100%(5)5 out of 5 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 5 pages.
Grace KnapperProfessor AbrahamEnglish 1626 March 2017Desmond Tutu AnalysisAt the beginning of the 1900s in South Africa, all of the political power was held by whites. The white government officials began taking away the rights of the blacks already inhabiting the land. During this time there was a huge amount of violence done to blacks. This brought about the apartheid. After years of being racially separated, the apartheid was abolished in South Africa. However, there was still an invisible barrier that separated the whites from the blacks emotionally. The blacks felt the need for justice. In order to get the justice they seeked, they created the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to decide how justice would be imposed. Desmond Tutu, a South African Archbishop and author, wrote No Future Without Forgiveness to express his thoughts on the way South African handled the situation of justice. In chapter two, Tutu describes the similarities and differences between the Nuremberg Trials and the South African apartheid. Tutu also discusses the idea of victor’s justice and how it should be imposed in this situation. He also uses the African tradition of Ubuntu to explain his reasoning in this chapter. In the book, Tutu is trying to persuade the reader that his idea of how to fix the crisis is correct by using logos (logic), pathos (emotion), and ethos (ethics). Tutu’s use of these persuasive techniques allows him to come across as educated and informed.Tutu uses “logos,” or logic, to appeal to and persuade the readers of No Future Without Forgiveness. Tutu makes his claim, which is, “Neither side could impose victor’s justice because neither side won the decisive victory that would have enabled it to do so, since we had a military
stalemate. (20)” Victor’s justice is the ability given to a group of people who have won a war or afight to decide what justice will be given to their opponents who lost the fight. With the South African apartheid, Tutu’s argument may be somewhat valid because there was never a war in the first place. However, his claim that no one “won the decisive victory” is false. After the apartheidended, it was clear to see who the victor was. The blacks in South Africa got back their freedoms and ended the apartheid, making it very clear that they won the so-called fight. One could argue