Cesar Chavez shows us in this piece just how upsetting violence actually is. The author relates to the audience through pathos and logos. Chavez also uses diction in such a beautiful way and he also makes a great deal of connection with his readers. In this essay he uses great diction to prove a non-violent statement. He is very repetitive with the word “non-violent’’, he even repeats this word ten times! Referencing to Martin Luther King Jr. only helps with the imagery of a non-violent society. By using the word “Demoralization”, Chavez ties together the emotional appeal of this article. The tactics used by Cesar add structure to his purpose. He demonstrates the violence affiliated with the working people and how we should not turn to violence so much as a solutions but however to turn to non-violence as the permanent solution. Chavez wants to make the point to use the power gained through non-violence to help make a better tomorrow. …show more content…
The way he flows through the appeals adds a definition to his purpose. Chavez expresses a great deal of pathos throughout this piece, he connects with his audience by doing this. He points out the disparity of violence and how people abuse this nature. He relates to Martin Luther King Jr. through their shared belief of a complete non-violence. Also chavez references to Gandhi and how he taught and expresses the instruments of non-violence. Cesar chavez reveals the truth about violence towards our working men and women. Boycotts and rampages were referred to as “weapons against grower” and “a way of avoiding our senseless violence”. He uses this to show the power of violence, but the even greater power of
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.
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.
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.
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
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
“Letter from Delano”, by Cesar Chavez, the writer is attempting to perform this impossible feat on E.L. Barr Jr., the president of the California Grape and Tree Fruit League. Throughout his life, 1927 to 1993, Chavez was a prominent civil rights activist who fought for the rights of farm workers. He performed nonviolent protests including marches, boycotts, and hunger strikes. One famous boycott was the Grape Strike, in which Cesar urged Americans to buy grapes from foreign places in order to bring attention to the plight of field workers. By 1969, when the letter was written, Chavez had already co-founded the National Farm Workers Association. His goal was to fight for better treatment, increased pay, and improved working conditions. His nonviolent methods were extremely similar to the protests of Martin Luther King Jr., who was assassinated in 1968, over the rights of African Americans. In the letter, Cesar Chavez is specifically addressing claims, made by the California Grape and Tree Fruit League, of a violent protest performed by the farm workers. Throughout the letter, Chavez confronts the shocking accusations, explains his use of nonviolent methods, and emphasizes the purpose of his protests. He strives to make the president understand the plight of the workers and view their protests as a product of the worker’s determination for change, not as violent and personal attacks that
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
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
Chavez was a Latino farmer. He migrated to Arizona. Cesar Chavez was working in the South in hot fields and vineyards. After his forceful speech, he was known as a religious and spiritual person. From Chavez’s background, he understands the hard workers
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.
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
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.
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.