Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies in "Legalize It -- The Economic Argument"

Appeals to Credibility or Character (Ethos)

• Personal stories

The author uses this strategy by saying, "In my own neighborhood a kindly older gentleman was recently arrested for possession of not quite four pounds of marijuana and sentenced to a year in state prison." He goes on to say, "His imprisonment has been devastating to his wife and family, has deprived the community of a good and well-liked neighbor, and has made him a convict or ex-convict forever." Dighe uses this strategy to connect with the reader, possibly to make them think what if that happened to one of their family members, and the lasting impacts it would have. I believe this makes the audience perceive the author as a good character who means well and transforms the text's overall message into something that the readers can relate to, and thus may sway them into also believing that marijuana should be legalized. Dighe is pro-legalization so depending on the reader's views, may impact his credibility.

• References to credible sources

"Ample medical evidence suggests that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol, and in a recent New Yorker interview even President Obama concurred." The New Yorker is a credible source, and the author uses this strategy to show readers he is not just voicing his own personal opinion, but backing it up with credible and factual information to further his claims. This makes the readers open to accepting the information much more, as it is backed up by scientific studies.

• Word Choice

The author uses the words "benefit" and "decriminalize" substantially to appeal to readers and make them feel like it will make the U.S. a better place to live with more freedom with what an individual can do with their body. 

• Tone

Dighe uses a very informative yet conversation-feeling tone that makes the article flow extremely well. A well written and sounding article affects the reader by making them believe the information truly is factual and correct, as the author "knows his stuff." This makes his claims seem more believable and one step closer to making his audience also believe marijuana should be legalized.

• Appeals to values or beliefs shared by the audience

"I might not approve of someone's choice to consume pork rinds and Keystone Light, but if it makes them happy we have to take that into account." The author knows not all citizens approve of the legalization of marijuana, and he does not force it upon them. That makes him seem more credible and a better character, which in turn, ups the notches on the text's effectiveness at conveying his message.

Appeals to Emotion (Pathos)

• Personal stories or other emotionally compelling narratives

By stating that his elderly neighbor's family's life has been ruined, he is attempting to create a sense of sympathy for the victims who have been affected by harsh laws, when they are indeed not criminals at all. These emotions are effective because the reader asks themselves, "what if that was my own child or husband, etc."

• Repetition of key words

"decriminalize" is used frequently throughout the text. The author is attempting to make the readers sympathize for the 19-32 million frequent marijuana users in the country who are labeled as criminals in the justice system. I'm not sure the resulting emotion is gained however, as Dighe mostly goes on to explain what decriminalization is and how it relates to prohibition, rather than tell a story that appeals to the emotions. It does not affect his credibility however, as his message around decriminalization is full of factual statistics and compelling evidence.

• Humor

I'm going to repeat a quote from above, "I might not approve of someone's choice to consume pork rinds and Keystone Light, but if it makes them happy we have to take that into account." This got a laugh out of me, and I'm sure it would do the same for other readers. Dighe's occasional insertion of one-liners in the article makes the reader smile and enjoy reading the piece. It creates an article that is not 100% technical and statistic, while still retaining the overall thesis.

• Shocking statistics

Many people argue that legalizing marijuana will lead to increased usage, and more accidents on the road or elsewhere. Dighe states, "A recent study by economists D. Mark Anderson and Daniel I. Rees found that semi-legalization, in the form of medical marijuana, in 16 states led adults to consume more marijuana but to moderate their alcohol consumption, leading to a 9 percent decrease in traffic fatalities." That is shocking and appeals to the emotions because nobody appreciates drunk drivers and the harm they cause to communities across the world. This enhances the author's credibility greatly.

Appeals to Logic (Logos)

• Historical records

"It was called Prohibition, which actually did not ban the consumption of alcohol but only its manufacture, sale and transportation. We've all heard how that turned out." The author is comparing prohibition to decriminalization in several states, where marijuana consumption is legal, but the manufacture or sale of the drug is still illegal. The same was the case with alcohol during prohibition, and that resulted in criminal empires supplying alcohol, violence, and just shear bad decision making. Effective at pushing for the full legalization of marijuana.

• Interviews

The article links to an interview by the New Yorker where President Obama concurred that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol. Many people respect the President's opinion, and this is an effective strategy at increasing the authors credibility and moving one step closer to having the readers agree with the Dighe.

• Case studies

"Marijuana has not been found to be physically addictive, and addiction rates of any kind are lower for marijuana than for alcohol, tobacco and harder drugs." This strategy creates believability in the author's claims that marijuana is not a health risk to the general public, and throws out the notion that marijuana is a gateway drug to even harder drugs.

• Effective organization

The author separates his claims and evidence by paragraph. Each separate claim has its own paragraph, and information is not thrown around randomly and ineffectively. He starts the paragraphs with his ideas and claims, and then gives ample background knowledge and factual references to back up his claims and improve credibility.

• Clear transitions/connections

Dighe does a fantastic job of transitioning from topic to topic. His transition sentences all relate to the previous claim and the next one, and his ideas basically one-up each other. He states a claim, gives evidence, and transitions into another claim that is made possible by his previous one. Usually, it is evidence of benefit to the U.S.

Logical Fallacies

• Casual generalization

In Dighe's statement regarding decreased traffic fatalities from decreased alcohol consumption, it does not state that the fatalities were related to crashes involving alcohol. The credibility still holds, however, more specifics would provide a stronger argument.

• Non sequitur

"(Aside: I live in upstate New York, which has an indoor smoking ban, and every day this winter I see nicotine addicts shivering and smoking outside; it's hard to imagine someone going outside in the dead of an upstate New York winter to smoke a joint.)" The author draws a conclusion that from his claim that usage would not go up by saying in the cold, users would not be smoking marijuana. That is not true, and I'm sure people would still be doing it. The effect on the reader is minimal because individuals who live in extremely cold areas would probably agree, and for those who don't, the content surrounding the claim enhances it, and makes the fallacy minimal.

Flickr. Rhetorical (1 of 2), July 8, 2011, Attribution 2.0 Generic