About how the Differing Views of the Confederate Monuments Engage the Audience by Going from Historical Events to Personal Narratives

Monuments are an epitome of the United States. Citizens of America choose what history they want to be displayed so it can be remembered by the people. The history of the Civil War was portrayed through the establishment of Confederate statues. According to an article by Sarah E. Gardner in Origins, “many historians have proven, Confederate memorials celebrated slavery, the South as a slave society, and white supremacy in general.” The monuments that were built after the Civil War were often of fallen soldiers, whom citizens wanted to remember.

Most Confederate monuments, however, were built during the era of Jim Crow segregation. The memorialization of Confederate soldiers was often endorsed by the families and daughters of these soldiers.

They were created by them so that their memory would not be forgotten. The money raised for their creation came from small towns and large cities across the south. Research from the Southern Poverty Law Center explains that there was a significant increase in the number of Confederate monuments between 1900 and 1920 (Gardner). Some Confederate monuments were determined by the actions of individuals after the Civil War and their political positions. For example, General William Mahone’s military career was portrayed as heroic. Still, since his actions did not support the expectations of the Jim Crow laws, his broad political alliances were not applauded. Because he enforced African American Civil rights, his statue was not put up. An article from the EJI explains that “the Investigative Fund at the Nation Institute found that taxpayers have directed at least $40 million to Confederate statues, homes, parks, museums, libraries, and cemeteries, as well as to Confederate heritage organizations, over the past decade.”

There has been an influx of establishments of Confederate statues on private lands, such as one of the statues placed in front of Martin Luther King Jr. Drive. On August 11, 2017, a rally named Unite the Rally was organized by white nationalist, Richard Spencer, at the University of Virginia. In retaliation for the Charleston church shooting, Spencer initiated the protest against the removal of Robert E. Lee Confederate statues. During the rallies, 250 protesters chanted white nationalist expressions. Three hours after the start of the rally, Charlottesville and Albemarle County declared a state of emergency. A few days later, Baltimore’s mayor commanded the removal of the Confederate monuments.

Americans have split views on the display of monuments. Everyone portrays past historical events from different perspectives; both legitimate arguments about the monuments hold credible statements. Throughout the past years, more citizens have fought for the removal of the statues, while others want the monuments to remain in their locations. In an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll released last week, Americans were asked whether the monuments should “remain as a historical symbol” or “be removed because they are offensive to some people.” Sixty-seven percent of white respondents thought they should stay, as did 75% of whites who were not college graduates. Meanwhile, 65% of Latinos were fine with keeping the statues, as were 44% of blacks, according to USA Today. People have many differing views about the statues as even the level of education impacts the decision.

The majority of supporters of the Confederate statue believe that the statue is a part of history. They view it as a symbol of our past that should be taught to future generations. From their perspective, students analyzing the Confederacy’s history can gain wisdom and enlightenment. However, the only way the younger generation can understand the past is by being honest about the purpose of the statues and their significance, which arguably is to promote white supremacy. From their point of view, engaging in a conversation about our nation’s history and continuing to make it relevant is crucial. Some may believe that dismantling the monuments would overstep a boundary. They also acknowledge that these statues have the power to highlight the possibility of racial injustice, as well as underscore its impact on our nation in the past and how we can avoid it in the future.

On the other hand, individuals who support the removal of the statues believe it is offensive to those who suffered in the past, as it continues to send a hostile message to African Americans. It serves as a constant reminder of the pain they endured. They also believe that the history being depicted is biased as it only serves as a positive reminder to white Southerners who maintained power at the time. People who want to eradicate the monuments believe that the statues are of those who supported slavery and white supremacy and would rather have all history displayed, including black history. As you can see, people have many contrasting beliefs about the removal of the Confederate monument. In this essay, I will be comparing Mitch Landrieu’s and Trevor Noah’s argument regarding the Confederate statues; nonetheless, Trevor Noah held a stronger case.

First and foremost, Mitch Landrieu is an American Democrat politician and lawyer. From 2010 to 2018, he was the mayor of New Orleans, during which time he gave a speech regarding the removal of Confederate statues. Landrieu’s main argument supports the removal of these statues. Throughout the speech, he provided his opinion about them. He claims that the Confederacy was “on the wrong side of humanity.” He says this because the statues portray a symbol of racism. He starts his speech with an analogy of New Orleans’s diversity, likening it to a melting pot: even though there are many types of citizens, they all unite. He refers to multiple events, like The Cult of the Lost Cause movement and the Civil War, to argue that the men who fought were warriors, not patriots, because they figuratively battled against the United States. He constantly mentions slavery, alluding to the Cornerstone speech, which stated, “the Negro is not equal to the white man.”

He constantly alludes to the slavery time period to express the pain they endured. This illustrates people’s perspectives of African Americans at the time, and underscores how they were relentlessly dehumanized and exploited for others’ gain. According to Landrieu’s speech on page three, paragraph three, he states, “Another friend asked me to consider these four monuments from the perspective of an African American mother or father trying to explain to their fifth-grade daughter who Robert E. Lee is and why he stands atop our beautiful city.” While sharing his anecdote, he employs pathos and rhetorical questions, empathetically seeking connection with families. This approach yields a high level of effectiveness towards the audience, as through his narrative, citizens may feel understood in their experiences. While discussing racism, he strategically chooses his words to convey his understanding of the African American perspective, despite never having personally experienced racism. This strategy helps him persuade a diverse audience, as despite being a white southerner, he publicly supports people of color.

Throughout the speech, he uses repetition to accentuate certain phrases like “think about this.” By saying that, he wants the audience to logic and comprehend what he is saying. When explaining the Civil War, he uses amplification and declares, “History cannot be changed. It cannot be moved like a statue. What is done is done. The Civil War is over” (page 3). This provides significance in the Civil War, and history as it cannot be altered. People should display all history, not only white history. Landrieu’s tone is confident, assertive, yet empathetic as he fluctuates the tone of his voice and creates emphasis when he wants to highlight a term. He was also passionate about his use of hand gestures. His audience consists of news reporters, journalists, and New Orleans citizens. He wants to persuade others regarding the ethics of the removal of Confederate monuments. Landrieu accomplishes this by utilizing many rhetorical strategies and expressing an open perspective.

His assumptions include New Orleans’ unity and the culture’s inclusivity, also voicing that we may need each other to create change. The effectiveness changes when read by a wider audience because it means that Landrieu has to employ more strategies and find multiple ways to connect with different citizens. The rhetorical choices greatly impact the persuasiveness of the overall argument because it increases writing creativity, and engages the audience by moving from historical events to personal narratives.

Trevor Noah is a South African comedian, political commentator, and television host who currently hosts The Daily Show. He is the most talented and prosperous comedian in Africa, and he moved to the United States to further his stand-up career. Noah and Wood Jr. use satirical diction throughout both of their videos. The videos contain many counterarguments; Trevor Noah mentions the Confederate-supporting side, while Wood Jr. backs the monument removal. Noah points out that this is all a part of our history. People argue that we shouldn’t “erase history,” but black history often isn’t presented or even taught. Wood Jr. uses an analogy to explain what it feels like for African Americans to see statues that symbolize their painful past. It’s like when a woman comes out of an abusive relationship and constantly sees pictures of her abuser in her house.

When he explains the use of a black tarp, he alludes to a personal narrative or his Halloween experience. By giving examples from his life, he creates an emotional connection with the viewer. In the video “Confederate Memorial Day Makes Waves in the South: The Daily Show,” Noah uses a sarcastic tone, especially when discussing African children who are wearing sweaters with Confederate flag pictures. He also alludes to Black Entertainment Television (BET), joking that it is the only thing a black person will do when they get their day off on Confederate Memorial Day. His voice was very engaging throughout the video as well.

Noah appealed to both logos and pathos. He added news interviews regarding people’s thoughts and tried to make people laugh by using pathos. In the YouTube video “Confederate Statues: Some See Culture, Some See Racism: The Daily Show,” Roy Wood Jr. explains the main argument that the solution to all the problems listed in the video is eradicating racism. He explains the utilization of euphemism because at 1:20 in the video, the interview depicts a white southerner who does not believe it’s about racism but says “Martin Luther Coon” and realizes he shouldn’t have said that after he already did. It is assumed that it’s a common belief that it is really about racism. The primary audience is the citizens of America since the show is broadcast all over the United States. They are trying to persuade others that the root of the issue is racism.

Trevor Noah’s videos were most persuasive. They employed a wide variety of strategies and rhetorical appeals. The video with Roy Wood Jr. is basically full of counterarguments, which can make an individual’s argument stronger because it can seem like they are educated on both sides of the issue. The evidence consisted of historical facts, the Southerners’ point of view, and protestors. Although Noah is not a U.S. citizen and Landrieu is a Southerner, this actually increases Noah’s credibility, as it provides an unbiased and third-party perspective. However, Noah’s speech lacked inclusivity. While Landrieu emphasized a diverse culture, he still described New Orleans as united. They both allude to authority and historical events like the Civil War, using analogies to provide a deeper understanding of the issue. Trevor Noah’s arguments were made very clear throughout his videos; it’s evident that he used both pathos and logos as well.

In conclusion, American citizens and even foreigners hold differing views on Confederate monuments. The importance of rhetorical strategies and appeals has been demonstrated throughout this essay. Strategies and appeals can determine how people engage with your argument, or if the author can create a connection with the audience. Trevor Noah demonstrated stronger effectiveness since he had a variety of information and counter-arguments regarding the Confederate monument.

Did you like this example?

300

16