Speaking of Human Rights Human Rights is the common thread in speeches given by Elie Wiesel “ The Perils of Indifference” and Susan B. Anthony’s speech “On Women’s Right to Vote “. Both speeches clearly challenge their audience to review history, the laws that govern, and each person’s role in basic human rights. Mr. Wiesel started his speech with gratitude. He was thankful towards the American troops who rescued him and thousands of other prisoners from the death camps in Germany in addition to the look of horror and anger, pure rage, and compassion clearly displayed on the faces of his saviors. This indicated to him they would forever remember and bear witness. He states “Gratitude is what defines the humanity of the human being.”
The unimaginable actions from German authorities in the concentration camps of the Holocaust were expected to be tolerated by weak prisoners like Wiesel or death was an alternate. These constant actions from the S.S. officers crushed the identification of who Wiesel really was. When Wiesel’s physical state left, so did his mental state. If a prisoner chose to have a mind of their own and did not follow the S.S. officer’s commands they were written brutally beaten or even in severe cases sentenced to their death. After Wiesel was liberated he looked at himself in the mirror and didn’t even recognize who he was anymore. No prisoner that was a part of the Holocaust could avoid inner and outer turmoil.
Margaret Sanger, a well known feminist and women's reproductive right activist in USA history wrote the famous speech: The Children's Era. This speech focuses on the topic of women's reproductive freedom. Sanger uses rhetorical forms of communication to persuade and modify the perspectives of the audience through the use of analogy and pathos. She uses reason, thought and emotion to lead her speech.
Elie Wiesel shows great respect for America. He complements the soldiers, the first lady and the president. He informs us about how young he was and felt anger and rage towards the Nazis. He also notices the soldiers that saved him had great rage which translates to true compassion for one another. He gives us a great history lesson and who was indifferent especially towards how towns were miles away from the camps and did nothing about it. He impounded the heart breaking on how doing business with them until 1942 and we knew what was going on. He questions the indifference we had.
There are many heroic individuals in history that have shown greatness during a time of suffering ,as well as remorse when greatness is needed, but one individual stood out to me above them all. He served as a hero among all he knew and all who knew him. This individual, Simon Wiesenthal, deserves praise for his dedication to his heroic work tracking and prosecuting Nazi war criminals that caused thousands of Jews, Gypsies, Poles and other victims of the Holocaust to suffer and perish.
In April, 1945, Elie Wiesel was liberated from the Buchenwald concentration camp after struggling with hunger, beatings, losing his entire family, and narrowly escaping death himself. He at first remained silent about his experiences, because it was too hard to relive them. However, eventually he spoke up, knowing it was his duty not to let the world forget the tragedies resulting from their silence. He wrote Night, a memoir of his and his family’s experience, and began using his freedom to spread the word about what had happened and hopefully prevent it from happening again. In 1999, he was invited to speak at the Millennium Lectures, in front of the president, first lady, and other important governmental figures,. In his speech, “The Perils of Indifference”, he uses rhetoric devices to get emotional responses and to connect with the audience. He wants to create awareness of the dangers of indifference and show how there needs to be change. His speech eloquently calls out the government for their lack of response during the Holocaust, and warns against continued disregard for the struggles of others. He sees indifference as being the ally of the enemy, and without compassion there is no hope for the
Wiesel wanted people to be able to keep the memory of the holocaust by informing them of what happened to the victims of the holocaust. All the pain and torture the jews had to endure during the holocaust. Wiesel told a young jewish boy about how he tried to keep the memory alive, that he had to
Wiesel endured much horrors in the world and he has worked his entire life to help get rid of hatred and ignorance from the world. “Fifty-four years ago to the day, a young Jewish boy from a small town in the Carpathian Mountains woke up, not far from Goethe's beloved Weimar, in a place of eternal infamy called Buchenwald. He was finally free, but there was no joy in his heart. He thought there never would be again” (Wiesel 310). This quote from Wiesel’s speech is located at the very beginning of his speech because he wants to build credibility with his audience. He is showing that he had first hand experience of being in the Holocaust. It allows the audience to visualize a young Wiesel being part of the Holocaust having dealt with the pain, punishment, and starvation. Wiesel describes himself as a Jewish boy “without joy in his heart” because even though he finally had his freedom, he felt much compassion from the American soldiers. This quote lets the audience know what the speaker went through and how it affected his world view. Elie Wiesel is a good source to hear about indifference towards World War II from because he lived through it. This quote impacts the meaning of the speech because its lets the audience know a little background information on what happened to Wiesel and we know that what he is saying is truthful because he tells us about what he saw, what he was thinking, and
According to Hannah Arendt, “The Declaration of the Rights of Man at the end of the eighteenth century was a turning point in history”. (Arendt, 290). She begins her thesis by making this affirmation. However, throughout her essay, she further develops the idea that this “Declaration of the Rights of Man” has been questioned ever since then, because of the fact that these human rights don’t really appear to be implemented over a numerous amount of human beings. This “turning point” which Arendt refers to, indicates that when human rights were first conceived, they stated that only the nation worked as the law, and neither the divine law nor anything else had power over them. This was the moment when control over these rights was lost, since there is a deficiency in the precision of who really has the rule of law over them, if not even the human authorities have been able to manage the “universality” they are supposed to express. Hannah Arendt’s explanation on the human rights article called “The
Elie Wiesel was by no means a stranger to pain and suffering. As a child he was separated from his family as they were sent to live in the deplorable living conditions of Auschwitz among countless others. He remained there for more than a year, and although he survived, both his parents and his little sister did not. After he was liberated, he dedicated his life to speaking against injustice and indifference, things which weighed heavily on his heart. On April 12th, 1999, he was invited to speak at the White House Millennium Lecture series on the exigency of indifference. The Millennium Lecture series were a series of lectures given over multiple evenings in the wake of a new millennium. They were intended to bring out the creativity and inventiveness
The topic of this speech is sufferage, specifically women's right to vote. This speech was delivered at a women's convention in Akron, Ohio to a group of white people. The purpose behind Sojourner Truth giving this speech was to allow women the right to vote. She made her tone very clear through diction and figurative language, she was determine to make it so women would finally have the right to vote. The tone present in this speech is determined and inspirational. This speech was a very powerful and has been an inspiration for decades.
“Death is the only pure, beautiful conclusion of a great passion” (David Herbert Lawrence). Coretta Scott King was an inspiring person to women of all ages and races. However her death had an impact on everyone, she was seen as an idol, more importantly as a leader. Malcom X’s daughter Attallah Shabazz who is also Mrs. King’s most pride supporter addresses her remarks in her eulogy and engages the people at the funeral service for Mrs. King on the sorrowful day of February 7th, 2006 in Atlanta, Georgia. With hundreds of people, (mainly women) watching on TV or listening in the stands during this depressing time reflect and honor on the achievements and positive attitude she had on the community for others. Attallah Shabazz hoped that this event
Every day, people are denied basic necessary human rights. One well known event that striped millions of these rights was the Holocaust, recounted in Elie Wiesel’s memoir, Night. As a result of the atrocities that occur all around the world, organizations have published declarations such as the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights. It is vital that the entitlement to all rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind, freedom of thought and religion, and the right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being of themselves be guaranteed to everyone, as these three rights are crucial to the survival of all people and their identity.
In the speeches The Perils of Indifference by Elie Wiesel and On Women’s Right to Vote by Susan B. Anthony, there is a common theme. Rights, whether human or civil, justifiably belong to every person. All people, regardless of race, gender, or ethnicity, should be afforded the same human rights.
One of the main reasons why human rights have been put in place is to protect the public life and public space of every individual being. One fundamental characteristic of human rights is that they are equal rights; they are aimed at providing protection to every person in an equal way. These rights have been entrenched through laws that are passed by states and international conventions. Human rights laws have evolved over time, and have been shaped by several factors, including philosophical theories in the past. This paper looks at the theories of two philosophers, Emmanuel Kant and John Stuart Mills, and how their teachings can be used to explain the sources of human rights. Kant’s moral philosophy is very direct in its justification of human rights, especially the ideals of moral autonomy and equality as applied to rational human beings. John Stuart Mills’ theory of utilitarianism also forms a solid basis for human rights, especially his belief that utility is the supreme criterion for judging morality, with justice being subordinate to it. The paper looks at how the two philosophers qualify their teachings as the origins of human rights, and comes to the conclusion that the moral philosophy of Kant is better than that of Mills.
The doctrine of human rights were created to protect every single human regardless of race, gender, sex, nationality, sexual orientation and other differences. It is based on human dignity and the belief that no one has the right to take this away from another human being. The doctrine states that every ‘man’ has inalienable rights of equality, but is this true? Are human rights universal? Whether human rights are universal has been debated for decades. There have been individuals and even countries that oppose the idea that human rights are for everybody. This argument shall be investigated in this essay, by: exploring definitions and history on human rights, debating on whether it is universal while providing examples and background information while supporting my hypothesis that human rights should be based on particular cultural values and finally drawing a conclusion.