[Name of Supervisor]
[Subject]
[Date]
“Beyond Vietnam-A Time to Break Silence” Rhetorical Analysis
Introduction
In this paper the speech “Beyond Vietnam” of Martin Luther king will be analyzed through the framework of Neo-Aristotelian criticism. Using the approach, the context of the speech will be analyzed according to the classical cannon of rhetorical. The impacts of dialogues on the audience will also be evaluated. In order to completely identify the context of the speech the speech can be broken down into three areas that are the occasion, the rhetoric and the audience.
Discussion
When Martin Luther King in 1967 did not want to mention the Vietnam War and "broke the silence," he brought the rhetoric of the establishment, with regard to 'America's mission in Southeast Asia', into a tailspin. His speech was titled "Beyond Vietnam: Time to Break the Silence '. He held this speech in Manhattan's Riverside Church. After more than 40 years, it still sounds revolutionary (Hansen, p. 175-177).
Martin Luther King brings the Vietnam War in relation to the Poverty Program of the government. Because of this program, the black population had a hope to improve their situation, the intervention of the United States in the war in Indochina, however, made an end to all those hopes. Exorbitant sums were from now on in the war - rather than in the Poverty Program - invested. Martin Luther King, it was necessary to see that "the war was an enemy of the poor people." Martin Luther King accuses the government to solve their problems with violence, which would have never solved problems, but have only brought more violence. He also criticized the conduct of the war, the poisoning of the water, the burning of houses, the murder of civilians - mostly children. It therefore calls on the Government to stop the bombardment of North and South Vietnam immediately. In addition to the ceasefire be declared to allow negotiations. All foreign troops should be withdrawn from Vietnam to meet the Geneva Convention of 1954. Even Martin Luther King asks each individual to protest the war.
At that time, Martin Luther King the advice of some of his closest advisers to the wind and took a politically risky and unpopular stance: He compared the devastation caused by the Vietnam War with the destruction that an richtete racial segregation in American society. And he compared the freedom struggle of the Vietnamese people with the freedom struggle of the 'colored' communities across America. Many civil rights representative / inside before King had joined the theme 'Equal opportunities for non-whites' with the theme 'Patriotism' (King,1-22). But King realized how sick the Vietnam War, which flourished like a cancer. But Kings Statements are sometimes distorted and abused. His comments on 'Zionism' were also modified so that they support the Israeli aggression in the Occupied Territories. Kings early death confronts us with the difficult task of interpreting his legacy and to ensure its international spread.
King began his preaching equal greeting which dedicated and distinguished ministers of the Gospel, gathered there, to all gatherers workers and their families. The Black community was represented by a huge crowd: there were workers, militants Civil Rights and church members African-American. One of the most important aspects evident in the words of King is the relationship of their presence there with the need visible to the claim of the workers. He uses his status as a preacher like in his statements. He also speaks of Langston Hughes, someone of great importance. And if that didn't convince his audience he spoke of God and what God thinks. Dr. King used these examples to speak “of the moral responsibility of those whose knowledge and world views had brought them to deeper understandings of the issues facing humanity”
Though it was not his intentions, but his speech did anger many people. He explained his reasons upon which he was against the Vietnam War and why he is opposing that brutal event. He also explained the connection of war to the efforts of civil rights in America (Hansen, p. 175-177). There were evidences according to which the King was against the war even before but he could not speak of it due to some pressure Michael Honey, scholar's speeches Martin Luther King, notes that despite the little experience of leading contexts strike, this time had the ability to arouse the attention and excitement of public, exposing their ideas methodical and building a dynamic in that his words gave rise also to voices of the audience, which responded with cheers and slogans. The author highlights besides the fact that King was not that days prior written discourse, but "Sketched a few words in a paper ", which would have been a important dose of spontaneity in their said, and might even think that some of ideas and proposals that he said were happening (Reaves, pp. 30).
There are two fundamental aspects that are emerging in the speech of Dr. King and illustrate very clearly the situation of their visit to Memphis: one has to do with the particular time spanning the African-American movement at that Then, the second related to that is linked with the ideas himself King was developing and emphasizing, that is, with the evolution of its thoughts and proposal The first element is reflected by the reference King makes permanent the question of the motion unit along its entire speech, underlined in his words. Second primary element that comes into play in the speech is about that in those days, King began to focus their concern around the problem of poverty, as mentioned, was not rescue for work of Civil Rights laws. In fact, when invited to Memphis, he was planning a Poor People's Campaign, a campaign of the working poor and unemployed, that involucres to also targets more low income. King Sought to turn the civil rights movement Toward An Economic Agenda that would finally address black economic demands that the United States had neglected ever since Reconstruction. At the same time, a massive mobilization to Washington, and that qualified as part of a second phase the struggle of African Americans, with the first one addressed to achieve equality civil (Shujaa, pp.179-89).
This gives the idea that, by going to Memphis, Martin Luther King was in the conflict of the gatherers, cutting simultaneously racial and economic, and the movement formed around him, the confirmation of their belief in the need to put the emphasis on combating poverty, giving him a reconstruction c ion deep in American society. Thus, King understood that the conditions strikers Memphis typified the harsh reality faced poor black workers and the unemployed across America and Thus spoke the problem to the Memphis as the expression of a national problems, stressing that the Most blacks in the United States were poor, not only the unemployed but especially workers perceived low wages, and by contrasting with such poverty permanently abundance of resources available to the country, King characterized as fact "Criminal".
As contrasts, metaphors, hyperboles and euphemisms Luther King constantly appeals to iconic and widely respected sources as the Bible and invokes the Declaration of Independence of the United States, the Emancipation Proclamation and the Constitution of the United States. It also draws on countless occasions to metaphor. On the other hand the effectiveness of the speech “Beyond Vietnam” is hard to measure. Unlike, I have a dream; it was greatly criticized by the media which tagged it as a demographic slander. His speech was also said to be the one in which the king has weakened his value to his country, his people and his cause (Cohen & Solomon, 1995).
The denouncing of the speech is not strange by the media because his words morally challenged the dominated of U.S all over the world (Reed, pp.150). As rhetoric, his speech and the effective words were able to accomplish his goals as a rhetoric. Its effectiveness can be measured by the idea of the society and the media to slander it. He wanted to break the silence and speak the truth and to expose the corruption and injustice of United States even by taking apart the rhetoric stereotypical war (Allah, pp. 30). Any part of the speech does not fall into the genre of the war rhetoric rather it is deliberately oppose the stereotype (David, pp. 35-76). The rhetoric of the king are so effective that its commemoration might had chances to dethrone the powers of that time which could result in an fixing of a modernized and reorganized social region.
King, uses rhetoric of parallelism tool, uses the same initial wording of a sequence of statements or phrases to add emphasis, order, or climax to an idea (Campbell & Huxman, 2002). His speech can be compared with another of his famous speech “I Have a Dream”. The most cited example of parallelism is found in the phrase "I have a dream ..." which is repeated eight times when Luther King describes his audience of a U.S. integrated and united. Martin Luther King, "I have a Dream" showed a gaunt face, however the strength of his speech rested on the words, sober black suit, reflecting a medium high status, which at that time the ordinary black citizen in United States, could not, did not have. The images of the speech focused on social semiotics, showed panning from right to left of black and white citizens, children and youth, adults and seniors, Muslim, Protestant or Catholic, were from all social classes, ethnic, cultural and religious. Shots areas reflected sense of freedom, at times altering shots concentration closed at that time exceeded the 200 000 inhabitants: Kress and Van Leeuwen (The relationship between language and images in their determination to realize the figures). Despite being Reverend and discuss lead his people by the power of reason, Luther King, repeatedly spoke of facing a struggle to take them to justice, real justice and not divine.
Conclusion
There is a Martin Luther King, we do not know from our basic textbooks: King, a human rights activist, the generations of resistance movements - whether in our prisons and on death row in the Horn of Africa - connects. Many of his followers were more radical in their choice of words, or are off course a strategy of nonviolence. Martin Luther King's message against the war will remain. So was quoted in several pan-African comments on the forthcoming independence referendum in Southern Sudan (this month) and Martin Luther King. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who is proud to be an enemy of the U.S. hegemony, praised King recently as 'martyrs'.
Works Cited
"King's Call for a 'Revolution of Values'." National Catholic Reporter (2007), p. 24
Allah, M."King Struggle Continues." New York Amsterdam News (2007), pp. 30
David A. B. The Rhetoric of Redemption: Kenneth Burke's Redemption Drama and Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" Speech. Rowman & Littlefield (2004), pp. 35-76
Hansen, D, D. The Dream: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Speech that Inspired a Nation. New York, NY: Harper Collins. (2003). p. 175-177.
King, Jr., Martin Luther. "Beyond Vietnam--A Time to Break Silence." American Rhetoric: Online Speech Bank. Avaialbale from
King, W. M. “Reemerging Revolutiosnary Consciousness of The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.” The Journal of Negro History. 71.No. 1/4 (1986): 1-22
Reaves, B. "Time to Break Silence: An Interview with Dr. King." New York Amsterdam News 88.6 (1997), pp. 30.
Reed, H. A. “Martin Luther King, Jr.: History and Memory, Reflections on Dreams and Silences” The Journal of Negro History. 8.2 (1999), pp. 150.
Shujaa, M.J. "The Widening Gap between Education and Schooling in the Post 9/11 Era” The Journal of Negro Education. 72.2 (2003), pp.179-89
Young, S.B. "President Lyndon B. Johnson's Vietnam War Disengagement Strategy." Vietnam (2006).