Dave Meslin Case

Antidote to Apathy

Voting is a way of expressing a citizen's own opinion regarding the political life of his nation. Democracy stands for freedom of speech and people are the ones that elect politicians by voting for them. But unfortunately, some people are apathetic regarding this topic, and so, Dave Meslin critiqued people's apathy. He started his text by saying that apathy doesn't exist but people are discouraged because of the obstacles and barriers created and standing in their way. The main obstacles he talked about were the media, articles and advertisements that don't give us enough information about politicians and campaigns. The media's role is to provide readers with enough information about a certain topic, for example a place, time and contact information is given about candidates, debates and campaigns. The author's purpose from this text is to redefine these obstacles in order to make people care a bit more about their community. Dave Meslin was convincing to readers since the issue he raised was a very common problem for people and along the text, he gave some references of articles that proved his point.

The author Dave Meslin raised concern on a very important issue. By only considering this matter, he appealed to many people. Throughout the text, he was arguing about how people are considering themselves apathetic because they do not care about their political environment, but as for Dave Meslin, the main reason for this apathy is, the obstacles blocking the spread of information. The author used examples and references as a support for his issue like articles taken from magazines and newspapers in order to prove the point where not enough information is provided about politics which is considered as a barrier for people who prefer getting involved in the planning process. His examples were more than enough to show people in what type of problem they were facing because of the media. His tone was also serious and angry regarding this issue, and all along the text he uses rhetorical questions like in paragraph 6 "How do we view leadership?" and in paragraph 7, "How can we honestly and genuinely encourage more people to vote when votes don't count in Canada?". And he also repeated the words "redefine obstacles" to tel his readers that those obstacles and barriers are a serious issue.

The author's intention was basically to persuade the readers and the listeners. Personally I was touched where at the end he kept on saying the words "We can" that primarily asks for the people and the readers to join hands and redefine the barriers together using one voice. And in order to grab the reader's attention he said "people are amazing and smart and that they do care", he complimented those people to make them feel good about themselves and not be apathetic. Dave Meslin provided the reader with a counter argument in paragraph 9 where he suddenly stopped blaming the obstacles for people's apathy. "Now I'm not trying to be negative