In Cesar Chavez's article, he argues that nonviolent resistance is better and more efficient than violent resistance. He feels very strongly toward this belief, because of the mistreated farmers, and hopes that these farmers will civilly resist. Chavez refers to Martin Luther King Jr. and adds on to his point towards nonviolence resistance. Chavez publishes this article in a magazine because it is the tenth anniversary of the assassination of King, who Chavez strongly admires. Chavez uses a comparing technique to discuss violent and nonviolent resistance, a mix of appeals to ethos and pathos, and strong diction to emphasize the importance of the current problems his society is facing.
Throughout the entire article, Chavez mentions the pros and cons of both violent and nonviolent resistance. For example, in lines 12-13, Chavez states, "We are also convinced that nonviolence is more powerful than violence." His point being that he supports nonviolence and finds it more effective than violence. In addition, he does verify the claim of supporting nonviolence resistance when he says, in line 45, "We advocate militant
…show more content…
For example, Chavez recites, "However important the struggle is and however much misery, poverty and exploitation exist. . ." in lines 37-38. His sophistication of diction is impressive, with his use of words such as "misery, poverty and exploitation. . ." instead of using words like "sadness" or "poorness." His scholarly words prove him to be quite knowledgeable about his argument, which shows the topic strongly matters to him and adds further to his credibility. People who listened could have been very impressed and could have decided to take his side and support his stance on nonviolent resistance, since Chavez clearly knew what he was talking about and made sure his audience knew too, with his intelligent