As a labor union organizer and civil rights leader, Chavez wrote this article to validate the use of nonviolence instead of violence as means to create change. Chavez presents comparing through counter argument, if-then structure, and parallelism. The article Chavez wrote explains how effective nonviolence is. Chavez argues for nonviolence despite understanding the tendency toward violence. Throughout the article, Chavez counters nonviolence with violence informing the "what ifs". Chavez states "if it fails our only alternative is violence". The people need an understanding of what is taking place in order to handle however amount of struggle is occurring nonviolently. Violence happens when concern about any human aspect gets deepened. Nonviolence is a more successful way to prevent future issues. …show more content…
As stated within the article, for example, "if we resort to violence, then one of two things will happen...". If-then structure sets a base to illustrating what could possibly happen if violence took place. Comparing nonviolence to violence holds a more clear understanding through
To accomplish this goal, Cesar Chavez uses rhetorical devices such as personification and many cause and effects. In Chavez's article, he believes and supports nonviolence as a virtue. An example Cesar Chavez uses was Martin Luther King Jr.
Cesar uses historical information in order to present a scenario where the use of non-violence successfully worked in Gandhi’s protest. Chavez further elaborates upon his success by stating “The boycott, as Gandhi taught, is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolent change, allowing masses of people to participate actively in a cause.” Chavez appeals to his audience’s reason by examining how Gandhi's nonviolent protest lead to his movements increased numbers and how it was “allowing masses of people to participate actively in a cause.” he uses this appeal in order to reason with hi people that nonviolence will increase the success of their protest by increasing their
Cesar Chavez, a civil rights leader and labor union organizer, published an article on the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, addressing the sufficent use of non-violence opposed to violent actions. Cesar writes in a persuasive tone to appeal to logos and the use of allusion to inspire the American people to utilize nonviolent actions on setting conflicts as an alternative to their go to violent encounters. Cesar’s use of allusion throughout his article e.g publishing on Martin Luther King’s tenth anniversary and mentioning Martin Luther, a widely known activist for nonviolence, brings the audience something familiar that they have either lived through to see this historical figure in action or have heard about and may have admired to further support his reasons on why nonviolent is the stronger way. In paragraph one, Caesar mentions MLK and states that his life was an example of power that nonviolence brings to bear in the real world.
Cesar Chavez, published an article on the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King. Jr. In his argument, he emphasizes about advocating for nonviolent resistance and cite the ideals of Dr. King. Implementing an admirable tone, he repeats about how nonviolence is more powerful than violence since nonviolence will only be able to achieve those of the civil rights activist's goals. This is appealing to different rhetorical devices but also bringing in the question of helping his argument for the nonviolence resistance.
Non-violence is fine as long as it works” (X 3). , Malcolm X said, and according one of Erica Chenoweth's books, it does. Why Civil Resistance Works: The strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, has many statistics to prove it. For example, that of the 323 violent and nonviolent campaigns between 1990 and 2006, the nonviolent protests had higher success rates (Chenoweth 7). This statistic demonstrates how nonviolent methods of protest are more effective.
Labor union organizer and civil rights leader Cesar Chavez wrote to his audience of followers of a religious organization on the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr to assert the importance of using nonviolent methods needed to incite change. Throughout the essay he explains that nonviolence is a powerful tool that should be used to incite change over the use of violence. By using logical arguments, relatable feelings through pathos, and emotionally charged words through diction, Chavez is able to convey to his audience that nonviolence should be chosen over violent means. In the beginning of the essay, Chavez’s use of logical arguments helps the audience realize the potential and importance of nonviolence starting
Aside from eventually giving a detailed explanation as to why nonviolence is more productive than violence, Cesar Chavez begins with definitive proof that it is more productive by mentioning a well- known, nonviolent activist, Martin Luther King, in his opening paragraph. By using Dr. King in his opening paragraph, Chavez sets up his whole article in a way that not only explains why nonviolence is better, but first uses a real example of when nonviolence functioned better than violence. In addition to this, Chavez is able to engage his audience and explain why nonviolence is always the best decision through the use of uncomplicated diction, sentence structure, and appealing to his audience’s religious beliefs. Chavez hits ground running after his opening paragraph about Dr. King, and his very first stride is appealing to his audience by the religious belief that violence is never acceptable, no matter how just the cause is. Chavez says, “...human life is a very special possession given by God… that no one has the right to take it for any reason…”
Chavez informs people about how violence comes at a price , and that there are plenty of shortcomings in violence than nonviolence. Chavez says “when victory comes through violence, it is a victory with strings attached.” and the in lines 60-69 he explains how violence only leads to more problems and saying bluntly that people will die can tug some heart strings. When Chavez contrasts non violence he uses “the American people.” to bring the audience who are american closer to what he is saying.
Cesar mentioned that, “If we resort to violence…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” (Garcia, 77). He created this idea that violence does not solve anything, and will only create bigger problems. However, a nonviolent movement is a protest
The civil rights movement was a strong topic of discussion in politics during the mid-twentieth century. Martin Luther King Jr., one of the most influential leaders of the civil rights movement, was assassinated which caused many protests and calls for violence. In Cesar Chavez’s speech, he is telling the people that nonviolence resistance is the best way to go about the situation. Chavez’s uses juxtaposition, diction, and rhetorical appeals to strongly convey his argument about nonviolent resistance. To begin with, Chavez uses juxtaposition to contrast the effects of violent and nonviolent resistance.
Cesar Chavez, in his excerpt He showed us the Way, utilizes strong pathos, ethos and logos statements, precise diction, and valuable patterns of development to convey the power nonviolence has in fights for freedoms and rights. First, Chavez provides strong pathos, ethos and logos to convey the power nonviolent actions have to change the world for the better. He applies ethos to show that nonviolence is something that people are drawn to. In fact Chaves presents a great nonviolent advocate who lived during the segregation: “Dr. King’s entire life was an example of power that nonviolences brings...”
In the first paragraph Chavez mentions Dr. Martin Luther King Junior, stating that Dr. King’s “entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings…” This reference to Dr. King causes those who know of his impact to realize that he lead a strong historical example of what nonviolence could achieve. By using Dr. King as an example it indicates that Chavez thinks that if nonviolence had heavily impacted the past, then it would most likely do the same in the present and future. Chavez also makes a reference to Gandhi and his nonviolent boycott in India, claiming that what he taught “is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolent change.” By using the word perfect to describe Gandhi’s teachings of nonviolence, it further supports Chavez’s stance for nonviolent resistance.
The assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. devastated a large majority of people around the world. His works of nonviolent acts against racism motivated many, including civil rights activist Cesar Chavez, to solve matters without resorting to inhumane behaviors. Inspired by Dr. King Jr.’s work, Chavez and his union of labor workers devoted themselves to helping those in need through peaceful protests. Similar methods are proven to be successful; Mahatma Gandhi, for instance, gained a great deal of supporters because of his pacifism and tranquil methods of boycotting against British domination. Despite brutal and savage methods of persuasion slowly gaining support, Chavez proves that nonviolent actions are superior; he does so by using ethos in order to uphold moral standards, logos (in reference to the past), and pathos to appeal to the emotions of his audience.
Cesar Chavez wrote a piece in the magazine of religious organization on the ten year anniversary of Martin Luther King. He starts off saying that Dr. King was a very powerful man with nonviolent means. Throughout his writing he gives many example of why nonviolence will ultimately succeed over violent means, and give of many appeals of emotional, logical, creditable justification. Dr. King may have dies, but with his death only more power has come to the peaceful citizens of the world.
All throughout his essay he uses juxtaposition to compel the audience the consequences for violent and the benefits for non violent methods. He states “When victory comes through