Elie Wiesel and Susan B. Anthony both delivered very impactful speeches that sought to address different issues. Elie Wiesel was concerned about the mass indifference towards victims of injustice and addressed this in the speech “The Perils of Indifference”. Susan B. Antony used the speech “Women’s Right to Suffrage” to address constraints limiting her constitutional right to vote due to her gender. Both these authors approach the issues of initiative and injustice with speeches that are impactful through personal experience, logical arguments, and emotional appeal.
In the speech ‘The Perils of Indifference’, Wiesel tries to highlight the danger that is present when people show lack of interest or sympathy for afflictions facing others. Wiesel is a Holocaust survivor who has firsthand experience of the plight caused by cleansing and genocide. Wiesel’s speech implores the audience to avoid being indifferent to victims of injustice and malice, and this was the main theme explored in the speech. Wiesel’s main strategy in affecting his audience was by connecting to their emotions and logical facts, by pulling up memories of the pain and sharing them, alongside using other significant historical events. The author hoped that the twenty-first century would be more tolerant and compassionate towards victims of injustice ( Wiesel, 1999 ). He brings out the active role of observers of cruelty in injustice by mentioning that society consists of the perpetrators, victims, and bystanders. The author also explores the theme of condemnation and regret in the speech when he notes that all injustices that are perpetrated in the current era will be judged negatively by future generations and will have effects on humanity down the line ( Wiesel, 1999) .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Anthony’s speech was directed at the general public and it addressed women’s denial of the right to vote. The main themes explored in this speech are injustice and equality. The author failed to understand why women were excluded from the voting process and she confronted this by explaining that the constitution covers voting for women as well as men. She appeals to the sense of nationality of the audience by emphasizing that she feels her rights are taken away from her. The fact that the preamble of the United States said ‘We the people’ meant that women were entitled to voting since they were people ( Anthony, 1873 ). Anthony went to challenge traditional perceptions on the role of women in politics and highlighted the denial of this right as an injustice ( Kohan, 2012 ). She then goes back to her arrest which she calls a violation of the law and which forms the logical base of her argument. She uses this to create an appeal to her audience’s emotion by referring to this treatment as hateful and also by asking her audience to treat women equally since’ women are persons’ ( Anthony, 1873 ).
The speeches by Anthony and Wiesel have several similarities. For starters, both authors are keen on passivity that surrounds them and have a firsthand experience to the injustices that they address. While Anthony’s issue on voting was due to a biased societal interpretation of the law, Wiesel’s concern on injustice was more moral and due to complacency. Both these authors appealed to their audience to abandon the passive role they assumed while witnessing injustice and to be more active while demanding justice for marginalized groups. Additionally, both authors used the advantage of having experienced injustice and oppression to stir emotion in their audiences. Both of them express their feelings when they were undermined to cause the listener to understand the effects of the injustices. Both of these speeches use rhetoric questions that engage the listener and forces them to decide where they stand on the issue being addressed. The main difference in the two pieces is that while Anthony’s speech called for immediate action and reforms, Wiesel advocated for the same sense of action and mindfulness for future unjust events.
Both these speakers used powerful speeches, with vivid imagery and rhetoric questions to engage the audience. Additionally, the authors used emotional words and experiences to affect the resolutions of their listeners. When these tools were coupled with sound logical arguments, these speeches were effective in encouraging justice and active involvement of the audience in achieving reforms.
References
Anthony, S. B. (1873). On women’s right to vote. Lend Me Your Ears: Great Speeches in History , 694-695.
Kohan, S. (2012). A Rhetorical Criticism of Susan B. Anthony’s Speech on Women’s Right to Vote.
Wiesel, E. (1999). The perils of indifference. Washington, DC, April , 12 .
