The populist leaders of Latin American countries fought vigorously against the strong-headed elites and foreign countries who had the power, wealth, and prestige to undermine populist rule. Populism was a new political tool and movement that was of the people. The leaders had to be charismatic and would often pledge to yield to the concerns of the masses who they wanted support from. Two of those leaders include, Getúlio Vargas and Hugo Chávez whom hold very similar views regarding the working-class masses and the imperialism inflicted upon them by the United States. Despite their similar targeted followers of the working-class, they had contrasting issues of focus they wanted to get across. In Vargas’s, “A Consummate Speechwriter,” he wanted …show more content…
To counteract his more adamant strategies, he used populism to gain the people’s support by making reforms relating to health, salaries, and resources. This populist leader clearly “understood the importance of the growing proletariat in Brazil” and implemented all his plans to give immediate benefits to the workers in order to instantly gain all their support. In his notes and instructions for his press secretary, Lourival Fontes, he made it blatantly clear to avoid any slang language or “stilted wording” because he wanted to keep his sentences short and simple. The intention was to make his industrial workers and the rest of the masses to understand and feel like they were at the same standing as their leader. In order to continue having the support the populist leader needed, he wanted to make an impression that was not academic or considered too proper for his intended audience, whom a majority did not have a proper education, which meant most were illiterate. The absence of proper education is being indirectly addressed by Vargas because he constructs the syntax and diction of his speeches so the masses could relate and understand. He places focus on the equality between all his people no matter race, he says “there are no superior or inferior races, nor races of masters and slaves” which is a controversial issue …show more content…
Chavez had a quarry relationship with the United States and their president in 2006, which was George W. Bush. In his speech to the United Nations, he focused on the U.S. imperialism that President George W. Bush was trying to persuade the other world leaders as beneficial. He constantly refers to Bush as the “devil” who came to endorse “domination, exploitation and pillage over the peoples of the world” and those are institutional concepts that Chavez would not allow in his country or any others in Latin America. Throughout his address, the diction Chavez led with was colloquial in a sense that the tone he set was humorous and made his audience laugh. There is great importance when looking at the approach Chavez took when speaking to all the other world leaders; making them feel united and being able to enjoy themselves was a great tactic to ensure the effectiveness of his speech. Chavez also employed common ground, he depicted George W. Bush as the universal enemy which aided him into stating all the issues within his country that he wanted to
Featured by his nonviolent actions (boycotts, pickets, and strikes), Chavez accomplished his last fight in 1988, in a 36-day fast. Risking his life, he inspired people who supported to believe in a world of equality. Furthermore, Chavez accomplishments brought a new community and environment to Mexican
Hey, Snapchat I 'm Jose Garcia Perez, I make short comedy snaps on this social media platform I realized that there are multiple accounts impersonating me. This is affecting me and my fans which can possibly direct them to a fake or a fraud account I want to know if there is a way to fix this solution if there is fix please don 't hesitate to message me by email. Thank you Snapchat for your
Emphasizing on comparison, Zavas uses a point-by-point pattern of development to inform the reader about cultural differences in the workplace. Zavas organizes his essay according to points of comparison rather than subjects being compared. Zavas focuses on 3 main points of comparison, attitude about arrivals and departures, meal times and dress code formality in the work place. Zavas pleas to his intended audience, the Canadian born-blue collar worker, “When a new immigrant arrives in your workplace, show tolerance and respect for cultural differences.” (186).
In Equiano's personal slave narrative, "The Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African", Equiano flips the idea that the African people are backwards and barbaric, thus ripe for slavery, by demonstrating his personal exceptionalism through his literacy to show that it is truly the white people who are backwards and barbaric through their own hypocrisy. This reversal that Equiano demonstrates in his slave narrative shows that the savagery of African people exists as a misconception and makes the reader fully grasp the need to abolish slavery and any inequality present. On page seventy-eight, Equiano uses first person pronouns like 'I', 'my', and 'me' to separate himself from the other African people and whites around him. This separation that Equiano creates demonstrates his exceptionalism as an African slave.
In this essay you will learn more about how and why he was such a good leader and why so many people looked up to him. Chavez was never a rich man. When he was a kid him and his family packed up from arizona and went to california. They only had 40 dollars to there name. He had to have a lot of courage to move at such a young age and to survive during this time was extremely difficult.
To begin with, Chavez uses logos in his speech through a rhetorical question, “Who gets killed in the case of violent revolution? The poor, the workers.” The people who are arguing for violent revolutions are mostly poor workers whom Chavez refers to. Chavez uses logic to show these people that if they use violent revolts, they are most likely the ones going to be killed which for the most part will deter the people who are aiming for this. Another appeal Chavez uses is ethos to show everyone as people we are expected to do the right thing.
He insists on the fact that inhumane vengeance will lead to injury and death, as well as “demoralization”. This argument is greatly supported by the death of Dr. King Jr; his view of nonviolence helped to grow and mature the farm worker’s movement. Civil workers are guilted into supporting their fallen hero in order to fulfill his dying wish. Chavez instructs them to “overcome… [their] frustrations” and support their causes through methods of peaceful protests. Chavez, appealing to their sense of emotion, manages to persuade a disconnected society by desperately wanting to avenge Dr. King’s untimely
One of Chavez’s most well-known protests is the Delano Grape Strike. Chavez is well known for this individual strike because he was specifically asked from the Filipinos, who were the peoples that were affected so they started the strike because of bad pay (90 cents an hour) and horrible working conditions. Cesar accepted the invitation from the Filipinos because he felt as though this strike could have been helpful towards his protesting causes. This strike focused on the pay, working conditions, and the land owner’s violent actions towards the farm workers. Cesar new the fight for these rights was not going to end anytime soon.
Chavez asserts repeatedly that nonviolence is the only way for change to happen. The repeated use of “we”, “us” and “our” conveys the message to the audience that he is one of them. Chavez can relate to the farm workers based on his credibility (ethos) because of his past. Chavez went to work on the farm fields at a young age and knew exactly how the frustrated workers felt.
Mentioning Gandhi, and stating his thought son the best ways peacefully cause change. This is showing the audience that Chavez realizes that these men have proved their methods the best, and he doesn't want to change them just try to use them for the benefit of the people. “ The boycott, as Gandhi taught, is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolent change, allowing masses of people to participate actively in a cause”. This quote really does work so well because of the organization that is used by Chavez to convey Gandhi’s message. If Chavez had not eased this very power quotes into is writing, they would not have been hear the same way.
Past leaders such as Andrew Jackson, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Marc Antony are evidence that society does not reward morality and good character in leadership. Society is drawn to leaders that have good rhetoric, propaganda, and charismatic personalities, and society supports them despite their immorality. Society is concerned about stability more than the morality of their leaders and will support immoral leaders in times of crisis to provide stability. In history there have been multiple leaders that have used rhetoric, propaganda and charismatic personalities to gain power, despite their morals.
During the Chicano Nationalist Movement, a well-known speaker, Rodolfo ‘Corky’ Gonzales, delivered a speech titled Chicano Nationalism: Victory for La Raza. In this speech, Rodolfo Gonzales tries to unify the Latin American people within the United States by using the idea of a family and to create a new political organization for the Chicano people. This speech was a cumulation of various ideas which stemmed from his own life, the experiences of the Chicano people, and the Chicano Nationalist Movement in general. Each of these factors contributed to the context of the speech and how the ideas within the speech are presented by Rodolfo Gonzales. Rodolfo ‘Corky’ Gonzales was born to Federico and Indalesia Gonzales, two Mexican immigrants, on June 18, 1928.
For this book review, I am going to be talking about David Montejano’s book entitled Quixote’s Soldiers, A local history of the Chicano Movement, 1966-1981. The author’s purpose is very well explained and it is not hard to understand. The author clearly tries to explain different ideologies, individuals and organizations located in one of the Southwest’s major cities, San Antonio, Texas, during the late 1960s and early 190s. All these varieties mentioned above made possible that a movement was created called Chicano Movement, a group that David Montejano provides a deeply understanding and description of the movement during the reading of the book. Since, the city was governed by a tough Anglosocial elite that was firmly convinced in the way
Often known as the Father of American Literature to many educated individuals, Ralph Waldo Emerson in his oration “The American Scholar” brilliantly provides a sublime example of how Emerson earned his title through the appliance of diction, syntax, allusions, and many other rhetorical devices and strategies. Indicated towards his highly educated audience, the Phi Beta Kappa Society, Emerson introduces the idea that the common class and common concepts of everyday life are becoming the future of art and literature through purpose, credibility, and tone. As many great writers, Emerson does not simply tell about his idea, but instead uses rhetorical strategies to help show his central point, one such strategy being purpose. Being focused on informing his audience of the coming days, the use of purpose can be
In this article, Javier Corrales looks at the topic of regimes; hybrid, autocratic, authoritarian, democratic etc. Corrales presents us with two major questions. “What are the mechanisms by which a competitive authoritarian regime turns more autocratic?” And “What were the causes of Venezuela’s rapid move toward greater authoritarianism, especially in the last five years of Chavismo?” This article mostly examines Venezuela at the turn of 1999, when Hugo Chavez took office.