Rhetorical Analysis Of Elie Wiesel's Speech

Wiesel pinpoints the indifference of humans as the real enemy, causing further suffering and lost to those already in peril. Wiesel commenced the speech with an interesting attention getter: a story about a young Jewish from a small town that was at the end of war liberated from Nazi rule by American soldiers. This young boy was in fact himself. The first-hand experience of cruelty gave him credibility in discussing the dangers of indifference; he was a victim himself.

In Weiesel's own life, he faced indifference head-on when he was in the Nazi concentration camp. For example, when Wiesel was in the camp he felt “abandoned by humanity” Wiesel (8) because everyone turned the other cheek and left the Jews out to dry. With no help until the American troops got to them. Another example that Wiesel noted in his speech is that indifference is “always the friend of the enemy”. This means that the perpetrator always wins in the world of indifference because the person or people that are being put down and mistreated don't have the strength and power to help themselves get help or be free.

In the middle of Wiesel's plea to the government Logos began to appear in his words and effectively strengthened his tone and the assertiveness in his voice. “Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response. Indifference is not a beginning; it is an end. And, therefore, indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor -- never his victim, whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten.

“In a way, to be indifferent to that suffering is what makes the human being inhuman. Indifference, after all, is more dangerous than anger and hatred.” In a way, indifference is the greatest danger one may come across. The thoughts of helplessness and feeling exiled is enough to drive a normal person completely off the rails. So Wiesel's statement is first hand proof yet again that indifference is more than just someone not providing the care you need: it's enough to make someone completely give up on life and lose all hope they may have

Elie Wiesel maintains a strong desire to spread awareness and create a small pool of guilt for the bystanders. Although the majority of bystanders didn’t wish pain upon the Jews, they chose to do nothing, standing on the sidelines while innocent people died. Elie emphasizes his opinion by repeating a word that has a great impact. “Indifference” is a strong word that expresses a heavy connotation. The word itself means no difference but is used negatively, ironically creating a bigger difference between people.

The second way is that Wiesel used real world connections to when indifference affected our world. For example when Elie said, “These failures have cast a dark shadow over humanity: two World Wars, countless civil wars, the senseless chain of assassinations- Gandhi, the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, Sadat, Rabin”(Perils of Indifference). It is a very good strategy to use because it makes what they are saying feel real and matter. If he hadn’t given examples, then we wouldn’t have truly thought about that indifference is actually real and not just something that could affect our future. The last main way that Elie

Jewish writer, Elie wiesel in his brave speech, The Perils of Indifference, asserts that indifference is a bad thing, a sin, because why would someone want everybody looking the same. No one would have their own unique personality, everybody would be bland. He supports his claim by explaining that indifference is inhumane and to create awareness so that way everybody can know that it's good to be different. Also to persuade people not to be indifferent, that we should be our own kind of person, unique, we can define indifference so that way others are aware of its effects that way then can do something about it. Wiesel’s purpose is to inform people that indifference is bad in order to encourage us to not feel bad about ourselves.

This was an effective strategy because it makes the reader think about the consequences of being indifferent. This ties the idea together that being indifferent only benefits the aggressor because the victim loses hope, which gives the aggressor more power. Wiesel (1999) used rhetorical questions like, "Does it mean that we have learned from the past? Does it mean that society has changed? Has the human being become less indifferent and more human?

The general statement made by Elie Wiesel in his speech, The Perils of Indifference, is that indifference is sinful. More specifically, Wiesel argues that awareness needs to be brought that indifference is dangerous. He writes “Indifference is not a beginning, it is an end”. In this speech, Wiesel is suggesting that indifference is dangerous it can bring the end to many lives. In conclusion Wiesel's belief is suggesting that indifference is an end, it needs to be noticed and taken care of.

Elie Wiesel emphasizes throughout "The Perils of Indifference" how choosing to ignore the suffering of others only produces more misery, more prejudice, and more grief—and it also imperils the very humanity of those who choose to do so. Wiesel also noted that in the

In Perils of Indifference Wiesel talks about indifference. He directly tells us, “indifference can be tempting ­­ more than that, seductive. It is so much easier to look away from victims. It is so much easier to avoid such rude interruptions to our work, our dreams, our hopes. It is, after all, awkward, troublesome, to be involved in another person's pain and despair”( Perils Of Indifference).

In the speech, titled “The Perils of Indifference,” Elie Wiesel showed gratitude to the American people, President Clinton, and Mrs. Hillary Clinton for the help they brought and apprised the audience about the violent consequences and human suffering due to indifference against humanity (Wiesel). This speech was persuasive. It was also effective because it conveyed to the audience the understanding of

Wiesel’s speech shows how he worked to keep the memory of those people alive because he knows that people will continue to be guilty, to be accomplices if they forget. Furthermore, Wiesel knows that keeping the memory of those poor, innocent will avoid the repetition of the atrocity done in the future. The stories and experiences of Wiesel allowed for people to see the true horrors of what occurs when people who keep silence become “accomplices” of those who inflict pain towards humans. To conclude, Wiesel chose to use parallelism in his speech to emphasize the fault people had for keeping silence and allowing the torture of innocent

When the young boy asks, “Who would allow such crimes to be committed? How could the world remain silent”, (paragraph 5) again the audience is prompted to emotionally respond. They have to realize that it was all of them, all of us, who remained silent and that this silence must never happen again. Wiesel demonstrates a strong use of pathos throughout his speech to encourage his audience to commit to never sitting silently by while any human beings are being treated

Although indifference can be very dangerous, Wiesel begins to explain how good things have happened in this century. By using a counter argument, it shows Wiesel knows a lot about this topic, which also makes him more