The Perils Of Indifference By Elie Wiesel

1306 WordsOct 12, 20176 Pages
A wise Ethiopian ruler, Haile Selassie, once said “throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph”. Throughout millennia, despite many differences in language, cultural, and social structures, humans all developed the same characteristics in their approach in tragedies happening around the world. When responding to tragedies, humans can either be aghast, furious, and eager to do whatever they can to help or they can be in support of the people who caused the tragedy. However, there is one response that is arguably worse than the latter: being…show more content…
This builds up Wiesel’s ethos which aids the audience in empathizing and agreeing to the main idea of the speech. In order to slowly ease into his reprimanding tone, Wiesel repeatedly uses the word “gratitude” to emphasize that he is extremely grateful to America. He to tries to cozy up to the President, Congress, Hillary Clinton and more before giving them a hypothetical slap in the face in future paragraphs. Wiesel then moves on to inform the audience that they are on “the threshold of a new millennium”. He then gives the audience something to think about by asking “what will the legacy of this vanishing century will be and how it will be remembered”. When given this rhetorical question, the audience is left to ponder the question and feel a sense of embarrassment for they now know that the future generations would be ashamed of their actions. He then goes on to appeal to logos by giving examples of many tragedies that had happened in their millennium like “ the two World Wars “ to emphasize how much violence and indifference, was going on. Shifting gears, Wiesel begins to define exactly what indifference is. He first gives the origin of the indifference which means “no difference” and then begins to juxtapose opposing ideas such as “good and evil “, “ cruelty and compassion”, and “ light and darkness” to epitomize his point that indifference is hard to define, because it 's has neither good or bad connotations but rather always
Open Document