to put an end to it. Sometimes, it isn't even a law, but a verdict for a highly talked about crime. I live near St. Louis, and I remember a few years back in Ferguson,