In September of 1939, King George VI had to deliver the most paramount speech of his life. Britain declared war on Germany, and he had to convey that message to his subjects (Farndale, “King’s Speech”). War is a difficult message for any king to announce, but it is an arduous task for a king with a speech impediment. Nevertheless, he orated with fluidity, courage, and grace. King George VI begins building his credibility with personal statements, citing convincing facts of declaration of war, and effectively utilizing emotional appeals; the handling of his speech defect, and his attempts to appeal to the emotions of the audience, strengthen the argument of unity through a trying time of hate. He begins by describing the gravity of the situation, while creating a sense of solidarity with his subjects, and then he announces the declaration of war. To exhibit this argument in favor of direct action, he says, “over and over again we have tried to find a peaceful way out of the differences between ourselves and those who are now our enemies. But it has been in vain. We have been forced …show more content…
He was known to have a speech impediment, so by making the speech he tapped into the compassion of the people. The stutter that defined him, and courage he embraced to beat it, came to symbolise the susceptibility of the British. In addition, his address is full of emotionally-charged words and phrases that create a powerful image. One compelling quote is, “But far more than this, the peoples of the world would be kept in bondage of fear, and all hopes of settled peace and of the security, of justice and liberty, among nations, would be ended” (George VI). His use of dramatic phrases such as, “bondage of fear,” and, “all hopes of settled peace… would be ended,” creates vivid images in the eyes of the audience, persuading them to agree with what is being
He triggers the feeling of patriotism while convincing them that "The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come." He believes that there is nothing that should stop the war from starting because we should be fighting for our our independence and our freedom from the British. He continues to say that “we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight!” Emphasizing the fact that the nation as a whole should fight against the British for our freedom because there is no other way to gain our independence. To continue as an independent nation we had to unite and fight against the
Keller, H. (1916, January). Strike Against War. Speech Presented at Carnegie Hall, New York City, New York.
It had seemed that ambiguity was arise in the forming nation, and was still establishing a central ideal for political issues to which it had no precedent. Would the strategy be to declare to the public a message of brutal warfare against a savage nation? Or the protection of the United States and its freedoms by a self-defensive action of declaring war against its former ally? Both would be approached vigorously by Ames to attempt to inform the public and gather a central and nationalized view in order to succeed against these heinous a...
He gains their trust and respect, while appealing to their emotions to unite in their decision to fight for their freedom from the British. Through ethos and pathos appeals, Henry’s persuasive speech delivers his strong feelings toward the country and his fellow men. Henry’s speech is relevant even today and encouraging to anyone willing to stand up for what they believe in and fight for their
Churchill would add pauses such as throughout the quote, “sure I am that this day -- now we are the masters of our fate; that the task which has been set us is not above our strength; that its pangs and toils are not beyond our endurance(“Winston Churchill 'Masters of Our Fate' Speech to).” By adding these pauses Churchill added an additional weight to the situations and points brought up throughout the speech. This then revealed that Churchill had total control on the impact of certain parts of his speech. Which then points out that the pauses Churchill used could make a superior authority on the reactions of his audience. Strangely the usage of pauses Churchill entwines in his dialogue have a current effect on the world today because many politicians that currently influence the future fate of the world have copied Winston Churchill’s style of vocal
Later in the book, he again reflects on the war. He catalogs the proofs that he has been given — injured and half-starved countrymen — but persists in his existential doubt. He notes, “So we knew a war existed; we had to believe that, just as we had to believe that the name for the sort of life we had led for the last three years was hardship and suffering. Yet we had no proof of it. In fact, we had even less than no proof; we had had thrust into our faces the very shabby and unavoidable obverse of proof…” (94). Because he has not seen the battles, he has difficulty acknowledging the reality of war.
Through his speeches, he tried to persuade America to join in the fight against the growing power if Nazism. One of his speeches are “The Lights Are Going Out”. He said this speech in 1938, to the people of the United States. The purpose of his speech was to encourage the US to join forces with Britain to overtake Nazi Germany. The subject of his speech is the loss of other countries, and America joining the war, and the tone of the speech is urgency. Churchill’s word choices in his speech “The Lights Are Going Out” are effective through his use of rhetoric and vocal techniques.
... He showed his people in his speech that he was a strong leader and had the mindset to overcome a war. Not only did he appeal to ethos, but also he connected to his people emotionally through pathos. The King asked them to stand firm and unite in this time of trial. The King did not demand them to do this, rather asked this of them. By using this formal approach to reach out to the nation, he showed that he cared about them on a respective level. The King did not talk down to the nation when giving this speech. He made this speech as formal as possible because this speech was given one day before the outbreak of World War II and he wanted to show the nation he cared and they could overcome this time of terror. Through using these rhetorical devices, The King empowered the nation and reminded his citizens of their strength and abilities to overcome adversity in life.
The next day, Hitler said that the English response meant that the German attack would commenec on Britain in a few days. Looking back at how these events unfolded, everyone should be glad that Hitler made such a mistake. I, for one couldn't believe that Hitler made this mistake. Throughout reading this entire book Hitler usually makes swift, decisive actions that get results and that is why Lukacs stresses this string of events in the book.Overall, this book is wonderfully written on a very interesting topic. The reader is put in the middle of a war of nerves and will between two men, one of which we have grown up to learn to hate. This only makes us even more emotional about the topic at hand. For a history book, it was surprisingly understandable and hard to put down. It enlightened me to the complex problems that existed in the most memorable three months this century.
In order to fully comprehend the reasons for Churchill’s speech and the vast response of relief from the population, one must understand the events leading up to its giving. On June 4
In closing, W.D Howells is successful in his use of these methods of argument. “Editha” paints a clear picture of the men who must fight and the people who casually call for war. He proves Editha’s motives are unworthy of devotion. After all, it is easy to sit back and call for war when it will be the common enlisted man who will die to provide this luxury. In the end, Howells made his point clear. War never comes without sacrifice or consequence.
Winston Churchill was perhaps one of the greatest public speakers in history. Some of the best speeches have come from being in life or death situations, Winston was known best for this. His small sound clips like, “this was their finest hour”, and “this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning”, encourage his troops and his people that they will win this war and will overcome the greatest odds. Although Churchill told many speeches, his speech on June 18, 1940 showed the most emotion and courage of any other speech he told. In this speech he explained that the war in France is over and the war in Britain would begin. He said that if we fail then the world sink into an abyss. This emotion that he shows would give Britain hope, courage and most of all determination.
The Declaration can be viewed in many ways, at face value it could be seen as simply a document that declares the United States’ freedom from England. However, it can also be looked at as a propaganda piece, created to swing public opinion in favor of a revolution. This seems more and more likely when you look at how slavery was addressed in the document and how the British were addressing it at the same time.
He began talking about a survivor of a Jewish Concentration Camp. The survivor thought that he would never lead a normal life again, but he was very grateful for the anger that others felt when they saw the state of the people. He revealed in the next paragraph that the person in this story was him. This establishes his credibility and his knowledge of the topic. He concludes the introduction by thanking the Clintons for saying their actions to protect others around the world. In the next paragraphs, he begins to explain what spurred on his thought for this topic. The countless violence that the new generation must learn about and how indifference comes into play. It is to turn away from those in need than to take the initiative to do something about it. He then goes into examples of this and how wrong it is based on general morals, Christianity, and Judaism. He had many questions of ‘why’ and examples of indifference of the United States. As he himself was a victim of unjust circumstances, he understands how those in other countries feel as the US turns their back on them. However, he states he is seeing improvement in involvements of nations that could lend a hand to smaller nations with revolts, genocides, and terrorists. The Unites States was involved in almost all of them, so it was relevant and perhaps gave the president and listeners a sense of
Carl von Clausewitz, “What is War?” On War. Edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, 139. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.