Sanders And Rushdie Argumentative Essay

Sanders and Rushdie Analytical The globalization of the world, beginning in the late twentieth century and still an ongoing phenomenon today, has brought unprecedented prosperity to the world, enabling those who could afford it new modern conveniences and an enthrallingly cosmopolitan way of life. But the same forces of globalization also deprived once-proud ancient indigenous peoples of their culture, imbuing their children’s minds with imported American values. Globalization, in light of this, deserves not hearty approbation but a tempered eye judging both its vices and virtues. To be clear, Sanders’s essay is not about globalization--it is about migration--but both globalization and mass migration bear connotations of rootlessness and …show more content…
Sanders, in doing so, wants his American readers to believe that migration for its own sake is inconducive to society; by tailoring his arguments to the predilections of his audience and demonstrating strong historical insight, Sanders persuades readers to reconsider whether living in a new place is beneficial after all. A realist at heart, Sanders realizes that to convey a strong and clear message, he must address Americans’ profound desire for social and physical mobility and explain how Americans’ impassioned, age-old yearning for new land is different from Rushdie’s newer, stateless ideal of mobility. His acknowledgement of the American Dream as a timeless American ideal ensures that his argument against rootless migration will not be misconstrued to be an attack on the American Dream. Indeed, Sander’s choice of diction shows that he, as a fellow American, tolerates the movement of Americans inside their own country. The words “seductive” and “romance” indicate an impassioned idealism with American mobility while “Promised Land” connotes a biblical fervor that what land lay ahead was land given to Americans by God. In a …show more content…
And just as the cunning sportsman who knows his opponent’s characteristic weakness loosens the slack on the rope, causing his opponent to wobble and slightly lose control, Sanders probes hither and thither until he discovers that appalling, unpatriotic quote in Rushdie’s essay. Sanders then “loosens the slack on the rope,” attacking at Rushdie’s weak point with his stirring discussion of American mobility, and asserting its profound differences from Rushdie’s stateless vagrancy. Nearing the end of the passage, Sanders tightens grip and heaves once again with his irrefutable historical anecdotes on the Spanish Conquest, slavery, and Dust Bowl. The final crushing blow which causes Rushdie to stumble and fall, his hands to lose contact with the rope, is Sanders’s thesis. The argument is finished, and Sanders is crowned as the winner who unequivocally holds the reader’s