Rhetorical Analysis

Many of the great historical adventures taught in history classes across the world center around migration. Salman Rushdie discusses the effects of human migration on American culture, emphasizing the idea that migration forms a better type of human. In his response to Rushdie’s essay, Scott Russel Sanders employs various rhetorical strategies to counter Rushdie’s idea that migration creates a more tolerant society. Initially, Sanders explains the history behind American migration, describing it as uniquely “seductive to Americans.” This word choice sets the stage for Sanders’ discussion on the appeal of migration to Americans. He lists groups who have been widely influential to American culture as a way to gracefully explain why migration …show more content…
Sanders ends his foundational paragraph by describing Americans as “drunk on driving.” This comedic flourish keeps his piece interesting, especially in the key moments as Sanders transitions into his incorporation of Rushdie’s work. Sanders concedes that “Americans are likely to share Rushdie’s enthusiasm for migration.” He implements parallel structures to introduce his disparate beliefs. He quotes Rushdie’s line “to say nothing of its ugly sister, patriotism” before creating a juxtaposition with his own, similarly structured line: “to say nothing of its ugly siblings, racism, religious sectarianism, or class snobbery.” In placing these lines side by side, Sanders makes it easy to see the disparities between his and Rushdie’s claims without overtly stating his thesis. He proposes a series of rhetorical questions as a turning point in his work. He asks if “migration has immunized the United States against bigotry” in order to transition into his discussion on the consequences of migration, and later on, his …show more content…
If someone leaves one place with a set of ideas, they will come to their new location with those same ideas still intact. This contradicts Rushdie’s thesis that movement allows people to develop tolerance. Sanders makes multiple historical references to instances of migration that had negative repercussions, including the Spanish colonization of Central America, the European colonization of North America, and the 1930s Dust Bowl. In doing so, Sanders bolsters his argument with indisputable, historical evidence. It can not be argued that the Spanish brought devastation with smallpox, or that Europeans carried slavery to North America, or that the migration to the Great Plains disrupted the natural ecosystem. Sanders ends his investigation of the effects of migration with a metaphor, describing “the mind [as] a cookie-cutter and the land [as] dough.” This figurative language provides a new perspective on the same idea: migrants will change the regions that they come to

Show More