Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cesar chavez nonviolence analysis
Cesar chavez nonviolence analysis
Cesar chavez nonviolence analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cesar chavez nonviolence analysis
Cesar chavez nonviolence analysis
Cesar chavez nonviolence analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
(Chavez 13) All these protests have just led to more violence and not helped. He brings up that the “poor and workers” are the ones killed in the violence. (Chavez 13) The normal people contributed to the violence and gained nothing from it.
In line 62 Chavez also provides a reference to Gandhi who was well known for his idea of nonviolence and promoting it. Next, Cesar Chavez uses logos as a rhetorical device
Cesar Chavez influences poor labor workers that nonviolence is the best way to make a change. The rhetorical devices Chavez uses within the article catch the workers attention and helps make them feel as if they can make a change, and of all the devices, his militant diction influences the reader most. The sixth paragraph of his article uses military diction by stating, “But if we are committed to nonviolence only as a strategy or tactic, then if it fails our only alternative is to turn to violence.” This means that if they think of nonviolence as a type of strategy instead of making it a mindset then they will become violent.
Cesar Chavez, a prominent labor union organizer and civil rights leader, passionately persuades the laboring class in his article published in a religious magazine that nonviolence is the best course of action. Printed on the tenth anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s death, Chavez proposes that acting nonviolently to get better working conditions, better treatment, better pay, better rights, and higher respect is more effective than acting in a violent manner. Chavez integrates personification by expressing how the laboring class’s struggles has “grown and matured.” By humanizing an idea such as “struggle”, Chavez aids the reader into feeling a sense of connection to the struggle even though they are not directly involved in it.
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.
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...”
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.
In addition to reasoning, Chavez uses references to history to further explain his logistics. As said in the passage, “Examine history. Who gets killed in the case of violent revolution? The poor, the workers.” Here, Chavez basically says why bother fighting physically, when the only ones getting killed or injured are the workers or rebels themselves.
To begin with, Chavez uses logos in his speech through a rhetorical question, “Who gets killed in the case of violent revolution? The poor, the workers.” The people who are arguing for violent revolutions are mostly poor workers whom Chavez refers to. Chavez uses logic to show these people that if they use violent revolts, they are most likely the ones going to be killed which for the most part will deter the people who are aiming for this. Another appeal Chavez uses is ethos to show everyone as people we are expected to do the right thing.
To achieve this, Chavez connects and sympathizes with his audience: “We advocate militant nonviolence as our means of achieving justice for our people, but we are not blind to the feelings of frustration, impatience and anger which seethe inside every farm worker.” This line evokes feelings of justice because it convinces people to advocate for the causes they feel passionately about. He also uses adjectives like frustration, impatience, seethe, and anger to drive their motivations. Chavez also uses an admonishing manner to convince his readers: “Our conviction is that human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however just it may be.” This line allows the reader to be inspired and rally for the civil cause.
Therefore, powerlessness and poverty are knows for the workers in the fields. Chavez wrote his article to build an ethical, logical, and emotional appeal to not only defend the farmers in the union, but to persuade the farmers to react to violence with nonviolent resistance.
Chavez brings up in paragraph 1, line 4, “Strategy of the farm workers movement.” which brings attention to Dr. King’s ideas because they were influenced by something that can be looked up in a history book. Dr. King himself reached out to so many with his civil rights movement and Chavez does the same bringing women, men, and children together of many different backgrounds to create a socially just world. This makes Chavez very credible, it shows his ideas were influenced by somebody like Dr. King who was very well known by his ideas and movements which makes him someone to follow because he knows what he is talking about.
In 1969, César Chavez wrote a letter to Mr. Barr, the president of the California Grape and Tree Fruit League, expressing that the protestors weren’t nonviolent, they were just expressing their rights to unionize. Chavez uses the argument of Martin Luther King Jr. and how he believed in the “nonviolent struggle for peace and justice”. He uses the phrase, “…we are not beasts of burden, agricultural implements or rented slaves…” to explain to Mr. Barr that the workers are protesting for their rights to work in a unionized setting. They would not become violent even if their requests weren’t met. Violence was
In addition, referencing Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in the text further established Cesar Chavez’s ethos. King was someone who was revered by proponents of civil rights. Associating an audience with a prominent figure such as Dr. King adds to the credibility in the rhetor. Chavez uses the main persona of a human
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.