Make A Rhetorical Analysis Of The Editorial Article America

Make A Rhetorical Analysis Of The Editorial Article America Has Lost

Make a rhetorical analysis of the editorial article "America Has Lost the War on Drugs. Here's What Needs to Happen Next." Begin with an introduction, summarizing the article, move to the argument analysis, analyze in several ways. Analyze the claim or thesis, evaluate it and the evidence if it is relevant to the claim. Conclude with a rhetorical context analysis: evaluate factors outside the text and answer questions provided to you. N/B You can analyze using the REALM approach. Length: 3 pages.

Paper For Above instruction

The editorial article titled "America Has Lost the War on Drugs. Here's What Needs to Happen Next" presents a compelling critique of the failed drug policies in the United States. The author argues that the longstanding war on drugs has not only been ineffective but has also exacerbated issues such as mass incarceration, racial disparities, and public health crises. The article advocates for a strategic shift towards decriminalization, harm reduction, and increased investment in treatment and prevention programs as more effective solutions to the nation's drug problems. This summary encapsulates the article’s central thesis, emphasizing the need for a fundamental reevaluation of current policies to foster a healthier, more equitable society.

The core argument of the article rests on the claim that the war on drugs has failed to achieve its intended goals and has caused significant collateral damage. The author supports this thesis by presenting evidence of the high incarceration rates for drug offenses, disproportionate impacts on minority communities, and the rise of opioid-related deaths. Furthermore, the article references studies and reports from reputable organizations like the Drug Policy Alliance and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to substantiate claims about policy ineffectiveness and public health issues. The relevance of this evidence is clear, as it lends credibility to the assertion that traditional punitive approaches are insufficient, calling instead for reforms rooted in public health and social justice.

From a rhetorical perspective, the article employs several strategies to persuade its audience. Ethos is established through citations of authoritative sources and the presentation of statistical data, reinforcing the writer's credibility. Logos is predominant in the logical progression of arguments that demonstrate policy failures and propose alternative solutions grounded in research. Pathos may also be invoked by highlighting the human toll of drug laws—disproportionate incarceration of minorities and the suffering of individuals underserved by current systems—appealing to readers’ sense of justice and empathy. The article’s tone, which balances urgency with reasoned analysis, effectively mobilizes the audience to reconsider existing stereotypes and policy paradigms.

Analyzing the claim or thesis critically, it is clear that the article takes a strong stance against the efficacy of the war on drugs. The evidence provided aligns well with the thesis, painting a consistent picture of systemic failure. However, one might evaluate whether the proposed solutions—decriminalization and harm reduction—are presented with sufficient acknowledgment of potential challenges, such as political opposition or implementation hurdles. While the evidence convincingly illustrates the problems, the feasibility of the suggested policies could benefit from further exploration, making the argument more comprehensive.

In terms of rhetorical context, outside factors shaping the effectiveness of the article include the current political climate, societal attitudes toward drug use, and recent shifts in drug policy debates. The article’s timing coincides with growing public support for decriminalization efforts, exemplified by policies in places like Portugal and parts of Canada. Politically, increased awareness of racial disparities in the criminal justice system fuels the argument, leveraging the ongoing discourse about social justice movements. Media coverage and advocacy by organizations such as the Drug Policy Alliance amplify the arguments, influencing public opinion and policymaker perspectives. Recognizing these external influences enhances our understanding of the article’s persuasive impact.

References

• Drug Policy Alliance. (2022). The Case for Decriminalizing Drugs. Retrieved from https://drugpolicy.org
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023). Drug Overdose Deaths. CDC.gov.
• Hansen, H., & Roman, J. (2017). The War on Drugs and Its Impact on Racial Disparities. Journal of Social Policy, 46(2), 243–269.
• Listhaug, D. (2021). Harm Reduction Strategies: Evidence and Challenges. Public Health Review, 12(4), 122–135.
• Potter, D. (2018). Drug Decriminalization and Public Health Outcomes. International Journal of Drug Policy, 55, 107–114.
• Reuter, P., & MacCoun, R. (2019). The Past, Present, and Future of Drug Policy. Annual Review of Public Health, 40, 81–96.
• Santos, C. (2020). Racial Disparities in Drug Sentencing. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 6(3), 363–375.
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2022). World Drug Report 2022.
• Watson, D. (2021). Public Opinion and Policy Change on Drug Decriminalization. Policy Studies Journal, 49(1), 123–140.
• Zolnierek, K. (2019). The Effectiveness of Harm Reduction Policies. Harm Reduction Journal, 16, 76.