1. What is the author arguing?
The author is arguing about the "race problem" in the Unites States. He talks about all of the actions taken which were suppose to crush the "race problem" which did not work. He also talks about promises made by a president which were broken, and how that same president said that he could not do something for blacks because a law had not been violated, but just a little while later he took action for whites who were going through almost the same things that the blacks were just going through. He also argues for the rights to citizenship for African Americans.
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?
Malcolm X mentions the actions that whites take for their own kind but not for African Americans which had an effect on their safety, how the police were letting their dogs bite "black women and black children and black babies in Birmingham, Alabama." This appeals to the logical part for the wrong morally that was done by the government and the action which was not taken. It also appeals to the emotional part by the harm and emotions that the black people had gone through from this experience, especially the babies being bitten by the police dogs.
3. What is the historical significance /relevance of this document?
During this time, blacks were suppose to already be treated as any other man, the "race problem" was suppose to already be gone but it was not. Malcolm X was the one who stood up for all blacks stating the facts that false promises were made to blacks, the actions that had been taken did not make a difference. Like Martin Luther King Jr, he had a impact on African Americans being discriminated much less. He was a great influence on many black people and still is to this day.
4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?
Malcolm X was very convincing. He made great points in all his speeches and opened up many eyes and spoke for many mouths. From his speeches you can tell that he was very motivated to stop discrimination and have every man be treated equal. He says "One white man named Lincoln supposedly fought the civil war to solve the race problem and the problem is still here...and then another white man named Kennedy came along, running for president, and told Negroes what all he was going to do for them if they voted for him, and they voted for him 80% , and he's been in office now for three years and the problem is still here." He also stated an incident that had happened which had made his speech even more convincing. His facts about events and discrimination that were going on in our nation and his clear motivation had made his speech very convincing.
Gurit, I agree that Malcolm X was cutting straight to the chase- it is quite clear that despite what was being said at the Federal level, very little was actually being done to correct the problems that African Americans faced. While his words may seem troubling and harsh, his point is extremely clear: the problem is still here. No amount of legislation, from Lincoln onward, was truly correcting the injustices built into society's structure. The fact that white people built an empire and a mythos based on their own privilege was entirely invisible to them, and Malcolm X took on the daunting task of trying to make that inequality apparent.
ReplyDeleteHis logic is quite clear; he has supporting evidence showing over and over again how when rights were being violated, whites were never there to actually enforce the laws that they kept saying were so important to them.
While Dr. King's speeches seemed "safer" and more approachable, these clips are raw and emotional. This is not to say that Dr. King's speeches lacked emotional impact- rather, that Malcolm X's delivery has a different sort of urgency that recognizes that his cause has been pushed aside for others agendas too long. His discussion of Black Nationalism makes clear that he is not willing to fight on the terms of the whites with all the power and privilege; he was going to redefine Nationalism on his own terms, because the prior terms were hypocritical and untenable. In this, he also recognizes that those who have power and privilege aren't going to give it up without a fight. He saw the violence erupt over and over when the status quo was challenged, and it is quite reasonable to think that African Americans should prepare themselves for the inevitability that this change would be difficult and even violent.