The Chinese People Have Stood Up Rhetorical Outline

Rhetorical Analysis Outline of Mao Zedong’s

“The Chinese People Have Stood Up” Speech

Purpose: the purpose was to unify the Chinese people and persuade them that supporting his rule would be the best for China.

Audience: The chinese population particularly the working class

Context: the era is the Cultural Revolution. On October 1. 1949 he officially establishes the People’s Republic of China. This is the opening address at the First Plenary Session of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference on September 21, 1949

Section 1: Setting Up:
Purpose: Introduces the People’s Political Consultative Conference and comparing the progress made so far with Kuomintang
Appeals: Establishes ethos; Pathos
Techniques:
Anaphora: “In a little more than three years..” uses this to show how much progress they made in such little time. Makes him look very hardworking, dedicated.
Diction: “nothing in the interest of the people” “no avail” “absolutely no room for compromise”
Word choice makes Kuomintang seem impossible to work with. Gives impression that he won’t cooperate so there’s no choice but to act against him
Imagery: “running dog of imperialism” degrades imperialism and supports the idea that it is weak and easily controlled
Hyperbole: “overthrow these enemies or be oppressed and slaughtered by them” this is not necessarily true and is exaggerated to create some fear of the enemy among the people
Connotation: “backed by the U.S. imperialism” indirectly saying the U.S. is an enemy too and also stating that they’re also the cause of the grief in China
Effectiveness: Very effective. He brings in the idea that everyone is united and highlights the progress made by his party. By putting Kuomintang right after successes he shows how harmful Kuomintang is .  

Section 2: His Goals
Purpose: Inform the people what he plans on doing and why they must take action
Techniques:
Anaphora- “It will” goes in a pattern of listing what they will achieve, makes it seem like they’re really organized and have everything all thought out
“Chinese’s People Political Consultative Conference” uses this many times to sell the idea that they’re united and everything they do is for the people
“Domestic and foreign oppressors” “Forefathers” makes the cause seem more important
Oxymoron/Juxtaposition: “democratic dictatorship” democratic is usually thought of as equal
Weak parts: says they must get allies and make friend with Soviet Union and New Democracies which contradicts his earlier statement about foreign oppressors. also used democratic dictatorship in a positive sense which is confusing.
Effectiveness: Effective. the part about making allies, having friends all over the world , and winning sympathy is questionable. The statements aren’t backed up very well.

Section 3: Building up Nationalism and Pride
Purpose: To convince the people that their hard work will make China into a wonderful country and how beneficial his new party is
Appeals: Pathos
Techniques:
Rhetorical Question- “If our forefathers, and we also, could weather long years of extreme difficulty and defeat powerful domestic and foreign reactionaries, why can’t we now, after victory, build a prosperous flourishing country?”
“keep to our style of plain living and hard struggle”- appealing to working class
“no imperialist will ever again be allowed to invade our land” “tremble before us!”
builds up momentum about how powerful China will become esp. idea that they will beat the foreigners
Anaphora- “Hail the..” has the people salute the ‘New China’
Effectiveness: very effective. makes the people feel like they’re important and that their hard work will eventually contribute to a greater China. Rallies the people up with the chant of hail the... Based mainly on pathos but is used well.

General Evaluation:
Mao is a master of manipulation people using pathos. He knows how the people are dissatisfied and is able to convince them that he’s the right leader that will lead them out of their struggle. Consistently brings up the idea of being united and together throughout the whole speech. Very similar to Goebbel’s. He establishes some pathos first and breaks the enemy down to make him more trustworthy. Then he primarily uses pathos afterwards. The section about needing allies is weak. He may need to add somes facts of examples of why it will be beneficial to strengthen that argument. Overall it’s a very persuasive speech.

Hirohito and Goebbel-- Similar Yet Different

When reading Goebbels and Emperor Hirohito’s speech they come off as complete opposites. One is trying to persuade the people to quietly surrender while the other rallies the nation up and encourages them to continue their fight. Emperor Hirohito and Joseph both had very different speeches but used similar rhetorical devices in achieving their goal.

 As Japan had recently been bombed by the nuclear bomb Emperor Hirohito has the tough job of telling his nation that they will be surrendering. Considering how proud and loyal the Japanese are to their Emperor it becomes even more difficult to do so. One of the things Hirohito does is use the feelings of nationalism to convince the Japanese that surrendering is the best thing to do. In the statement “Despite the best that has been done by everyone—the gallant fighting of our military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of out servants of the State and the devoted service of our 100,000,000 people..” Hirohito is very clever in his diction. Words such as gallant fighting, diligence and assiduity, and devoted service are used to show that the Japanese people gave it their all. He then says the “war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage”. By using such an understatement he softens the blow of losing the war. In fact, he turns the situation around by claiming that their surrender is the ultimate sacrifice. They are essentially saving the world from the “total extinction of human civilization” and paving the way for the future of Japan. Rather than delivering a speech about merely surrendering, Hirohito turns it around to make it seem as if they are still fighting.

Though Goebbel has a different goal his speech uses techniques similar to the ones used by Hirohito. Goebbels states how the German people are “raised, educated and disciplined by National Socialism” and is “armed against weakness and uncertainty”.  Here Goebbels uses the sense of nationalism in the German people to get them to agree and support him. He also makes a heavy claim that the survival of the whole world depends on them. “This is a threat to the Reich and to the European continent that casts all previous dangers into the shadows. If we fail, we will have failed our historic mission “.  Goebbel continuously says throughout his speech the German people are the only one capable of saving the world from the evils of Bolshevism. In that sense, both speeches are similar in ways of using the people’s sense of pride to agree that surrendering or fighting is the best for their country.

However there are obvious differences in the two speeches as well. Goebbel uses guilt to make his audience agree with him. He refers back to the “heroic sacrifices of heroism“ at Stalingrad multiples times implying that they must live up to that. Rather than directly addressing the loss at Stalingrad he makes use of soldiers to set remodels of the German people. Goebbel also instills fear to insure that everyone complies with him.  He conjures an image of the Jewish as the “incarnation of evil, as the plastic demon of decay and the bearer of an international culture-destroying chaos”. And if that isn’t frightening enough, he makes very ominous threats such as when he says “we will respond appropriately.”

Both speeches were successful in persuading the nation to do what they wanted. While nationalism is effective for both what sets them apart is the writer’s way of delivering them. Though Hirohito makes understatement and some exaggerations like the "obliteration of Japan"  most of his content is agreeable  Hirohito has more faith in his people while Goebbel seems to have none considering that the speech is based mainly lies, prejudice, fear, and guilt. One thing that can be known for sure is that when you convince the people that they are the hero that will save the fate of man kind from impending doom-- like worldwide destruction from the deadly bomb or enslavement by the Communist Jews-- they are more likely to comply.