Summary Of Non Violence By Cesar Chavez

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

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

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.

Cesar Chavez viewed his civil rights issues as “not just another movement, but a movement to change the conditions of human life” (Houle 95). He followed the teachings of Gandhi, who helped India obtain their independence from England through nonviolent actions (“Cesar Chavez 2”). When landowners threatened Chavez he called a boycott on grapes throughout the whole country which was a great success because though this he obtained support from various organizations and people (“Cesar Chavez 2”). His perseverant and nonviolent strategies caught the attention of the people and proved to be a success.

By restating that nonviolence is more powerful than violence, Chavez successfully gets it in readers’ heads. Chavez states that “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 o n both sides, or there will be demoralization of the workers.” This statement better illustrates how violence can affect a community, resulting in an overwhelming number of injuries and deaths. As a community and especially as leaders, they don’t want all of, or even any of their

Imagine having to work all day in the hot sun and barely get paid any money. Working in a place with no bathroom, no clean water, and getting sprayed by pesticides. The only reason why this is not happening right now is because of Cesar Chavez. Cesar Chavez, grew up working in the fields so he know how low the wage is and how bad the working conditions are. After being in a farmworkers organization he saw the opportunity to create his own organization to change farmworkers work problems.

Chavez develops his argument for non violent resistance by using ethos, pathos, and logos throughout the story. All of the arguments back each other up and he uses many different point of views throughout his writing. He also quotes people that have used non violent protest as part of his argument. These rhetorical devices come together to create a strong argument.

“When victory comes through violence, it is a victory with strings attached.” (Prompt) is a quote that eloquently summarizes what Cesar Chavez believed in and wrote about. He felt that with violence there was too much injury and death, and those were the strings attached to violent victories. Chavez advocated for nonviolent resistance, and provided a strong argument. He used pathos to present readers with thoughts that were intended to tug on their heartstrings. Chavez also used allusion when he spoke of other strong speakers for nonviolent resistance, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi.

In terms of anaphora it was once again a major aspect of Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous speech, and since one of the main subjects of the article was Dr. King himself it was almost for certain that he was going to follow some of the rhetorical choices that Dr. King used to make his speech so successful. Cesar Chavez not only took advantage of Dr. King’s undeniable credibility as an advocate for nonviolence but he also followed in the footsteps of Dr. King when it came to some of the rhetorical choices that he made within the article and the cause that he was trying to portray to the