Rhetorical Analysis of "Think Globally, Eat Locally"

In their essay “Think Globally, Eat Locally,” authors Jennifer Wilkins and Anna Lappe make an argument for increased awareness of the locality, content, and origins of the food and water we consume. Both of these women are well-known advocates of sustainability in the era of globalization, Lappe the co-founder of the sustainability-driven Small Planet Institute and Wilkins a professor of nutritional science. With this in mind, we can clearly see that these two authors have unique motivations in their writing of this essay. They are well-versed in the implications of sustainability or the lack thereof in a globalized world, and are obviously passionate about enacting change they feel would be beneficial to the planet. Their purpose is to convince their audience, the readers of the Seattle-Post Intelligencer, that a shift towards sustainability is necessary.

Wilkins and Lappe attempt to establish credibility in their very first paragraph, quoting from a Congressional testimony by Al Gore, one of the foremost voices on climate change in recent years. They proceed to construct an argument centered largely on logical appeals, even dismissing current American production and processing strategies as “environmentally illogical.” They use many statistics, pointing out that organic farming results in 30 percent less energy usage, and comparing the gasoline used to process fertilizer and pesticides to driving “more than 6,000 Priuses from New York City to Los Angeles and back.” The authors also attempt to build common ground with their audience, highlighting the natural foods found “here in the Northeast.” These strategies serve two major purposes – to build the authors’ credibility with their audience, and to use that credibility to influence them, using logical statistic-based arguments.

I think Wilkins’ and Lappe’s article is effective, and accomplishes the task they set out to accomplish. They demonstrate an obvious knowledge of their subject matter and by coupling that with the common ground they share with their audience, they allow themselves to influence their readers. They make a point of showing that sustainability isn’t just an emotional or environmentally-protective standpoint, but a standpoint based on logic and reason. Through their use of numbers and statistics, I think they communicate this message quite well.

Ethos/Pathos/Logos Analysis

For my ethos/pathos/logos analysis, I chose to analyze the Perspectives on Globalization article "Refuting the False Doctrine of Globalization. The author used these rhetorical strategies to further her argument that globalization has several adverse effects on issues like poverty.

Ethos:

1. The author establishes in the first sentence that she is a faithful Christian. Targeted to a BYU audience, this would establish a common belief with the audience and foster respect.

2. The author quotes the scripture, "Do you have eyes, and fail to see?" Again, by utilizing the common religious ideals she finds with the audience, her arguments take on a new level of validity.

3. The author refers to Adam Smith, whom many see as the original source of free market theory, and his perspectives on capitalism. This enhances the argument's credibility due to the prominence of the man quoted.

Pathos:

1. The author says that "Christians are called, before all else... to love neighbor as self." This statement appeals to the audience's emotions and beliefs, in a way that supports her argument.

2. The author gives many examples of globalization's adverse effects (sweatshops, pollution, etc.) and then indicts the public for accepting these consequences. This causes the audience to reflect on how they view emotional social issues.

3. The author criticizes the hunger for "growth" as encouraging destructive activities: Young children buying cigarettes, alcoholism, and pornography. These extreme examples evoke strong emotional reactions from the audience.

Logos:

1. The author cites statistics showing a 22.2% growth in household worth in the US from 1983 to 1998, but also that homelessness increased. These facts support the idea that growth isn't always good.

2. The author states that "the world's 225 richest people have a combined wealth of over $1 trillion, equal to the income of the poorest 47% of the world's people." Again, she uses numbers to show the adverse affects of economic "growth."

3. The author cites examples of companies exploiting patent laws that oppress farmers and merchants in poor countries.


 

Intro and Op-Ed Proposal

What's up guys? My name is Hayden Brown, and this is my blog I guess. I'm from Denton, Texas (but often just say I'm from Dallas because that sounds cooler). I have one sister, who is married and has a super cool two-year old, and a brother who just returned from a mission in Ghana. I was here at BYU over the summer, so I guess you could say I'm an experienced freshman. I don't really have many hobbies, I'm a pretty simple guy. I like to hang out with my friends, longboard, read the news, talk about politics, and I'm a huge fan of the show Breaking Bad. So that's how I spend most of my time. I'm also a Journalism major, so I actually kind of enjoy writing essays. Which is weird.