Cesar Chavez, a labor union organizer and civil rights leader, explains to his audience why nonviolent resistances are more effective than a violent one would be. Concluding this statement, he does this through his use of illustrating how if we do this, then that will be the result. He also introduces how Dr. King and Ghandi got what they were looking to accomplish done through peace. First, throughout the magazine article Cesar uses pathos to define the outcomes of “If we do this” or “If we do that”, then there will be a result to appeal to his reader’s inner emotions. In paragraph 4, he says, “If we resort to violence, then one two things will happen”, he finishes by explaining the forecast of how the violence will advance and could potentially result in injuries, death, and possible demoralization. By explaining the consequences that could become it redirects his audience to want to try prevent things like above to happen to them as well …show more content…
In lines 33-35 he says, “If we are committed to nonviolence only as a strategy or tactic, then if it fails our only alternative is to turn to violence.”. This is an important quote to acknowledge because it recognizes that the author knows if all we use is nonviolent ways to get to our goal, and it doesn’t work that the only other option is to resort to harmful ways. To prevent the use for our last option Cesar suggest balancing our strategy with a vivid understanding of what the goal is that they are working towards. He uses Ghandi as an example to represent how he and his followers were lead to victory. Ghandi lead is people by explaining how we should go about getting the change and what they wanted in the end. Emphasizing this in Chavez’s article helps clarify to the readers that explanation and visualization can get you closer to your