In the mid 1960s, farm workers experienced many hardships and labor without being given enough resources to live comfortably. Cesar Chavez argues how farm workers should be treated like humans and that we should fight for their rights in his speech, The Union & The Strike. Fighting for the workers’ rights requires forming a union which will show how power can come in numbers. Using moralistic and ambitious diction, an audacious and zealous tone, logos, pathos and syntax, Chavez was able to share his ideas with the public and persuade them to help farm workers get the rights they deserve. Chavez uses moralistic and ambitious diction in order to convey his message out to the audience. Morality is shown when the director of the National Farm
…show more content…
He shows his belief in equality when saying, “You live in big, warm homes and we live in boxes… We do the work and you make most of the money” (paragraph 3). The dreading truth that these hard working migrant workers are not being treated equally by their bosses just does not make sense. The belief that all people should be treated equally shows logic and common sense. These people desperately need all they can get in order to survive in the world and work is not enough. As much as they try, the conditions constantly gets the workers sick or injured and while these migrant workers are doing the dirty work, the owner’s family is just relaxing at home where the mom takes care of the house and the children. The speaker believes that the farm workers should be treated like any other equally paid worker. He uses logos more than just once in his speech. Another instance of this director of an association using logos is when he says, “FROM THIS DAY WE DEMAND TO BE TREATED LIKE THE MEN WE ARE! We are not slaves and we are not animals” (paragraph 1). These migrant workers deserve to have rights just like anyone else. These migrant workers are actual humans who were not given through trade. They want justice for not being treated like any other privileged human. Logos shows the logical point of view of the argument which gives a good reasoning for agreeing with the argument at …show more content…
The repetitive style of parallel structure is used when Chavez announces, “Our strike is stopping the work in the fields... Our strike is stopping the trucks that would carry the grapes. OUR STRIKE WILL STOP EVERY WAY THE GROWER MAKES MONEY…” (paragraph 7). The repetition of the phrase “Our strike…” brings emphasis towards the reiterated phrase, increasing the importance more and more as the speaker further explains what the strike will do. Every sentence represents an example of a way that the strike will fight for what they want. The dedication and the sensible rebellion can influence the listener to help input what they can to help fight for rights. This civil rights activist also uses exclamatory syntax in his speech to emphasize why he is fighting for the farm workers. The exclamation point in the sentence, “FROM THIS DAY WE DEMAND TO BE TREATED LIKE THE MEN WE ARE!” (paragraph 1) boldly states the goal of the strike. Not only does Cesar Chavez appeal to logos in this sentence but he also accentuates what he wants from the rest of the society. The purpose of the speech is to evidently help the farm workers get treated like equally paid citizens. The more emphasis that is put into the speech, shows how important this cause is for the speaker himself, and those affected by the issue he
He shows his belief in equality when saying, “You live in big, warm homes and we live in boxes… We do the work and you make most of the money” (paragraph 3). The dreading truth that these hard working migrant workers are not being treated equally by their bosses just does not make sense. The belief that all people should be treated equally shows logic and common sense. These people desperately need all they can get in order to survive in the world and work is not enough. As much as they try, the conditions constantly gets the workers sick or injured and while these migrant workers are doing the dirty work, the owner’s family is just relaxing at home where the mom takes care of the house and the children. The speaker believes that the farm workers should be treated like any other equally paid worker. He uses logos more than just once in his speech. Another instance of this director of an association using logos is when he says, “FROM THIS DAY WE DEMAND TO BE TREATED LIKE THE MEN WE ARE! We are not slaves and we are not animals” (paragraph 1). These migrant workers deserve to have rights just like anyone else. These migrant workers are actual humans who were not given through trade. They want justice for not being treated like any other privileged human. Logos shows the logical point of view of the argument which gives a good reasoning for agreeing with the argument at …show more content…
The repetitive style of parallel structure is used when Chavez announces, “Our strike is stopping the work in the fields... Our strike is stopping the trucks that would carry the grapes. OUR STRIKE WILL STOP EVERY WAY THE GROWER MAKES MONEY…” (paragraph 7). The repetition of the phrase “Our strike…” brings emphasis towards the reiterated phrase, increasing the importance more and more as the speaker further explains what the strike will do. Every sentence represents an example of a way that the strike will fight for what they want. The dedication and the sensible rebellion can influence the listener to help input what they can to help fight for rights. This civil rights activist also uses exclamatory syntax in his speech to emphasize why he is fighting for the farm workers. The exclamation point in the sentence, “FROM THIS DAY WE DEMAND TO BE TREATED LIKE THE MEN WE ARE!” (paragraph 1) boldly states the goal of the strike. Not only does Cesar Chavez appeal to logos in this sentence but he also accentuates what he wants from the rest of the society. The purpose of the speech is to evidently help the farm workers get treated like equally paid citizens. The more emphasis that is put into the speech, shows how important this cause is for the speaker himself, and those affected by the issue he