Analysis Of Elie Wiesel's Perils Of Indifference

In the speech, “Perils of Indifference,” Elie Wiesel, the author of Night, conveys his message that indifference entices inhumanity as a lack of acknowledgement to one’s suffering is advantageous to an assailant and provides “no elicit response.” Therefore, the individual with a sense of indifference is a determining factor in others’ distress for the reason that without involvement, the victim will never be assisted. Sentiments of anger and hatred possess the ability to endorse positive conclusions, however indifference incites no reaction because of the absence of participation. Wiesel develops his claim by providing a series of background information to display credibility and personal experiences to amplify the emotions of the audience.
He calls the American public to act against the atrocities produced by indifference using rhetorical questions, tragedies of children, and once more the Jewish boy to emphasize the obligation of people in the future in the event of violence. Throughout the speech, Wiesel has prompted the audience to avoid indifference; however, it is at this section that the listeners are tested on whether they will be involved to aid the people in distress or simply avoid. He claims that the U.S. finally intervened in the Kosovo war, which enabled countless lives to be saved. However, Wiesel questions his audience: “Does it mean that we have learned from our past? Does it mean that society has changed? Has the human being become less indifferent and more human? Have we really learned from our experiences? Are we less insensitive to the plight of victims of ethnic cleansing and other forms of injustices in places near and far?” These rhetorical questions prompt the audience to “become less indifferent and more human” and realize the faults in the 20th century. The addition of the Kosovo war indicates that Wiesel has some reassurance that people have overcome indifference. The public will be inclined to ask these questions to themselves, influencing their future choices on the account of witnessing or involvement. Also, he appeals to the American public emotionally by speaking of the children’s tragic future prompting several of the audience members to relate as they have their own children and therefore feel obligated to contribute to a child’s well-being by not participating in indifference, which is ultimately the speaker’s