The Twisted Truth On Good Friday of 1969, César Chavez wrote a letter addressed to E.L. Barr, Jr., the president of California Grape and Tree Fruit League. What prompted Chavez to write the letter was Barrs accusation that Chavez had used “violence and terror tactics” to succeed in his boycott and union movement, when Chavez’s true intention of his nonviolent movement was to address the social and labor struggles that Mexicans were dealing with. Mexican workers from the area grape-table farms left and began a strike to fight for their labor rights. Chavez uses logos, ethos, and pathos to convince Barr to repeal his insulting words made against the nonviolent union movement and to understand the determination made to the mexican culture. Chavez first appeal to Barr by using logos to prove to Barr that the things he is accusing the movement of are completely false. Chaves even explicitly calls Barr out on his actions by stating the obvious that “[he is] working against nonviolent social change.” Chavez knows that Barr is lying and is specifically telling him that he is against change because of the poor excuse he has to make for their success. Chavez again uses his logic to tell Barr that he only said such things because of the pressure he was under and his bitterness toward the movement. Chavez relates to Barr jokingly and makes a valid point that everyone can sometime “[feel] the need to lash out in anger and bitterness.” The use of logos Chaves demonstrates logically shows how Barr is really thinking as opposed to his own inner thoughts and Chavez does a tremendous job of calling him out on his faults. Chavez soon moves toward the emotion of Barr to make him understand why the strike and boycott are truly in place. Chavez uses pathos to appeal to Barr and his indifferent feelings toward the strike. Barr believes the tactics they use are violent, but Chavez demonstrates why the protest is peaceful. Chavez says the strikers “are well trained for struggle.” Chavez’s use of diction insinuates that most Mexicans are used to the struggle within the workforce and don’t want to handle the manner violently. The use of the quote is to make sure that Barr knows that the protest is meant to be peaceful because the
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
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.
Chavez achieves his main purpose to persuade to support his view on nonviolent resistance. He does this by not only using many examples, but to challenge the reader into thinking deeper into the lines of his speech. By doing so, as well as using his many rhetorical strategies throughout, Chavez becomes very effective in his
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
During his address to The Commonwealth Club of San Francisco on November 9, 1984 Cesar Chavez sought support for the United Farm Workers by using rhetorical strategies such as pathos, logos and ethos to convey his message that farm workers need to stop allowing other people to treat them like inhuman farming implements to be disposed of whenever the owner feels they’ve become unprofitable. Chavez's speech starts with a description of a tragedy that highlights the mistreatment of migrants and ends with the belief that the descendants of Hispanic farm workers are the future of California and their accomplishments will enrich the entire nation. The Cesar E. Chavez Foundation articulates that as leader of the United Farm Workers of America, Cesar Chavez, saw the hopes for better lives for Mexican, Mexican American, and Hispanic workers in the United States repeatedly raised, sunk, and revived again. Many factors contributed to this seemingly unending fluctuation from hopefulness to despair, and Chavez's
“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
The company was aware of what Chavez was doing, but they didn’t pay that much attention until they started to lose money. The boss of the company was started to get concerned and started sending his people to stop the strikes. The strikes of Chavez were nonviolence so he didn’t care if the police or somebody came to stop it because it’s against the law. However, the boss sends his people over to Chavez and told him that if they don’t stop the strike they will open fire to all the people. The people of Chavez were getting scared, but Chavez was motivating them by saying “si so Puede” until the police shot fire and took Chavez to jail. Cesar kept fighting until he got out of jail and proceed his work he had left. Cesar was losing hope because people were not following him because if they do they will get shot. Cesar stopped eating for a week to see if the people were still caring to change the way they were getting threaten and the people got the message and started doing strikes again without fear. The company was in rage, but they couldn’t do anything and the people were getting hopped. People from other countries were joining them too. People were with Chavez and when the company had no choice but to surrender. Chavez at the end stood up and started to eat again and he does justice for his people and for all the people around the world saying the famous phrase, “Si se Puede”.
César Chávez, a civil rights activist in the mid-1900s, stood up and made his voice heard for what he thought was wrong. In the twentieth century he noticed that farmers were being treated unjustly and he wanted to give them the rights that they deserved. He led many strikes and ended up being a great role model to the farmworkers who wanted more rights and better wages. His voice spoke to the people, especially the farmworkers, about injustice and what is right for them. César Chávez led with determination by fighting for the rights of farmers by orchestrating an organization for worker’s rights, battling the government, and never giving up from his cause.
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
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
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.
When Daniel Alejandrez was a young boy, he noticed his father bowing his head to a superior and thought to himself that he would never do that. The reason behind this was anger. Fast forward to around the age of seventeen, he and a few fellow coworkers had noticed that they were being paid four times less than his older coworkers who were using machines and not their bare hands. On the radio, a voice called “You must organize. You must seek justice. You must ask for better wages.” The voice was Cesar Chavez. With this quote in mind, he and his coworkers went on strike against the contractor and they raised the wages from $1.65 to $1.95. The point was not to raise wages, but to call attention to the unfair treatment that they were enduring.