Our culture is drenched in senseless violence. Cesar Chavez noticed this devastating fact and took a stand. Known as the Martin Luther King Jr. of his day, Cesar Chavez was a strong advocate against violence. He dedicated his life to improving the treatment, pay, and working conditions for farm workers. Chavez argues in his 1978 article that nonviolence is the only way to overcome any oppressor. Chavez uses motif, allusion, and comparison/contrast in order to convince his audience that nonviolence is the only way to achieve lasting change.
The use of motif develops the articles major theme of nonviolence. Not only does he use the literal word nonviolence throughout to do this, but he also uses collective pronouns repeatedly in order to emphasize that he his actively involved with his cause. He says, “If for every violent act committed against us, we respond with nonviolence, we attract peoples support.” The use of ‘we’ and ‘us’ shifts the responsibility of the violence issue unto the reader, thus emphasizing the theme. This use of personal pronouns creates a call to action that encourages the reader to lead peaceful protests. The reason of involving the reader …show more content…
He references the likes of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. in order to develop his argument that lasting change comes through nonviolence. The opening sentence states, “Dr. Kings entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings to bear in the real world.” When he mentions Dr. King the reader immediately thinks of his efforts he made for equal rights and the strides he made for black people. He did this through nonviolence. Not once did he provoke or influence taking someone’s life. This is what Chavez wants us to take from the allusion. This connection primarily to prove that historically nonviolence has caused lasting change, and it is the tool that should be used by the people
The use of motif develops the articles major theme of nonviolence. Not only does he use the literal word nonviolence throughout to do this, but he also uses collective pronouns repeatedly in order to emphasize that he his actively involved with his cause. He says, “If for every violent act committed against us, we respond with nonviolence, we attract peoples support.” The use of ‘we’ and ‘us’ shifts the responsibility of the violence issue unto the reader, thus emphasizing the theme. This use of personal pronouns creates a call to action that encourages the reader to lead peaceful protests. The reason of involving the reader …show more content…
He references the likes of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. in order to develop his argument that lasting change comes through nonviolence. The opening sentence states, “Dr. Kings entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings to bear in the real world.” When he mentions Dr. King the reader immediately thinks of his efforts he made for equal rights and the strides he made for black people. He did this through nonviolence. Not once did he provoke or influence taking someone’s life. This is what Chavez wants us to take from the allusion. This connection primarily to prove that historically nonviolence has caused lasting change, and it is the tool that should be used by the people