Rhetorical Analysis Of Elie Weisel's Perils Of Indifference

In his influential 1999 speech, “Perils of Indifference,” Elie Weisel brought attention to the problem of indifference in society, and in the government. After his experiences as a child survivor of the Holocaust, he believed people were indifferent toward the dilemmas of others and chose to not care to help them, for their own sake. In his speech, he recalls historical events to prove how much the world has been affected by the dangers of indifference and forces his audience to self-reflect on this issue by asking rhetorical questions, introducing them to different points of view, and showing its effects. With this, he makes a call to action and with hope, inspires his audience to make a change. As history keeps changing, it is important

In the speech, Weisel introduces the topic of indifference; he wants to bring attention to the problems that acting indifferent brings to those who need the most help. To do this, he expresses, “Indifference reduces the other to an abstraction” (5). Indifference takes life away from a human, making them nothing but a concept that was not worth helping, destroying the person that was living inside the body. With this, he introduces a very impactful idea of what indifference truly means to the victims and the ones being indifferent and describes how it only benefits the aggressor. He proceeds to explain in more detail how this concept works, “They no longer felt pain, hunger, thirst. They feared nothing. They felt nothing. They were dead and did not know it” (6). His usage of strong and poignant words makes his audience not only understand the meaning of indifference but also its consequences by showing its effects on other people. He shows how many people are suffering because of this problem, and makes his audience understand that they need to help and work towards a

Many victims believed they had hope and that they would’ve been helped only to end up disappointed when no one stood up for them. During the speech, Weisel introduces the audience to a different point of view, putting them in the shoes of the victims and showing them how they felt. As a victim himself, he explains, “We are now in the Days of Remembrance -- but then, we felt abandoned, forgotten. All of us did” (12). Because he was a Holocaust survivor, he understood what it was like to think someone would come to help, and never show. With this experience, he shared what he and all the other survivors believed, “If they knew, we thought, surely those leaders would have moved heaven and earth to intervene… And now we knew, we learned we discovered that the pentagon knew” (13-14). Knowing that other countries were aware, yet decided to not assist, made them feel helpless and worthless during those times. Even after they were rescued, the image of government figures was still affected by knowing how they took too long to care. With these personal connections, he forces the audience into the perspective w of the victims, which makes them a better understanding of the consequences and the situation. He shows what the people in those situations were going through, and persuades the audience to take