Elie Wiesel stipulated a certain, demanding tone in his speech given on the topic of indifference. The use of rhetoric language he uses is compelling to his audience, it draws them into his claim of indifference as he demands for a change. “What will the legacy of this vanishing century be? How will it be remembered in the new millennium?” Elie exclaimed to the President. He wanted the audience to feel society's grief to the topic and wanted remorse, change, and will out of the President to make the conversion of a better world, an indifference free world. To make the world great. The failures he proposed the world has had in this very millennium include; two World Wars, civil wars, and “the senseless chain of assassinations”. In the opening …show more content…
God being the object in hand, he speaks “We felt that to be abandoned by God was worse than to be punished by Him. Better an unjust God than an indifferent one.” The terminology he uses only grows his argument and pulls in the audience to jump the barrier of indifference and join his side. Including the ones suffering from indifference already being on his shoulder, using members of a religion to grow his appeal is ultimately the goal, to shed light to the non-oppressed on oppression and to reach a fast paced solution. Wiesel uses more rhetorical devices to plead his case: In the middle of Wiesel's plea to the government Logos began to appear in his words and effectively strengthened his tone and the assertiveness in his voice. “Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response. Indifference is not a beginning; it is an end. And, therefore, indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor -- never his victim, whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten. The image he invokes in his words is powering, and fulfilling the void of the overlooked indifference that oppressors use against the