ENTERING THE CONVERSATION

1. Both Martin Luther King (p. 355) and Nelson Mandela (p. 364) worked to change not just unjust laws but the belief systems that allowed those laws to exist. In other words, they had to leverage pathos to change hearts, and logos to change laws. Revisit the speeches by King and Mandela, and discuss whether one speaker relies more on one appeal than the other speaker, and how audiences may have contributed to these rhetorical choices.

2. Both Thomas Paine (p. 374) and Nelson Mandela (p. 364) recognize that the political changes they are calling for will likely require violence. Revisit both of their texts, and then compare and contrast the degree and magnitude of the changes that Paine and Mandela seem to be suggesting are necessary in order to achieve their political ends.

3. Like Mandela in his statements before his trial, Paine (p. 374) offers reasons why taking arms against the ruling political power is not only justified, but necessary. Select two significant moments from both the Paine and Mandela arguments, and discuss the ways in which the attitude of each speaker shows ambition as well as restraint. Use textual evidence from each passage in your response.

4. The pieces by Carrie Chapman Catt (p. 383) and Malala Yousafzai (p. 378) both call for women’s rights, in one case to vote, in the other to education. Revisit these speeches and analyze how each speaker challenges the men in her audience to change their positions, without alienating them. What rhetorical strategies do Catt and Yousafzai employ to maintain this crucial balance? In what ways are their strategies different and in what ways are they similar?

5. Both Nelson Mandela (p. 364) and Old Major, from Orwell’s Animal Farm (p. 388) call for the use of force to overcome oppression. Revisit each text, and compare the ways each speaker justifies the use of violence as a response to oppression.

1. All of the texts in this Conversation are in response to very specific circumstances, yet they all include ideas that transcend the particular issue they are addressing. Revisit the speeches and identify a universal theme that at least three speakers address. Then, in a well-organized essay, explain how each of the speakers addresses the theme you identified. Also identify the rhetorical strategies each speaker uses to effectively argue his or her point.

2. Many of the texts in this Conversation contain references to religion or faith, even though most of the speakers are not religious leaders. Select three of the texts in this Conversation, identify the references to faith or religion in each of the texts, and write an essay in which you analyze how these references are used to advocate political change.

3. What rhetorical moves do these calls for change share? What makes an effective voice of rebellion? What, in your mind, makes some of the texts in this Conversation more effective than others?

4. You have read pieces by leaders calling for change through peaceful means and by force. In a well-reasoned response, argue whether a peaceful approach to change is effective in the long run, or whether lasting change must ultimately involve violence. Use specific examples from the texts in this Conversation to support your argument.

5. In this Conversation, we hear only the voices of the oppressed calling for justice. What sort of rhetoric do the powerful use? Choose one or two of the texts in this Conversation and research speeches or responses from those on the other side of the issue. What characterizes their rhetoric, and how does it differ from the voice of rebellion?

6. Each of the texts in this Conversation advocates for significant political and social changes. Without referencing the specific speaker, create a political poster using images and a slogan that capture a main argument in each of the speeches. Share the posters with your peers and ask them to decide which poster accompanies each of the speeches, justifying their reasons for pairing each poster with the speech with which they think it belongs.