I Have A Dream Speech Misinterpreted

465 Words2 Pages
In the interview “Was MLK's 'I Have a Dream' Speech Misinterpreted?”, Professor Rieder argues that Martin Luther King’s memorable speech “I Have a Dream” contains violent elements which function like weapon in his rhetorical strategy in order to attain the purpose of democracy in America during civil rights movement. In the video, Professor Rieder firstly quoted King’s one famous sentence from this speech “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character,” and he interprets that King was not living in the nation he was. Otherwise, he would feel the sign of democracy in America in 1960s. He also points out that “MLK is a fire creator.” Professor Rieder thinks King was using his ethnicity…show more content…
Foley argues that if rhetoric is persuasive, it also contains elements of violence in her scholarly paper “Of Violence And Rhetoric: An Ethical Aporia.” She believes that rhetoric plays a crucial role in persuasion. For example, she explains that persuasion is like an involuntary force that can compel people against their desires, which acts same as violence in the field of ethical action. In King’s speech, he tried to give his audiences a sense that all African American who are oppressed are victims of American imperial society. “ One hundred years later; the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land,” King tells his audiences that African Americans are not treated equally in the land they are currently living. This quote seems conflictive that citizens of a country themselves feel they are exiled by their homeland. If this quote is interpret in another way, it seems that King is warning African Americans that they should stand for their civil rights from now. King applied a good rhetorical technique to persuade followers of his ideology to join the war with
Open Document