The Civil Rights Movement, led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., played a massive role in American history and it did so not through a revolution of savagery, but one of peace. The right to peaceably assemble for change has always been a staple in American society, defined as a right in the first amendment to the Constitution, ensuring that everyone could protest and call for peaceful action without being persecuted by the government. In 1978, Cesar Chavez wrote an article addressing the usefulness of “nonviolent resistance,” especially referring to Dr. King’s Civil Rights Movement. His usage of juxtaposition, logical fallacies, and unifying diction assist in Chavez’s attempt to drive the point that nonviolent resistance is the greatest way to …show more content…
So is the case for Cesar Chavez and the argument he develops in favor of peaceful protests. Case in point: Chavez makes a rather blunt claim that “If we resort to violence, he one of two things will happen: either [it] will be escalated and there will be [losses] on both sides, or there will be total demoralization of the workers” (Chavez 17-21), assuming that these are the only two possible options creates an either/or fallacy error, it is entirely possible that there are other options. Perhaps one side will emerge entirely victorious over the other, there are an untold number of other options that could be available. Chavez also utilizes appeals to pity to convince readers that his movement is morally superior to that of standard groups pushing for change. This is evident when Chavez writes that he believes that “...when poor people are faced with a direct appeal from the poor struggling nonviolently against great odds, they will react positively” (Chavez 27-30) and that “[his movement] can gather the support of millions who have a conscience…” (Chavez 24-25). Chavez’s usage of the phrase “people who have a conscience” alone manipulates the logic of regular people by convincing them that if they aren’t a part of nonviolent resistance, then they have no conscience, which clearly is not the case as people can choose to not involve themselves whatsoever and still have a clear moral compass in line with that of a reasonable society. Chavez’s bandwagoning claims that “The American people and people everywhere still yearn for peace” (Chavez 30-31) so as to convince the audience that since so many people already “yearn for justice,” that they should as well. Besides these fallacies, Chavez utilizes one far more than any
In the excerpt, Cesar Chavez, labor union organizers and civil rights leader, discusses how nonviolent resistance to problems in society easily resolves a situation better than violent protest. Throughout his speech, he uses many rhetorical strategies to argue his view on nonviolent resistance. Chavez’ use of ethos, logos, and pathos, creates his passionate attitude towards nonviolent resistance.
Cesar Chavez had a view that all races work together for one goal, he had the strikers of Delano take a “solemn vow of nonviolence” (Cesar Chavez Foundation, chavezfoundatio.org, ‘Against All Odds’: Cesar Chavez & the Delano Grape Strike). Chavez followed the examples set forth by M.K. Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by using the nonviolence strategy. However for the first time in American History, Chavez used an untested method when he boycotted using California table grapes. The outcome surfaced an exceptional result of major support from outside the Central Valley. The UFW received support from other unions, church activists, and students and civil rights groups. The step was initiated when Cesar Chavez led a 300-mile march that started in Delano and ended at the State Capital of Sacramento. The union garnered National attention across the country and it gave birth and served as the UFW’s stand against unjust treatment against minority
On the tenth anniversary of Martin Luther King’s assassination, Chavez utilizes King’s association with civil rights in order to give foundation to his own words. Chavez knows the anniversary is “...the best possible opportunity to recall the principles with which [their] struggle has grown and matured…” (ln 5-7) because King has values regarding civil rights that are synonymous to his own. Both Chavez and King possess the value that the human life is special and no one has the right to take it away. By referring to a well-known, wildly respected, and successful leader with a similar cause, Chavez has ensured that the audience will be receptive to his message that the use of nonviolence is a better solution to a problem than violence. A later reference to Gandhi further strengthens this effect. Chavez praises the effectiveness of a boycott, an act in which people forbid relations with a group in order to achieve change, made popular by Gandhi. The allusion to commonly revered supporters of the principles Chavez has built himself upon, gives him the credibility to gain the attention of the audience.
Cesar Chavez was born in Yuma Arizona on March 31, 1927. Cesar Chavez was in a family of seven brothers and four sisters. Caesar lived in a mud house where his parents owned a grocery store and ranch, but lost both during the Great Depression. His family moved to California, where they became farmers for a living. Caesar left high school in the seventh grade to work for the good of his family. Caesar joined the United States Army when he was seventeen and served for two years. Caesar married Helen Fabela and moved to San Jose, California, where he had eight children. Caesar was recruited and trained by Fred Ross. Fred then formed the San Jose chapter of the Community Service Organization a Latin American civil rights movement. Cesar worked
Cesar Chavez, a civil rights activist who fought for the freedom of farm workers wrote an article to promote his cause and claim that nonviolence can make a change because it’s more powerful than violence.
In enjoying, as well as closely examining, an article written by Cesar Chavez on the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., which was published in a magazine of a religious organization devoted to helping those in need, it becomes evident that Chavez, through the use of many rhetorical devices and literary tools, feels very strongly on the thought of nonviolence being superior to violence. According to the labor leader and civil rights activist, nonviolence will always conquer violence, which Chavez makes clear through the use of rhetorical tricks such as allusions, specific word choice and sentence structure, strategic tone and by appealing to the values of his audience.
Cesar Chavez, a civil rights leader fighting for improving pay and working conditions of farmers, employs the use of nonviolence resistance in his role as a leader of the United Farm Workers. As a child, Chavez and his family worked as farmers on a field as migrant workers who were most likely treated in an unjust manner and thus, he dedicated his life to improving the conditions for all farmers. To honor Martin Luther King Jr. on the 10th anniversary of his death, Chavez wrote to a religious magazine that helps people in need about the benefits of nonviolent resistance. Throughout his letter, Chavez applies rhetorical devices such as pathos, diction, and juxtaposition to persuade and inform people about how powerful and effective nonviolence techniques can be for civil rights.
During the mid-20th century, African Americans struggled to acquire equal rights and recognition under the laws of the United States. African Americans fought and protested to obtain equality as the whites. After the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. many blacks began to protest more frequently leading to violence. In the speech, Chavez implores the people to put an end to violence and how it’s not more effective than the nonviolence resistance. Chavez appeals to pathos and ethos to develop his argument on why the citizens should turn to nonviolence resistance.
To make nonviolence the more logical option, Chavez implements logos and leads readers to believe that violence takes too many sacrifices. After identifying the advantages of nonviolence, he gives the readers two possible conclusions to make about the brutal opposite: “either the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides, or there will be total demoralization of the workers” (Chavez). Presenting these two unfavorable options uses the logos appeal and persuades the audience to see nonviolence as the more reasonable choice with more promising outcomes. At another point in the article, Chavez tells the audience to simply “examine history” (Chavez). The straightforward statement causes readers to recall violent events of the past and logically recognize them as inferior to the previously mentioned nonviolent protests. This conclusion helps Chavez achieve his purpose by persuading the audience to side with his point of view and support nonviolence. After establishing his argument on sound reasoning, Chavez uses that foundation to employ other rhetorical appeals.
Cesar Chavez, a labor leader and civil rights activist, wrote an article that discusses his strong stand on how using nonviolent resistance is the better way to go rather than using violent acts. Inspired by the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Chavez writes an article about his argument on nonviolent resistance; he accomplishes that by using rhetorical choice like allusions, pathos, and tone.
In his first large protest, Cesar went on a long march. When reflecting upon the march Chavez remarked that, “We marched alone at the beginning, but today, we count men of all creeds, nationalities, and occupations in number.” (Chavez, 2) From the very beginning, Chavez brought groups of people together by uniting his small group of protesters with a group of Filipino strikers to create the United Farm Workers. Uniting his group of protesters with the group of striking Filipino workers allowed the protest to become bigger, and therefore more successful. The large numbers also attracted more attention from the media. By uniting groups of strikers, Chavez created a strong protest organization that lasts even today. Another essential group of people Chavez got to join his cause were the consumers. Chavez and his partner Dolores Huerta once wrote, “We called upon our fellow men, and were answered by consumers.” (Chavez, Huerta, 1) Consumers helped the protest by participating in a grape boycott, and did not buy grapes until the grape workers’ needs were met. With this boycott, Chavez tried to weaken the business of the grape growers until they complied, and it worked. When thousands of citizens would not by grapes, the media covered the issue. Through the media coverage, the boycott spread rapidly, uniting people from all over the United States. With the popularity of the boycott, the protest evolved into not just a protest, but a civil rights
Martin Luther King Jr. discusses the advantages and purposes for his theory of nonviolent direct action in his Letter From Birmingham City Jail. He shows four basic steps that must be taken to achieve nonviolent action. They include 1) collection of facts to determine whether injustices are alive; 2) negotiation; 3) self-purification; and 4) direct action. Each of these steps will be explained as part of King's argument later in this essay. The main purpose of a nonviolent campaign is to force any community to confront a problem rather than refuse to negotiate or face a specific issue. In the letter, King discusses his group's reasons for coming to Birmingham.
On the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr.Martin Luther King Jr, labor union organizer and civil rights leader Cesar Chavez writes to the magazine of a religious organization devoted to helping those in need, in order to persuade their conscientious readers that “only nonviolence will be able to achieve the goals of a civil rights activist”. Chavez establishes that violent tactics in a resistance are not effective for the cause by using juxtaposing diction in order to distinguish violent strategies and nonviolent strategies. Doing this allows him to elaborate on the later as his judgment as well as use of plural pronouns and rhetorical question drives his argument for nonviolent resistance.
When caught in an injustice, protesters tend to use various strategies in attempt to successfully convey their opinions. In an article published by Cesar Chavez, he describes his fight for civil rights by using Martin Luther King Junior’s methods to show how violence fails to promote victory. Chavez appeals to his audience by using ethos, pathos, and allusion to highlight how nonviolence is more of an effective form of protesting.
Cesar Chavez was an extremely influential individual in the Latino civil rights movement. Born in March 1927, he preached unionism and aggressive non violence, and cofounded the National Farm Workers Association. Being a major player in the civil rights movement, he recognized the obvious influence of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and on the tenth anniversary of his assassination Chavez published an article in Maryknoll Magazine. While writing about nonviolence, Chavez appealed to logos and pathos to have the message of the article connect with the reader’s emotions and reasoning.