Analysis of Analogy for the Climate Change Movement with the Black Lives Matter Movement

Speaker: I'm qualified to speak about this issue because I'm passionate about learning history. I think it's crucial to draw ties between similar social movements because you might be able to prevent repeating history.

Purpose: The purpose of this letter is to inspire those in the Climate Change movement to learn from their opponents and not view the incoming hate as necessarily detrimental.

Audience: My audience is the Climate Change movement. I chose this movement because they have recently come under fire due to a controversial speech given at the UN (see: Exigence). They have the most to benefit from their opposition.

Context: The Climate Change movement is a group that advocates for policies that contribute to the conservation of our planet. Specifically, their biggest concern is global warming, caused by harmful pollution and agriculture. As politicians refuse to accept demands for renewable energy, global warming becoming more and more of an issue. However, the climate change movement is controversial because of individual outspoken global warming deniers.

Exigence: Last Tuesday, child advocate Greta Thunberg presented a highly emotional speech to the UN to convince lawmakers to implement climate change policy. Ever since there's been an ongoing debate if her angry address was warranted. Some critics have gone so far as to speculate Thunberg of being a victim of child abuse. Regardless, the current situation with the Climate Change movement requires a different mindset going forward. This is what I'm trying to change in my letter.

Choices: Throughout most of the essay, I utilize an extended analogy for the Climate Change movement with the Black Lives Matter movement. This is effective because I draw links between the two movements. Furthermore, I implemented repetition to create emphasis on the traits of supporters and nonsupporters. For example, I repeated, 'they are … they don't… they spread.' (2) My usage of this technique increases the prominence of the opposition. This adds additional effect and makes it a bit easier to read.

Appeals: I have integrated logical appeal the most throughout my letter. This truly helps with keeping a level tone and bolstering my credibility.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Tone: I have taken an advisory, informative tone throughout the letter. I've laid out the facts, and near the end, I give some advice that is backed by evidence. This neutral tone helps with persuasion in two ways. First, convincing on a logical basis gives me a lot more credibility. Second, having a neutral tone vividly stands out from the rage-charged arguments happening in the Climate Change debate today.

Dear Members of the People's Climate Movement,

It's clear that recent events - such as the Greta Thunberg's divisive UN speech - have stirred up hatred against your cause. However, as the great Martin Luther King Jr. once said, basic supportiveness 'is much more bewildering than outright rejection.' Simply put, the opposition of others is more beneficial to your cause than people who mildly support it. Similarly, how strongly a group feels about an issue correlates to the group's overall influence - whether or not it supports your cause. I advise you to perceive the incoming hatred against your movement as beneficial to the cause since your opposition can serve to bolster awareness of Climate Change.

Take the Black Lives Matters movement, for instance. There's one side with individuals who perceive the entire movement as racist and anti-police. They are your keyboard warriors on Twitter; they are your ranting online bloggers. In general, they don't succeed in spreading their views. However, they spread a crucial awareness of the problem. In fact, the BLM movement would not have become so big without the controversy surrounding it. The debate, the division, and the discussion all help fuel the fire of activism and change. Meanwhile, there are lukewarm supporters. These are people that agree with the issue halfheartedly. They understand all the statistics and keep up to date with the news. But how many of these 'casual supporters' will show up to BLM rallies? How many will post online as fervently as the radical opposers do? How many ordinary sympathizers will send notes to Congress and rally for reduced police brutality? In terms of actual contribution to an organization, a shallow supporter isn't worth much, whereas an avid opposer will draw massive attention to an issue.

And then there are your hard-core supporters. They will educate others on the racial shooting statistics. They will spread the impact and lobby for racial equality. But perhaps most importantly, faithful supporters will benefit from the critiques given by their opposition. One such counter-argument to the Black Lives Matter movement is the 'All Lives Matter' movement, which serves to promote the defense of police brutality of all races. They argued that defending specifically black lives is inherently racist. BLM wisely revised its message. According to Alicia Garza, an advocate at the forefront of the #BlackLivesMatter movement, black lives are critically 'important for [white people's] liberation.' (Smith) Garza's crucial argument sufficiently addressed the opposition and strengthened the movement's purpose, simply by extending the benefits of equality to whites as well. This debate is just one example of the impact of successfully using critiques to bolster an argument, or in this case, an entire movement.

Finally, those that oppose your cause are at least consistent in their beliefs. They have and will repeatedly reject your claims and substitute pseudo-science as an explanation. It's incredibly easy to disprove their claims. However, the lukewarm supporters are unlikely to advance their cause or push for additional regulations. In a study done by the American Resistance, only '12 percent of the people who were new to protesting' in a gun-control rally, 'was motivated to join the march because of the gun-control issue.' (Fisher) This baffling claim leaves a critical question - what were the majority of participants passionate about? The article later reveals that these participants were protesting President Trump and peace issues. Clearly, a significant portion of gun control supporters was interested in pushing a completely different agenda. This goes to show that the most venerable opponents are at least more reliable than a mild supporter.

Now - how does this talk of the Black Lives Matter movement apply to your Climate Change movement? Some might say that the former is much more controversial than something that might as well be fact. Yet the Climate Change movement could do well to learn from their political opponents - or what not to do. View your opposers as an asset against the dangers of global warming.

Works Cited

1. Fisher, Dana R. 'Here's Who Actually Attended the March for Our Lives. (No, It Wasn't Mostly Young People.).' The Washington Post, WP Company, 28 Mar. 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/03/28/heres-who-actually-attended-the-march-for-our-lives-no-it-wasnt-mostly-young-people/.
2. Getsos, Paul. 'Our Vision.' Peoples Climate Movement, peoplesclimate.org/our-vision/.
3. Khan-Cullors, Patrisse. 'About the Black Lives Matter Global Network.' Black Lives Matter, blacklivesmatter.com/about/.
4. Smith, David. 'The Backlash against Black Lives Matter Is Just More Evidence of Injustice.' The Conversation, 29 Aug. 2019, theconversation.com/the-backlash-against-black-lives-matter-is-just-more-evidence-of-injustice-85587.