Rhetorical Analysis Of There's A 'Ferguson' Near You

1.
The first article, ”There’s a ”Ferguson” near you” published in USA Today in 2014 by Jesse L. Jackson, a African-American civil rights activist, has an impartial approach to the subject of the racial unrest in Ferguson, but at the same time urges the reader to call for justice not only at Ferguson but also everywhere else. Jackson has her starting point at Michael Brown, a teenager killed by the police for causes that are still unknown. Slowly Jackson goes up the ladder of abstraction from Michael Brown to other black men, to Ferguson and at last to all the suburban and rural parts of America. Jackson finds the cause of the conflict to be the deterioration of these parts of America. She claims that independently of the racial demographics of Ferguson, it is undergoing a typical development for small communities - It has a hard working middle class and a growing lower class. Jackson blames this on politicians and tells that both Republicans and Democrats should be focusing on development and not just containment of the suburban and rural communities. She underlines that there are many problems in America right now, for example the rising poorness, high unemployment and inadequate investment in the youth. At last she call on her audience
to not just demand justice and equality at Ferguson, but everywhere, because a threat to injustice and inequality anywhere is a threat everywhere. Although she calls for a riot, she mentions that looting and vandalism is not demanding justice and will only clouds the real issue.
The second article is unanimous with the first by the fact that the racial conflict applies to everyone, and not just the ones who are directly a part of the conflict. It is an article from the American News site “The Huffington Post” called “What White People Can Do About the Killing of Black Men in America” by Paul Raushenbush. The article focuses a lot on race, and on how the blacks are the victims but that the whites should join the fight for justice, like in the civil rights movement 50 years ago. Raushenbush calls the problem an “epidemic of black deaths in America (l. 110)” He, and another pastor of the name Reverend Tony Lee also calls out social media as a part of the problem because rather than tweeting hashtags they should be focusing on organizing a movement. Raushenbush and Lee also claims that the portrayal of blacks in the media is one of the things that keep blacks from being equal to whites. For example, Lee argues that everyone should dissociate themselves from the criminalized depiction of black people in movies and music.
The third article, “Ferguson’s horrors: Riots achieve nothing” written in New York Post by Rich Lowry, argues that both the rioters and the Ferguson police are fighting an unrestrained public-relations war, that has nothing to do with justice. This way his arguments are nearly the same as Jesse Jacksons but he is far more negative in addition to the Ferguson problem. Given that there are antithetical testimonies in the Michael Brown case, he think he best resolution is going to trial and not nightly confrontations between protesters and police.
He lists negatives actions in both groups.
About the protesters he comments on them stealing and destroying property – the same arguments as in text one. While he claims that the highly militarized teams used to control the crowds are inappropriate to domestic police work As well as that, Lowry criticizes the police force for handling the press badly, giving examples of improper tear-gassing and arrests. However, he refutes his claim by opposing the critic of the military gear, by telling that riot police should not be “cute and cuddly” regardless of their uniforms. Lowry ends his article by claiming that the formula for calm in Ferguson is simply to let justice take its course – a claim he does not seem to substantiate in any
way.
2.
Paul Raushenbush uses most of his column inches to set himself and Reverend Lee as front figures in the moral issue of racism in Ferguson with tons of ethos, and creating evidence that the things they want to obtain are valid. This engages the reader a lot and make them feel like they can trust the writer. For this, he uses an abundance of rhetorical devices. The text starts with an example from Raushenbush everyday life; an analogy that makes the moral issue racism clear and shows us how to deal with it. The Analogy consists on Raushenbush’s friend Sean, an African-American, who wants to swap races with Raushenbush for a day. Afterwards Raushenbush spells out to his audience, why this analogy is important. This is because Sean indirectly comments that living a white man’s life is easier than living as a black man. Then Raushenbush refuses because he realizes his privilege and safety as a white man. Afterwards he names some of the examples of black men being killed as evidence that the problem he is describing is actually real.
When he introduces Reverend Lee, he increases his own ethos by introducing a man that is not only black but also a pastor, an ethos that is already quite high considering that he is an American Baptist minister. Given that America is a very believing country, both these two people has a high ethos, which adds to how reliable the reader finds their opinions. Also the fact that Raushenbush knows his limits of knowledge on the problem and therefore brings someone who is more familiar on the topic, but makes sure that the reader knows, that he thinks Lee is reliable, is very ethos-stamped.
Later in the text, Reverend Lee claims that the police and the community should have a better relation, and that the church should become advocates for police training, so the problems in Ferguson cannot happen. When he applies his substantiation; that his church has a good relationship with their police force.
This makes the reader engaged in the claims on what could be done better are actually valid claims.
At last Reverend Lee speaks directly to his readers, which engages them massively. Here he gives his solution to the problem. He emphasizes that everyone has to commit to making a changes like in Freedom Summer, which is exactly 50 years ago. That Lee draws his rhetoric’s back to the roots of the problem, to a conflict that was actually solved, is a big rhetorical device that makes the reader believe in the change.
The fact that Lee uses the word “we” throughout the whole text engages the reader and males them feel like they are a part of solution for the problem.
3.
The question on how authorities, here the police, can prevent racial conflicts is a difficult one. Though I can say that murdering the minorities who are in the tight spot, is probably not the way. Rich Lowry finds that the issue of Michael Brown should be solved in a courtroom, and I agree. However, as Jackson, Raushenbush and Lee argues, Michael Brown is not everything. He is a solitary case that is the tip of the iceberg. Michael Brown has become a symbol of police brutality all over the world, and police brutality is a theme even Lowry agrees is an issue. The issue, as Lee tells, originate from the antagonism against black people, the “de-humanization of black bodies (l. 45)” . I think this is the central problem. Because right now the authorities in the American society does not represent the population, it is very hard for them to understand the ordinary people. When multiple groups of people does not understand each other they reduce each other to one or two stereotypical traits, and this is where racial conflicts happen.
I do not know who is to blame for Michael Brown death, but I know that Michael Brown is not the only one who suffered this fate. The authorities should not silence this problem, but try to make it official business, as Lowry suggests. There should be no more fights at night everything should be out in the open. As Jackson argues, there might be more to this conflict than just racial demographics.
To conclude Lowry is partially right, Michael Browns case should go to course, but so should all of America, to find out who they actually are as a nation.