The accounts of the Native Americans occupation of Alcatraz demonstrate the use of persuasive rhetoric in the form of deductive and syllogistic reasoning and shows the validity behind why the Native people should fight for their independence from the U.S Government. The film argues that the Native people believed the American Government did not have their best interest in mind. In fact, they felt that the Government was denying them their basic human rights. Throughout the years, the government has stripped the Native people of their dignity, liberty, and way of life. They believed that the U.S. Government was only interested in taking what they wanted from the Native people (Trudell). The Indian People were acting on a general belief that as human beings they …show more content…
The Native people assert that as a culture that long existed before the first settlers set foot on this land, they have rights to self-governance. Moreover, the film effectively uses syllogism when the question of freedom and inequality arises in an interview with Trudell when he states, “This is a country where all men are created equal and it’s the land of the free and the home of truth, justice, and liberty for all.” He says all this to pose the question, “Well we wanna [sic] know why that doesn’t apply to us?” (Trudell). His question is asked to provoke thought on the issue. In doing so, he forces the audience to consider his reasoning: all people of this land have rights, Native Americans are people of this land, so Native Americans have rights. This statement further supports the claims made by the Native people because it paraphrases lines from several historical documents that are well-known and are sure to resonate with the audience. The films use of these two types of reasoning, as well as the reference to historical documents, effectively support the claim made by the Native people concerning their rights to the