Effecting Persuasion: How Adapting Rhetoric Informs the Response
Naomi Klein – “Honour the Treaties.”
Naomi Klein’s piece, Honour the Treaties, is an excerpt from her 2014 book entitled, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate, which is the fifth of seven books authored by Klein. An award-winning Canadian author, social activist, and filmmaker, Klein has authored several books on environmental activism, corporate globalism, and capitalism. While she holds no formal degree, Klein is a prolific and accomplished writer. Her extensive history and knowledge regarding the issue provides the ethos for her writing. While she may not proclaim her experience outright, within this section of her book, it is understood from her career that Klein is sufficiently knowledgeable about her subject of authorship. We can then surmise that the opinions and conclusions proffered within her composition are noteworthy.
To determine the timeliness of Klein’s piece, we must understand the context; that is, what was taking place in 2014 regarding The Northern Gateway Pipeline. Proposed in the mid-2000’s, Enbridge Inc., a multinational Canadian energy transportation company, originally submitted their proposal to undertake the construction of twin pipelines that would span from Bruderheim, Alberta to Kitimat, British Columbia. These pipelines would have crossed the tumultuous mountain terrain, unique to the harsh, yet fertile, Canadian North. From the onset of this controversial project, dubbed The Northern Gateway Pipeline, environmentalists, First Nations populations, and even several municipalities, stood in opposition to the expansive reach of Enbridge. The primary point of contention that was ultimately the demise of the proposed pipeline, was the severely detrimental environmental impact this project would have on protected, indigenous lands. What’s more, the unique aspect of this specific land is compounded by the fact that many indigenous First Nations peoples have lawful claims on these lands to support their traditional ways of life. The effects of climate change and environmental pollution, as a direct result of the extractive industries, already plagues many traditional lands used for hunting and subsistence living. Klein’s book, published in 2014 would have been received shortly after the Canadian Joint Review Panel (JRP), established by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) and the National Energy Board (NEB), had just reviewed Enbridge’s revised Northern Gateway Pipeline Proposal. By issuing her rhetorical response at a pivotal moment in this proposal’s lifespan, Klein struck while the iron was hot. The experienced author issued a compelling rhetorical plea at an excellently timed moment. Klein’s claims are centered around issues that she has spent her career addressing. Combatting and renouncing capitalistic values has been a recurring theme in much of Klein’s writing. Her attempts at drawing attention to capitalism provide insights exposing where the interests of many governments reside. Yet, it is not enough to simply provide a point of contention, at least, not in the composition of an effective rhetorical piece. Thus, Klein’s following claim is an attempt to demonstrate the difficulties First Nations populations have encountered in their opposition to Enbridge’s pipeline. As indigenous lands, traditionally used for subsistence survival are continually damaged by the pollution of oil and mineral extraction, First Nations people are caught in a difficult transition. Half-way between traditional indigenous practices and a capitalistic dollar-based existence, these protected populations are struggling to deal with the social issues resulting from Enbridge’s desire to change their landscape. By drawing attention to the quality of life and living condition on indigenous reservations, Klein is effectively calling to action non-Natives who oppose the pipeline. She claims that it is not enough to oppose the pipeline, nor is it enough to rely on the First Nations peoples to oppose the pipeline based on their legal claims to the land. To be able to expect reasonable opposition by First Nations peoples, it’s essential for non-Natives to provide viable alternatives that address the social hardships felt on indigenous reservations.
Let us then first examine Klein’s claims that capitalism is being valued over the environment. “The attacks came in the form of two omnibus budget bills passed in 2012 that gutted large parts of the country’s environmental regulatory framework. As a result, a great many industrial activities were suddenly exempt from federal environmental reviews […]” (Klein 2). Exposing political disenfranchisement of the environment, and those that depend upon it, Klein shows where the government’s interests lie. The sidelining of environmental concerns, in favor of capital gains, is systematically enacted into governmental policy, and to those in the extractive industries, the environmental impacts are apparent. Klein quotes a Greenlandic official as saying, “We’re very aware that we’ll cause more climate change by drilling for oil” (Klein 4). Using strong and assertive claims, such as, “[Indigenous rights] may now represent the most powerful barriers…from a future of climate chaos,” and “[…] demand that our governments refrain from finishing the job of flaying the planet” (Klein 1), Klein attempts to elicit a powerful and motivating response from her audience. The strong use of metaphor and assertive language is emblematic of an author’s attempt to elicit an active response from their audience.
The organization of an opposing party is not enough to combat the monumentally prosperous extractive industrial complex, Klein concludes. Calling attention to the squalid economic and environmental conditions present on many of Canada’s indigenous reservations, Klein aims to provoke an empathic realization for those unfamiliar with life on a reservation. “The deeper reason why more First Nations communities aren’t taking on companies like Shell has to do with the systematic economic and social disenfranchisement that makes doing business with heavily polluting oil or mining companies seem like the only way to cover basic human needs” (Klein 3). In a display of excellent authorship, Klein paints a vivid picture of the struggles of First Nation peoples to meet basic needs, often having to turn to the very companies damaging their traditional lands for work. Though the very work they are doing results in the pollution of essential fishing and drinking water, as well as hunting and living lands, First Nations peoples have little to no viable alternatives for economic opportunity. In a cyclical fashion, the more extractive work that is done, the more environmental damage results. Thus, the very land these populations are seeking to preserve is being damaged by the only work available to them. With this empathic perspective, Klein has provided a classic use of pathos, eliciting a strong emotional response from her audience.
Klein’s conclusion seems obvious, but that’s where its profundity lies: those who would stand in opposition of Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline must do more. First Nations communities are dealing with a staggering 25 percent of water ways that are so polluted a 2011 government report classified them as being a “high overall risk” to health (Burnside 2011). As if the fundamentally essential access to water was not a big enough hurdle, many communities also struggle with a lack of basic infrastructure, like sewage and running water. For communities such as these, meeting these basic needs remains at the forefront of their minds and priorities. Klein conjectures, “If this situation is going to change […] non-natives will have to become the treaty and land-sharing partners that our ancestors failed to be […] from providing health care and education to creating economic opportunities […]” (Klein 4). The conclusion put forth here is simple, yet compelling—a call to action for the environmentalists; a call to action to right past wrongs; a call to action for fellow humans.
Winona LaDuke – “The Spirit Bear and The Pipeline.”
Klein’s call to action, a skillful display of assertive and vivid language, draws attention to government’s politicized institution of capitalistic policy reform and negligent disregard for the impacts such policies have on the environment and the First Nations populations that depend upon a healthy ecosystem. While the economic struggles of many First Nations communities are well-documented and extensively discussed by Klein, it would seem as though the environmental activists opposed to Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Pipeline are similarly neglectful of the very real and conflicting issues that are taking place for these peoples. Confronting the same issue, Winona LaDuke, a renowned environmental activist, employs distinctly different rhetorical strategies to elicit a much different type of reaction from her audience.
Winona LaDuke’s piece, “The Spirit Bear and The Pipeline” is an excerpt from the 2012 book, The Energy Reader: Overdevelopment and the Delusion of Endless Growth. Holding a bachelor’s degree in economics from Harvard and a master’s degree in community economic development, LaDuke is an established environmentalist, economist, author, and former Vice-Presidential Candidate. She has co-founded, and is Executive Director of, Honor the Earth, a Native American environmental advocacy organization that actively protests the Dakota Access Pipeline. With understated professionalism, LaDuke addresses the same circumstances as Klein, establishing credibility through her prolific career. Using this knowledge, we can surmise that the opinions and conclusions proffered within her composition are also noteworthy.
In 2012, when LaDuke’s piece was released, Enbridge’s original proposal was under the review of the Canadian Joint Review Panel, of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and the National Energy Board. In 2011, the Joint Review Panel issued a request for additional information regarding the pipeline proposal, largely due to the unique geographic location that encompassed the proposed development grounds. A pipeline that would have traversed many lands whose legal owners, First Nations tribes, were woefully underrepresented and largely not consulted in Enbridge’s proposals. As such, The Northern Gateway Pipeline would have been a passionately debated recent event at the time. This a perfect example of seizing a kairotic moment to make a rhetorical plea.
LaDuke, like Klein, seems to have several purposes within her text. LaDuke attempts to: call awareness to the infringements upon historic treaties by the Canadian Government; call awareness to the impacts extractive industries have on the environment; and, call awareness to what climate change is doing to the traditional way of life for First Nations. These similarities end with the common social and environmental issues, however, as LaDuke gravitates towards more passive but equally visual and effective language. Her choice of rhetoric demonstrates a calm and factual presentation that is equally, if not more, inspiring for readers.
LaDuke’s initial claims are centered around the Canadian government’s infringement upon historic treaties made with First Nations peoples. “The People here in front of you signed Treaty with the government of Canada about 113 years ago […] Those people that signed Treaty had a belief that they would be treated fairly and that this land would be theirs […] They got the short end of the stick […]” (LaDuke 4). Historically, Native Americans, Alaska Natives, and First Nations peoples have been continuously exploited, and often, treated inhumanely. For this reprehensible policy of the opportunistic seizing of traditional lands to continue in the 21st century, LaDuke claims, is ethically and morally challenging. Acknowledging past transgressions by those who colonized Canada, LaDuke showcases the sentiment held by the First Nations: they can no longer passively observe their land being stripped from them. It’s an effective use of rhetorical technique to remind current generations of past transgressions.
LaDuke also addresses the known effects of the extractive industries on the environment. The environment in question is the same land that has supported First Nations peoples for thousands of years, “their territory surrounds the town of Kitimat, the proposed end of yet another tar sands pipeline, which means more large equipment, pipes, possible spills, and a lot of infrastructure […] straight through sensitive watersheds, temperate rainforests, and millennia-old communities of First Nations peoples” (LaDuke 1). The conscious decision of these people’s traditional lifestyle includes an honorific reverence for their natural resources. In essence, these societies have traditionally valued what has resulted in the propagation of a healthy and sustainable ecosystem. Struggling to abide by a traditional regimen, the necessary acquisition of monetary security has forced these people to accept what could be branded as predatory deals offered by mineral and oil extraction companies. A similar concern voiced by Cree villagers also embodied these apprehensions, “[…] talked about their land being overrun with roads and power lines, poisoned by oil and its by-products […]” (LaDuke 2). By evidencing the disappearance of their traditional way of life, LaDuke enlists facts to elicit an irrefutable truth.
LaDuke’s conclusion is congruent with the tone set by much of her paper, calmly factual, yet there’s a sense of urgency that spurs a notable feeling that action must be taken. By evidencing trends of subtle and gradual offenses against First Nations peoples by Canada’s government, it kindles a humanitarian response to defend these neglected peoples and cultures. “Alberta’s Petrol State is hoping that no one will notice the threat to the aboriginal people, the water, and the Spirit Bear” (LaDuke 4). She shows that, historically, the western form of government has relegated the needs of the First Nations peoples to the sideline. Where capitalism and the necessary concerns of First Nations peoples come into contention, the pursuit of a dollar seldom loses.
Conclusion
We’ve established that Klein’s and LaDuke’s motives are very similar, yet they’re presented using different perspectives and rhetorical techniques, as is evident in their conclusions. Klein, using assertive and vivid language, sparks a call to action for those non-Native opponents of the pipeline to do more to help First Nations peoples in their fight against the extractive industries. Choosing to fight with the power of the pen, Klein rallies support through her usage of graphic metaphors and charged words. As a direct result of these deliberate rhetorical choices, Klein’s work rallies and excites the reader, motivating a strong response for action. The impetus is placed upon the non-Native audience to stand in solidarity and support of the First Nations communities who are the strongest line of defense against the ethical depravity that is often intertwined with a capitalistic neglect of anything other than money.
LaDuke, a Native American, presents the case in such a way that shows the historic subjugation of First Nations peoples by Western government. Establishing a trend of subtle offenses against First Nations peoples, LaDuke elicits a humanitarian reaction from her readers. The audience is given powerful and factual evidence that demonstrates the inexcusable behavior of those companies and governments who would seek to exploit a struggling minority population. LaDuke’s writing provides a deeper understanding of what the First Nations peoples may be feeling, a factual look at what is happening to their traditional cultural practices, future existence and how it’s a continuation of a pattern. Together these pieces are evidence that an author’s intentional selection of different rhetorical techniques can elicit a different response from the audience. Whether attempting to provoke a combative call to action through assertive language, or humanitarian aid for a marginalized minority population struggling to obtain basic necessities, a consideration of proper rhetorical strategies will surely serve any author well.
Works Cited
Klein, Naomi. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2014.
LaDuke, Winona, et al. The Energy Reader: Overdevelopment and the Delusion of Endless Growth. Watershed Media, 2012.
Leung, Dennis. Northern Gateway Pipeline Map. December 19, 2013. Date Accessed December 18, 2018. www.vancouversun.com/Northern Gateway Pipeline/9306640/story.html.
Neegan Burnside Ltd. National Assessment of First Nations Water and Wastewater Systems: Manitoba Regional Roll-up Report, Final. January 2011. Date Accessed December 18, 2018. http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2016/aanc-inac/R6-1-2-2011-eng.pdf
____________________________________
Cody Coonjohn is a junior pursuing a Baccalaureate of Arts in English.