In this article, John Daniel Davidson explains that tearing down the statues is wrong. John Davidson asserts the audience that, “the reason for keeping them has nothing to do with honoring the cause of the Confederacy or the memory of slavery. Even though many of them were erected for that purpose in the decades spanning the 1870s to the 1930s, that should not be our purpose for keeping them now” (Davidson). He reminds us that the real reason on why they should be kept is not for praising slavery or confederacy, but for preserving history. Davidson then gives an example of how the statues should be viewed and acknowledged, he says suggestively, “Something as central to American history as the war between North and South should impose on us
Jared Diamond makes a great and compelling argument about how inequality across the entire globe originated. The main components that were agreeing with this argument were guns germs and steel. Guns meaning the advancement in weaponry, military warfare and military sophistication. Germs meaning the harmful disease and other foul illness that wiped out humans throughout History. Then the third and final point steel, which was about the advancement in societies and the complex sophistication with their technology, which lead to building great architecture and devices that were completely impactful.
Along with ethos and small touch of logos, the author Roxane Gay uses a strength appeal of pathos to persuade her audience onto her argument. “White people will never know the dangers of being black in America, systemic, unequal opportunity, racial profiling, and the constant threat of police violence. Men will never know the dangers of being a woman in America, harassment, sexual violence, legislated bodies. Heterosexuals will never know what it means to experience homophobia.” (Gay). In this paragraph, the author is identify the inequality between racial barriers, genders and sexual orientation which an emotionally involved topic to bring up. How people are treated differently how the way they look, where they come from. Woman would
Only the poor, the beggar, and the under-classes are prefer to walk, in the opinion of some Americans. However, one American, the author Antonia Malchik, writes “The End of Walking,” and she argues that in Orwellian fashion, American people not only walk less, but are afforded less opportunity to walk. Undermined pedestrian transit systems encroaches on people’s liberty, instinct, and health. In Malchik’s article, most of the rhetorical strategies are very effective. She strengthens the credibility successfully by citing experts’ words and narrating her own experiences. With facts and statistics, she interprets the logical reasons of walking.
“He say Mr. Parris must be kill! Mr. Parris no goodly man, Mr. Parris mean man and no gentle man and he bid me rise out of bed and cut your throat!” (Miller 47).
Photographs capture the essence of a moment because the truth shown in an image cannot be questioned. In her novel, The Lovely Bones, Alice Sebold uses the language of rhetoric to liberate Abigail from the façade of being a mother and spouse in a picture taken by her daughter, Susie. On the morning of her eleventh birthday, Susie, awake before the rest of the family, discovers her unwrapped birthday present, an instamatic camera, and finds her mother alone in the backyard. The significance of this scene is that it starts the author’s challenge of the false utopia of suburbia in the novel, particularly, the role of women in it.
Edgar Allen Poe’s poem, "The Raven" starts off in a dark setting with an apartment on a "bleak December" night. The reader meets an agonized man sifting through his books while mourning over the premature death of a woman named Lenore. When the character is introduced to the raven he asks about Lenore and the chance in afterlife in which the bird replies “nevermore” which confirms his worst fears. This piece by Edgar Allen Poe is unparalleled; his poem’s theme is not predictable, it leads to a bitter negative ending and is surrounded by pain. To set this tone, Poe uses devices such as the repetition of "nevermore" to emphasize the meaning of the word to the overall theme; he also sets a dramatic tone that shows the character going from weary
The controversy of the confederate flag has been an issue for many years. Whether one believes in the historical importance of the flag or the negative symbolism of the flag, it is merely an opinion. However, even though there are many pros to the confederate flag, the cons seem to outweigh the
Mich Landrieu’s speech that he delivered to the public on May 19th, 2017, was a beautiful speech written and expressed by him about the removal of the four monuments within the city of New Orleans. This message was given by the Mayor due to racist comments of these statues and Landrieu expressed in his speech the true history of the city. For some of the people of New Orleans, they thought these statues were the identity of the city and a celebration of confederacy, however, African Americans took offense to the statues. The mayor effectively uses logos, pathos, and ethos to persuade his audience that taking down these confederate monuments is what needs to be done. Confederacy and the widespread demonstrations found many in other southern states as well discussing different monuments and their meanings. .Bill Golash, a gentleman interviewed from Richmond, Virginia said “I love the city of Richmond and I want to see us grow” (Raddatz). This statement reaches out to many of the issues being faced with decisions of change and Golosh echoing we can’t change
In his argument about amnesty, Nathan Thornburgh makes a very good case. He presents real world examples, doesn’t focus on the policy of the issue, and brings it to a human level. His emotional and factual appeals make it a very good read, and very intelligent argument. His writing style makes it easy for any audience to pick up the meaning he his conveying. If your argument is not able to be read by a multitude of audiences, you will not reach the maximum amount of people you can.
In the south, in places such as Charlottesville, VA, there are monuments and statues up all over cities and towns, these are racist statues that illustrate a dark part of American history. These monuments were statues of confederate soldiers and confederate officers that fought to keep slavery alive. In the North in places like New York there are statues of a man that some believe is a great man, but overall he caused another bad part of American history. These statues of Christopher Columbus were put up to celebrate the man that “discovered America” but this man also took America away from its indigenous people, the Native Americans. Columbus monuments and Confederate monuments should both be taken down across the country. Some of these monuments should be destroyed and some should be removed and placed in history museums because they are a part of American history, but all of these statutes should be taken down.
The monuments have not created racism in America, and are not the reason that white supremacist groups exist. The removal of these monuments would not stop the KKK from holding rallies, recruiting members, and existing. If the statues are torn down, it would have no effect on the high school dropout rate. In an article on the website, nationalreview.com, Deroy Murdock says “…black Americans still would face a national unemployment rate 7.4%...” In this statistic, Murdock provides an argument in defense of the statues. Throughout the article he provides statistics and information that support the theory. Tearing down the Confederate monuments will in no way improve the lives of any person. Beyond the lack of improvement everyone won’t see in their day to day lives, there will be no improvement in the battle against racism and white supremacy. According to the website, nationalreview.com, Kyle Smith, the author, says, “If a statue that has been standing in your city for years suddenly sends you into paroxysms of destructive rage, you are really determined to create a problem for yourself, and you’ll create another problem when it’s gone.” This statement speaks to the argument that the statues are so offensive that people feel the need to vandalize and tear them down. Even if the statues would be torn down in an effort to console those few Americans who find
Edward O. Wilson, the writer of this satire, writes about the opinions of two disagreeing sides to demonstrate the unproductive nature of these litigations. To do this, the author writes in a horatian manner and uses instances of exaggeration, parody, incongruity, and irony to help him convey his message that these arguments are pointless. The well distributed use of these strategies allows the writer to efficiently illustrate and mock the unproductive disagreement of these two groups of people.
Imagine standing in front of the defaced statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee only to hear two sides of people curse, hurt each other. This situation is too familiar for people who visit Charlottesville, VA, the formerly peaceful town. The controversy between Confederate memorials never ends. Many people argue that Confederate monuments should be taken down because they become the flashpoints of unrest and violence. As far as I am concerned, confederate memorials should remain as these memorials are the legacy of history; history is value-neutral and innocent.
The American Civil war is considered to be one of the most defining moments in American history. It is the war that shaped the social, political and economic structure with a broader prospect of unifying the states and hence leading to this ideal nation of unified states as it is today. In the book “Confederates in the Attic”, the author Tony Horwitz gives an account of his year long exploration through the places where the U.S. Civil War was fought. He took his childhood interest in the Civil War to a new level by traveling around the South in search of Civil War relics, battle fields, and most importantly stories. The title “Confederates in the Attic”: Dispatches from the Unfinished Civil War carries two meanings in Tony Horwitz’s thoughtful and entertaining exploration of the role of the American Civil War in the modern world of the South. The first meaning alludes to Horwitz’s personal interest in the war. As the grandson of a Russian Jew, Horwitz was raised in the North but early in his childhood developed a fascination with the South’s myth and history. He tells readers that as a child he wrote about the war and even constructed a mural of significant battles in the attic of his own home. The second meaning refers to regional memory, the importance or lack thereof yet attached to this momentous national event. As Horwitz visits the sites throughout the South, he encounters unreconstructed rebels who still hold to outdated beliefs. He also meets groups of “re-enactors,” devotees who attempt to relive the experience of the soldier’s life and death. One of his most disheartening and yet unsurprising realizations is that attitudes towards the war divide along racial lines. Too many whites wrap the memory in nostalgia, refusing...
In 1729, Jonathan Swift published a pamphlet called “A Modest Proposal”. It is a satirical piece that described a radical and humorous proposal to a very serious problem. The problem Swift was attacking was the poverty and state of destitution that Ireland was in at the time. Swift wanted to bring attention to the seriousness of the problem and does so by satirically proposing to eat the babies of poor families in order to rid Ireland of poverty. Clearly, this proposal is not to be taken seriously, but merely to prompt others to work to better the state of the nation. Swift hoped to reach not only the people of Ireland who he was calling to action, but the British, who were oppressing the poor. He writes with contempt for those who are oppressing the Irish and also dissatisfaction with the people in Ireland themselves to be oppressed.