Project 2 Outline

This post will include a detailed outline of Project 2, using the new knowledge I have obtained and will reflect on from the reading, which was titled Writing Your Rhetorical Analysis.

Verdier, Christophe, "Alone in front of the sea." 12/27/2010 via Flickr. Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic

I was reminded in the thesis portion of the reading that in addition to analyzing the strategies employed by the author of my text, I also need to evaluate the effectiveness of those strategies' persuasiveness within my thesis statement. Thus, I feel like I have to edit my thesis to include an argument that I create. The introduction part of the text informed me that in an analysis of a text one doesn't have to give all possible background on an issue, rather merely providing essential background information regarding the issues addressed in the text itself. Learning that analytical claims must be debatable but still supported by the text was another effective lesson to learn, and that closing sentences to body paragraphs are essential in proving a paragraph's worth. Also, unlike what has been instilled in my mind, which is that conclusions simply restate main idea, in a rhetorical analysis a conclusion is used to analyze why the arguments I feel the strategies I chose to discuss are or are not truly effective.

Introduction:

• Background info:
• who the author is and what credibility this gives her
• the context of the text when it was written and how things have changed (or not) since then
• address how this controversy has only been debated from a moral standpoint, but money has a lot to do with legalization of marijuana.

• Thesis:
• Well-known and respected author, S.E. Smith, employs statistics, historical background, and humor throughout her article "How legalizing pot could save America's economy". These strategies are used in order to appeal to the values of her predominately American readers, whether or not they were originally supporters or opponents of legalizing marijuana before reading the article, and effectively makes it seem as though legalization is the only option for moral and economic prosperity in America, from both logical and emotional standpoints.

Body 1:

• Analytical Claim: Smith addresses a common American belief within her article, which is that history repeats itself, to effectively persuade her readers that marijuana must be legalized.
• Sub Claim- The author uses historical data to illustrate why America's prohibition on alcohol failed, in order to show how the banning of alcohol of the past is quite similar to the current prohibition of marijuana, thus proving that it too must be put to a stop.
• Support- "In a 1970 essay for the New York Times, Gore Vidal
  spoke to a previous era of prohibition in U.S. history, cautioning the reader to avoid repeating the lessons of the past. Vidal wrote, 'No one in Washington today recalls what happened during the years alcohol was forbidden to the people by a Congress that thought it had a divine mission to stamp out Demon Rum and so launched the greatest crime wave in the country's history, caused thousands of deaths from bad alcohol, and created a general (and persisting) contempt for the laws of the United States.'"
• " Forty-four years later, the editorial board of the same publication was calling for full legalization. 'It has been more than 40 years since Congress passed the current ban on marijuana, inflicting great harm on society just to prohibit a substance far less dangerous than alcohol...'"

• Sub Claim- The author uses shocking statistics to show just how expensive it is to keep marijuana illegal.
• Support- "The drug war costs the U.S. government a tremendous amount annually... Instead of wasting $1 trillion on direct law enforcement initiatives yearly to investigate suspected growers, traffickers, and dealers, the government could focus on more pressing initiatives."

• Sub Claim- Smith employs humor in her appeal to the value of how history repeats itself to show how the harsh ideas against marijuana are out-dated, especially when out past three Presidents have all confessed to using the drug that is viewed in such a judgmental fashion.
• Support-"In a nation where substances like tobacco and alcohol remain legal, highly regulated, and highly profitable, it's surprising to see marijuana still tarred in stigma — especially when Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all admitted to having a toke (whether they inhaled or not)."

Body 2:

• Analytical Claim: The article is effective in appealing to a common American belief that equality is a crucial corner stone in life, and that citizens of the U.S. should be willing to help their neighbors whenever possible.
• Sub Claim- Smith utilizes shocking statistics that will really appeal to her readers, emotional and moral beliefs. She proves to her audience that far too many people, especially minorities, are currently unjustly incarcerated for non-violent drug charges, including marijuana.
• Support-"An estimated one in four people are in prison solely because of non-violent drug offenses, including possession, sales, and repeat offenses related to marijuana."
• "The vast majority of these individuals are black and Latino, reflecting racial imbalances in the justice system — people of color are more likely to be profiled, more likely to be caught, and less likely to be able to bring an adequate defense to court. "   

• Sub Claim- The author further appeals to her audience's emotions by reminding them that when marijuana is legalized many individuals will be able to stay with their families, thus allowing them to work and consequently help society, which also appeals to readers' logic.
• Support- "Systemic poverty can be directly linked to fractured communities, such as those that have been torn apart by the drug war. Allowing men to remain with their families, economically participate in their communities, and contribute to society boosts not only their own economic chances and those of their families, but the community as a whole."
• "Opening the prison doors would be a good start to solving the thorny problem of entrenched poverty among communities of color in the United States — and it's worth noting that poor communities are themselves an economic drain, requiring more government support and a stronger safety net because they are unable to support themselves."

Body 3:

• Analytical Claim: In addition to achieving her goal of proving the need for a country-wide halt on current weed prohibition by appealing to her readers' acknowledgement that history repeats itself and that equality and fairness should be prevalent in all aspects of life, Smith further attracts people to the idea of legalization through catering to the typical American appreciation of money.
• Sub Claim- The author portrays how the government is losing the potential to make a ton of money, by legalizing marijuana, that could benefit a lot of people in return.
• Support- "For a country obsessed with free market capitalism and government spending, the United States has been slow to act on repealing marijuana prohibition..."
• "Average annual trade in marijuana is estimated at $113 billion, which represents nearly $45 billion in taxes slipping through our fingers..."

• Sub Claim- Statistics and effective appeal to logic are used by the author when she goes into great detail about how legalization will benefit many industries in America. Thus portraying the idea that legalization not only appeals to government officials, but hardworking Americans as well.
• Support- As mentioned in the text a plethora of industries will benefit if marijuana is legalized, including: transportation (trucking, rails), packaging, retail, processing, and tourism
• "For labor unions, this could indirectly provide an opportunity to reopen negotiations over pay, working hours, and benefits, which would stimulate further localized economic growth."

• Sub Claim- Smith uses humor in her description of how legalization could benefit tourism to show how in some states, specifically her home state of California, marijuana has already become the norm, which helps to remind readers that legalization isn't such a huge issue.
• Support- "While the streets of San Francisco and Berkeley already ring skunky with the scent of marijuana at some times of the year, full legalization would lead to more open usage of the drug, along with an uptick in tourist rates to regions well-known for their crop and the quality of their marijuana products, such as the Bay Area."

Conclusion:

• Discuss how the above support for the author's appeal to typical and widespread American values, while defending marijuana legalization, makes it seem un-American to be an opponent of legalization.
• Address how in a typical business argument logic and numbers are crucial to prove a point, but emotional and ethical appeal to audience is imperative also. Business people do indeed like hard facts, however they are still human in an emotional aspect on the inside, thus finding a balance between logic and emotion while formulating an argument about an issue pertaining to business is very important. 

Reflection:

I learned a lot after reading and commenting on Breanna's and Annelise's posts for their outlines. Both of my peers provided a lot of examples and support from their chosen text to prove their claims, which reassured me that I didn't put to many quotes from my article in my outline. One thing that both Breanna and Annelise pointed out in their analysis of the reading for this post and within their outlines was the fact that the conclusion is very important and should have a real purpose, rather than just restating earlier ideas. Specifically, Breanna pointed out that one's conclusion might be geared to invoke further thought for the author's audience. I think that this is definitely something that I should keep in mind, especially to avoid the typical summary based conclusion that I am used to writing.