Final Post-Definition of a Protest

After experiencing a class such as the rhetoric of protest, I have learned about a variety of protests. I still feel that many protests are violent while many are also nonviolent. Although I first learned that protests where sit-ins, riots, strikes, pickets, and marches, I have now learned many more ways in which people protest. I have seen protests done through a variety of artwork, even some extreme cases such as the starving dog, through music, and through websites or various blog postings. The start of a protest happens because someone or some group of people feel that something is not right and should be changed. Protests can be about anything you could imagine. Examples are protesting against war, various groups of people, government or any type of authority, abortion, starvation, religion, and even things such as what days students should be allowed out of school. I have also learned from this course that not all protests actually work. Many, in fact, get their point across to the listener or viewer but that is merely it. The listener then goes on with his or her day without being drastically changed from the message that the protester was trying to spread. I still agree with my point made in the first blog post that read that in order for a protest to be a success, it must grab, as well as hold, the attention of its audience. Without people's interest in the matter being protested about, no change will be made and the protest will not be a success.

protest song

When choosing protest songs I could not decide between two. Not only did I like both songs and feel that they both represented great protests, but I also could not remember if they had already been shown in class so I decided to bring in both to class. The first I chose was "We're not gonna take it" by the Twisted sisters. This song is sung by a group of punk singers who protest against authority figures in the world. This song can be against anything from parents, to teachers, to the government. The group implies that they will no longer conform to or obey any further authoritative actions.
The second song I chose was "What's going on" by Marvin Gaye. This song protests against social injustice. I talks about how love is the only think that can conquer hate. Marvin Gaye says too many people are unhappy and too many people are dying. He, along with many Americans, wants to know where the love and peace in our world has gone.
Protest songs are effective because they allow people to really put emotion into something they believe in. They are especially effective for those who love music and listen to regularly. "We're not gonna take it" is effective because it is a very fast, upbeat song that one cannot help but to dance and sing along to. "What's going on" is effective in that it focuses on the softer, more emotional side of the issue. It brings to light the fact that people are dying and unhappy and that it needs to be fixed. Protest songs seem to bring about awareness but usually do not seem to bring about change unless the changes are small, personal changes.

The Rhetoric of Ann Coulter and Michael Moore

In my opinion neither Ann Coulter nor Michael Moore should be considered a protestor. I feel that both of these people are not protesting anything but are rather strongly supporting their positions and beliefs. They are more like persuaders than protestors in that they openly state their ideas and feelings in hopes of changing people's views on the political world. I think the American public supports both Coulter and Moore because they are two of very few people who will actually express the feelings and so therefore the people simply follow along with what they say. They have also captured the public eye due in large part to their means of speaking on the subject at hand. Coulter tends to use very strong, aggressive means when speaking. She also uses personal attacks in order to protect her appearance and ethos. On the other hand, Moore has been seen to use comedy and satire as his choice of expression. People find both means of speaking to be interesting and always sure to grab the audience's attention. Although people seem to watch and listen to both Coulter and Moore, I feel that neither is very well respected. The way they come across can be seen as attacking and uncomfortable to many people.

Fallacies and Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter is an extreme conservative who stresses her point about all political issues through her books and her appearances on several talk shows across America. She uses a very harsh tone. She is able to keep her cool while very strongly making her point. She respectfully listens to what her "opponent" is saying and then she defends her argument by making very brief, to the point remarks about the reality of the situation and then stating what the conservative belief is on the issue. She presents her points usually as a defense to what others, often liberals, have said about it. She holds very strong beliefs so it is therefore usually very easy for Ann to make her points. She never lets the words of others bring her down. She simply continues on with her original belief ignoring what was said against it. I find Ann's method somewhat persuasive. However, I think that she is more the type of person who is willing to stand up for what she believes in whether someone else shares her point of view or not. I think she is far more interested in backing her beliefs than in trying to persuade others to take her side in the argument. Other people may or may not find this type of speaker persuasive. Her strong points could capture people's attention but if the audience is full of people just like Ann who have such strong beliefs, then she would probably have a harder time swaying their opinions. The only fallacy I could point out is one that I personally do not see as a fallacy but several other people may. It occurred as Ann compared the war in Iraq to abortion. I agree with her point that killing is the same in all aspects. However, others may feel that she was comparing two completely different things in this conversation.