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. In the speech Chavez says, “We are also convinced that nonviolence is more powerful than violence.” He then goes on to say that violence causes deaths and demoralizes the people, while nonviolence attracts people’s support and is morally just. The use of juxtaposition as a rhetorical device throughout the whole speech shows the pros of nonviolence and the cons of violence. This technique helps Chavez develop his argument because it creates a favorable bias …show more content…
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. In the speech he says, “We are convinced that when people are faced with a direct appeal from the poor struggling nonviolently against great odds, they will react positively.” This appeals to peoples’ morals by saying people are expected to react in a positive way when dealing with struggling