Rhetorical Analysis Post

      In his article, "Put Your Money Where Their Mouths Are," Nicholas D. Kristof attacks the current democratic solution to ending global child labor issues. He addresses modern democrats and humanitarians, telling them that protesting against child labor with the intention to end it really does nothing for the children who have fallen victim to it. In fact, children and families across the globe rely on the money made through child labor. Strictly prohibiting child labor actually does more harm to these children. Kristof proposes that instead putting all efforts into fighting against it, democrats need to worry more about getting these kids into school. Kristof suggests that the best way to do his is bribery. Many of these children have spent their lives in hunger so they will go anywhere they can find food. Therefore, to get these kids to school, Kristof encourages his audience to donate money to organizations that provide these schools with food. Instead of ending child labor and leaving them with nothing, the action of getting these children in school will provide them with the lasting benefits associated with having an education.
     Kristof is extremely effective at convincing his audience of republican university students that he has a valid solution for fighting against child labor, at least he is to me. As a republican, it caught my attention and obtained my agreement when Kristof highlights the lack of logic in the modern democratic solution in fighting against child labor. He argues that it makes no sense to end child labor and call it good. That simply leaves the children with no productivity in their lives; therefore, it makes sense to get the children out of labor, but also give them an eduction.
     In succeeding to capture his audience's emotions, Kristof shares the personal circumstances of different children around the world. Many of these children come from very difficult circumstances and Kristof is very effective at making that clear. Sharing the lives of these children with his audience certainly builds to their sympathy. This causes his audience to feel morally obligated to help these children out by donating, which is ultimately his purpose in writing the article.
    Kristofs argument is very aggressive towards democrats, but also very effective because he has credible sources to back up his claim. He presents multiple numbers and statistics that illustrate the magnitude of the global child labor issue. One of the most effective numbers he presents is the cost to feed one child per day, nineteen cents. Such a low price helps his audience understand that they really can donate and make a difference. It also provides a sense of hope for the children that we read about having very difficult circumstances.