The Importance Of Peaceful Protests By Cesar Chavez

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

Violence is only the illusion of power, and this is made clear by Chavez’s well-written article. The rhetorical devices Chavez utilizes lend credibility to an already credible argument, and will be sure to convert any supporters of violent protest to a more peaceful

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 labor union organizer and civil rights leader, published an article on his views about nonviolent resistance. In his article, he develops his argument about nonviolent resistance by using many rhetorical devices such as logical fallacies, diction and tone, and repetition.

Chavez begins his rationalization reminding the audience of the vigorous efforts Dr.King displayed in his cause; comparing and contrasting violence against non violence. Chavez explicitly states violence leads to nothing more than “injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides” as non violence is “supportive and crucial.” His variation in diction deriving from descriptions of deaths and injuries as opposed to the righteous dignation convinces readers with what they would prefer. Similarly, his mentioning of violence as being harmful to “both sides” helps bring clarity to a point with lack of bias, and demonstrates how violence is damaging to all equally, regardless of his position on civil rights. He later moves on to once again explicitly stating distinct contrasts.

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

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.

This creates a strong emotion of hopefulness within the reader since Chavez claims that he’s on their side which, helps convince the audience to listen to his argument about the importance of nonviolence more thoroughly. Basically, Chavez here is saying that we shouldn’t resort to violence no matter what hardships we face since it’s more important than relying on our negative emotions to attack others physically.

Chavez wanted to help the community that he came from, as well as others like it. The migrant worker community became his main focus, this resulted his creation of the UFW in 1962 (Chavez Foundation). His earlier life as a migrant worker would be a strong influence for attaining better working conditions for those workers. Early in Chavez’s life, he was exposed to the hardships of migrant working. When Chavez was 10 his family was forced from their home in Yuma, Arizona because of back taxes and because of the depression, his family couldn’t pay the payments (Castillo and Garcia, 7). Chavez began migrant work when he was 14, and the injustices had a memorable effect. Migrant workers were often exploited because of their lack of organization in a uniform union group, something that Chavez would eventually change. In future years the UFW would give migrant workers a voice in the conditions under which they were living and working.

In the mid-1960s thousands of Chicanos, people of Mexican descent, walked off the California grape fields in which they worked in protest of exploitation and poor working conditions. They wanted fair wages, better working conditions, and education for their children. They wanted all the opportunities that were extended to other Americans. Among the disgruntled employees was the soft-spoken César Chávez, who believed that his people’s plight could be resolved through the mechanism of non-violent protests. Chief among these mechanisms were his firm belief in fasting and non-violent strikes. These beliefs were the combined result of his childhood experiences, significant

During his time at the CSO, he had met Dolores Huerta, a woman who shared his passion for obtaining farm worker’s civil rights. His plan was to fight for the rights of the migrant and resident farm workers in California. To achieve this goal, Chavez set out to form a “viable union” among the thousands of disenfranchised farm workers.

Starting in line 17, Chavez concludes that “if we resort to violence then” many lives will be lost or workers will be completely “demoralized”. By using if-then statements, Chavez anticipates routes people will choose when nothing seems to be effective and then follows up with the negative outcome bound to follow a senseless act of violence. The if-then statements stop readers in their tracks and immediately turns their perspective before they have a chance to consider violence as an

Nonviolent resistances often consist of numerous individuals that gather together to use their voice and protest in nonviolent manners. Nonviolent movements and peaceful resistance is the refusal to obey an idea, law, or future decision made by individuals in power (Dictionary.com). They can be extremely important in revoking or stopping a law or decision from being enacted. This is proven by peaceful movements and protests such as the one gathered by Marin Luther King Jr. and the many Americans who established the Women’s Suffrage Movement. Peaceful resistances have been and will continue to show that sanding up for what is perceived as wrong socially, politically, or economically will always have a positive impact on a free society.

When governments take unjustifiable actions and the people of the country rebel in a nonviolent manner the leaders of the country rethink their actions for the country to not cause any wars, after all , what’s a government with no one to govern? Over the years there have been many protests that have led to great outcomes for the people of the country. An example showing this is the Rosa Parks Bus Boycott which is when Rosa Parks, an African-American woman, refused to give up her seat on the front of the bus to a white man . This is an example of peaceful resistance to law because at the time it was illegal for black people to sit in the front of the bus with white people. This, later on, led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott which then got equal rights for all people including African-Americans.

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. Rather than having violent movements and harming citizens, it is better to peacefully resist. Once a violence is used, the resistance to the law becomes nulled. People tend to not follow a violence protester. Once a violent riot starts, chaos is everywhere. People forget what they are truly fighting for. They unconsciously run away with the fear of getting harmed and dare not to go back. A peaceful resistance on the other hand leads citizens to join and support. People are able to see what they are fighting for and their real intentions. They are able to stand and cause no problem to people passing by as they are showing their support through silent voices. Many famous activists and leaders are for nonviolence. Mahatma Gandhi, a primary leader of India’s independence