People and Peace Not Profits and War Rhetorical Analysis

Analyze how Shirley Chisholm's choice to present herself "as a teacher, and as a woman" rather than emphasizing her position as a Congresswoman impacts her ethos in the speech.

• It diminishes her authority and makes her argument less credible.

• It aligns her with the everyday experiences of her audience, enhancing her credibility.

• It distracts from her main argument about the Vietnam War.

• It emphasizes her lack of experience in political matters.

Evaluate the effectiveness of Chisholm's use of contrasts (e.g., "weapons vs. children") in her argument. What is the strategic purpose of these contrasts?

• To confuse the audience with unrelated comparisons.

• To highlight the inequities in government spending priorities.

• To emphasize the importance of military spending.

• To suggest that education is less important than defense.

What reasoning does Chisholm use to argue against the continuation of the Vietnam War, and how does it reflect her strategic thinking?

• She argues that the war is popular and should continue, reflecting a lack of strategic thinking.

• She suggests that the war is necessary for national security, showing strategic alignment with the administration.

• She argues that domestic issues like education and poverty are more pressing, using evidence of federal budget allocations.

• She claims that the war is a distraction from international diplomacy efforts.

How does Chisholm's reference to President Nixon's previous statements serve her argument strategically?

• It undermines her argument by showing inconsistency.

• It strengthens her argument by holding Nixon accountable to his promises.

• It distracts from her main point about education funding.

• It suggests that Nixon's policies are irrelevant to her argument.

In what way does Chisholm's tone contribute to the urgency of her message?

• Her tone is dismissive, which reduces the urgency of her message.

• Her tone is sarcastic, which confuses the audience about the urgency.

• Her tone is urgent and idealistic, which emphasizes the need for immediate action.

• Her tone is indifferent, which downplays the importance of her message.

What strategic reasoning does Chisholm use to justify her decision to vote "No" on defense funding bills?

• She believes that defense spending is the only way to ensure national security.

• She argues that reallocating funds to social programs will better serve the American people.

• She thinks that defense spending is already too low.

• She wants to increase taxes to fund both defense and social programs.

How does Chisholm's strategic use of historical references, such as quoting Calvin Coolidge, enhance her argument?

• It weakens her argument by focusing on outdated policies.

• It strengthens her argument by showing a historical pattern of misplaced priorities.

• It distracts from her main point about the Vietnam War.

• It suggests that past presidents were more effective than the current administration.

Analyze how Chisholm's strategic choice to not emphasize racial tensions impacts her argument.

• It weakens her argument by ignoring a significant issue.

• It strengthens her argument by focusing on universal issues that affect all Americans.

• It distracts from her main point about education funding.

• It suggests that racial tensions are not relevant to her argument.

What is the strategic significance of Chisholm's decision to quote the Kerner Commission in her speech?

• It undermines her argument by introducing irrelevant information.

• It strengthens her argument by providing authoritative evidence of domestic issues.

• It distracts from her main point about defense spending.

• It suggests that the Commission's findings are outdated.

Evaluate Chisholm's strategic use of the phrase "People and Peace, Not Profits and War" in the context of her speech.

• It weakens her argument by oversimplifying complex issues.

• It strengthens her argument by succinctly summarizing her main point.

• It distracts from her main point about education funding.

• It suggests that profits are more important than peace.