Full text of "Indian independence movement under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and the U.S.A. civil rights movement under the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: a comparison of two social movements to assess the utility of nonviolence as a rhetorical strategy"

See other formats

THE INDIAN INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF
MAHATMA GANDHI AND THE U.S.A. CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT UNDER

THE LEADERSHIP OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. :

A COMPARISON OF TWO SOCIAL MOVEMENTS TO ASSESS THE UTILITY

OF NONVIOLENCE AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY

MITTIE JO ANN NIMOCKS

A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN

PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1986

Mittie Jo Ann Nimocks

I dedicate this dissertation to

Cordelia Jones Nimocks

Frances Lane Nimocks

and

Robert Franklin Nimocks, II

This dubious honor is bestowed with

all the love and appreciation I can express,

for their cheerful, patient and generous acceptance

of numerous,

unexpected,

extra years of parenting

to get the last one launched

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I suspect that it is rarely if ever that a dissertation
is truly the product of a single individual's efforts. It
is certainly not so for this one, and so I would like to
acknowledge and offer a special note of thanks to those who
made the completion of this dissertation possible for me.

First of all, there are no words that can adequately
express not only my gratitude but my respect and admiration
for Dr. Donald E. Williams, who served as chair of my
committee until he left to fill a Fulbright Professorship in
Zimbabwe. Not only did he give skilled guidance for my
research, but he gave willingly of his much-demanded time to
enable me to complete most of my work before his departure.
His enthusiasm, professionalism, and understanding, as well
as his expertise, form a model of a university scholar and
educator that I gratefully carry with me as I begin my own
career.

I also want to express my appreciation to Dr. Norman N.
Markel who graciously stepped in as cochairman of my commit-
tee. His time and advice were of incalculable value, and
his enthusiastic interest in my study was an endless source
of motivation. For conquering my statistic-phobia, he has
my unflagging wonder as well as gratitude!

The course in general semantics I took under
Dr. Anthony Clark provided information that stimulated my
thoughts more than any one course in my academic career.
It, in fact, provided the basis for the theoretical portions
of this study. Dr. Gene Thursby introduced me to the
philosophies of Gandhi's India (not to mention "A Prairie
Home Companion"!). His thoughtful suggestions and friendly
words of encouragement could always be counted on. Dr.
Joseph Vandiver also graciously stepped in at the last
moment to make available his knowledge of sociology and
social movements as a resource for this study.

I also want to pay special thanks to two professors who
were not on my committee but who were still most instructive
in the development of my study; they are Dr. Maxine Thompson
and Dr. Lynne Webb.

Thanks go to my typist, Barbara Smerage, whose profes-
sionalism and ingenuity made her a pleasure to work with.
Thanks are also due my cocoders, Annie FitzSimons,
Anita Raghaven, Sylvia Oosterhoff, and Lorin Mullins for
their time, conscientiousness, and interest.

My acknowledgments would never be complete without my
thanking those friends who through their time, hospitality,
and emotional support were as instrumental in the completion
of this document as those who helped in the actual writing.
I extend thanks to Mary and Ted Landsman for providing my
home away from home; to Fred Zendt for his "southern"

hospitality which mitigated the expense of trips to the
M.L. King Center in Atlanta; to Martin de Wet for introduc-
ing me to the wonderful world of word processing and for
many hours of typing so generously given; to my roommate,
Susan Roxbury, who helped make our apartment a quiet and
congenial escape from academic pressures; to Bill "Chief"
Wallace who gave me the best advice I received ("Don't worry
about it; just write it!"); to Jim Flynn who went to great
lengths to keep me smiling ("dammit!"); to Laurie Weiman for
being so "heroic" (Boy, have you got 'em all fooled!);
and to Amanda Jamison who is certain to want to keep this
document so that she can sell it with my other personal
correspondence once I am rich and famous.

Finally, I would like to thank all of my family for
their continuing interest and encouragement. My greatest
thanks go to Mother, Dad, and Aunt Frances, for reasons so
numerous they could comprise another dissertation! To them,
I can only say "Thanks for everything!"

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv

LIST OF TABLES X

LIST OF FIGURES xi

ABSTRACT xv

CHAPTERS

ONE NONVIOLENCE AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY: A
HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF TWO SUCCESSFUL

MOVEMENTS 1

Introduction 1

The Question 18

Review of Existing Research 22

Rhetorical Studies in Intercultural

Communication 22

Indian Independence and Civil Rights

Movements Research 27

Rhetorical Studies about King and Gandhi. 30
Research on the Use of Nonviolence as a

Persuasive Device 42

Movement Studies 4 9

Methodology for the Present Study 59

TWO NONVIOLENT EFFICACY THEORY: INTRODUCTION
TO A METHOD FOR ANALYZING RHETORICAL
OPTIONS FOR THE PLANNERS OF SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS 6 3

Major Propositions of NVET 75

Operational Linkages 82

Objective Material Conditions 83

Rhetorical Discourse 98

Ideologies 108

THREE NONVIOLENCE AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY IN THE
INDIAN INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT: NONVIOLENT

EFFICACY THEORY APPLIED 117

Variables Affecting the Movement's

Potential for Power 118

Level of Exposure (to Movement

Rhetoric) 119

Level of Identification (of Followers

with Movement) 12 8

Level of Unity (among Followers) 141

Level of Motivation (among Followers).... 145
Extent of Economic and Political

Influence (of the Movement) 151

Level of Potential Physical Power 158

Degree of Credibility 160

Level of Power (of Movement) 162

The Level of Persuasibility of the

Opposition to Movement Rhetoric 165

The Level of Socio-Psychological

Importance 165

Level of Economic/Political Importance... 171

The Level of Persuasibility 173

Variables Influencing the Potential Efficacy

of Nonviolence 175

Level of Cultural Preference for

Nonviolence 176

Level of Violent Reaction 178

Extent of Modification 182

Strength of the Rhetorical Vision 185

Degree of Possible Rejection 188

Degree of Efficacy 189

Variables Affecting the Extent of Change. . . . 190

The Level of Disequilibrium 191

The Extent of Change in Attitudes and

Policies 191

Extent of Restoration of Equilibrium 193

Synthesis 194

FOUR THE RHETORIC OF NONVIOLENT MOVEMENT

LEADERS: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN

COMMUNICATOR STYLE AND LEADERSHIP TRAITS

AS REVEALED THROUGH THE SPEECHES OF GANDHI

AND KING 200

Procedure 203

Selection of Speeches 203

Description of Content Measures 206

Word count measures 206

Content analysis measures 207

Reliability of Measure 209

Method to Determine Differences Between

Speakers 211

Results 212

Results of word count measures 213

Results of content analysis measures.. 214
Method to Determine Differences Among

Speeches of One Speaker 215

Methodology 215

Results of Friedman two-way analysis.. 217

Discussion 227

FIVE A REVIEW OF THE NONVIOLENT EFFICACY THEORY:
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH IN THE
STUDY OF NONVIOLENT SYMBOLIC ACTION AND

RHETORIC AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY 228

Nonviolent Efficacy Theory Analysis 228

Psycholinguistic Analysis 229

Research Limitations 230

Suggestions for Further Research 231

APPENDICES

A CODER'S PROTOCOL 234

B WORKSHEETS FOR CODERS 252

C SPEECH SEGMENTS CODED FOR WORD COUNT AND

CONTENT ANALYSIS MEASURES 261

D GANDHI'S AND KING'S SCORES ON WORD COUNT

MEASURES 296

E GANDHI'S AND KING'S SCORES ON CONTENT

ANALYSIS MEASURES 298

REFERENCES 300

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 307

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page

4.1 Intercoder Reliability for Each

Measure 210

4 . 2 Score for Mann-Whitney U-Test 213

4.3 Scores for Friedman Analysis 217

4.4 King's Scores on the Flesch Human

Interest Score 218

4.5 Gandhi's Scores on the Anxiety Scale 220

4.6 Gandhi's Scores for the Attitude Toward

Self Scale 221

4.7 Results of Mann-Whitney U-test Applied to
Find Differences in Gandhi ' s Speaking
Style According to Audience's Racial
Composition 224

4.8 Results of Mann-Whitney U-test Applied
to Find Differences in King's Speaking
Style According to Audience's Racial
Composition 224

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

2.1 Four stages of change in the opposition's
vision of social reality 77

2.2 Theoretical path model for NVET. (Lucas'
Vital Force #3; ideologies of those

involved is present throughout the model.). 80

2.3 The greater the Degree of Exposure to the
movement's rhetoric, the greater the Level
of Persuasibility (of the opposition) to a
critical point of saturation at which the

Level of Persuasibility lessens 85

2 . 4 The greater the Degree of Exposure to
the movement's rhetoric, the higher the
possible Level of Identification with the
movement will be until the Degree of
Exposure reaches a critical point of
saturation at which the Level of
Identification lessens slightly and

levels off 85

2.5 As the Degree of Identification (with the
movement by followers) increases, the
Level of Unity (among factions) increases.

2.6 As the Degree of Identification (with the
movement by followers) increases, the
Level of Motivation (among followers)
increases

2.7 As the Level of Follower Unity increases,
the Extent of Power (of the movement)
increases steadily until it reaches a
critical point at which the Level of Unity
increases incrementally 90

2.8 As the Level of Motivation increases, the
Extent of Power (of the movement) increases
steadily until it reaches a critical point
at which the Extent of Power increases
incrementally 90

2.9 As the Extent of Economic and Political
Influence (of the movement) increases, the
Level of Power (of the movement) increases
until it reaches a critical point at which
the movement is so powerful that no
"movement" is necessary — change can occur

on demand 93

2.10 As the Extent of Physical Strength (of
movement followers) increases, the Level of
Power (of the movement) increases to a
critical point at which a "movement" is

not necessary 93

2.11 As the Degree of Credibility (of the
Higher Authority) increases, the Level

of Power (of the movement) increases 96

2.12 As the Degree of Credibility (of the
Higher Authority) increases, the Level of
Persuasibility increases 96

2.13 As the Level of Sociopsychological
Importance (of the opposition's original
social reality) increases, the Level of
Persuasibility (of the opposition)

decreases 99

2.14 As the Level of Economic/Political
Importance (of the opposition's original
social reality) increases, the Level of
Persuasibility (of the audience)

decreases 99

2.15 As the Level of Power (of the movement)
increases, the Degree of Efficacy (of
nonviolent symbolic action plus rhetoric)
increases incrementally 103

2.16 As the Level of Persuasibility (of the
opposition) increases, the Degree of
Efficacy (of nonviolent symbolic action

plus rhetoric) increases incrementally 103

2.17 As the Level of Cultural Preference (for
nonviolence) increases, the Degreea of
Efficacy (of nonviolent symbolic action)
increases 105

2.18 As the Degree of Violent Reaction (evoked
in the opposition by the movement)
increases, the Level of Efficacy

increases 107

2.19 As the Degree of Violent Reaction (evoked
in the opposition by the movement)
increases, the Extent of Modification (of
the rheteorical vision by the opposition)
decreases 107

2.20 As the Extent of Modification (of the
rhetorical vision by the movement)
increases, the Degree of Efficacy

decreases 107

2.21 As the Degree to which Verbal Rhetoric
embodies commonly held ideological myths
increases, the Degree of Efficacy

increases incrementally 110

2.22 As the Degree to which Verbal Rhetoric
embodies commonly held ideological myths
increases, the Extent to which the
Opposition may Reject or ignore the

rhetoric decreases incrementally 110

2.2 3 As the Extent to which the Opposition may
Reject or ignore rhetoric increases, the
Degree of Efficacy (of nonviolent symbolic
action) decreases incrementally 110

2.24 As the Degree of Efficacy of nonviolent
symbolic action plus rhetoric) increases,
the Level of Disequilibrium (in the
opposition) increases 112

2.25 As the Level of Disequilibrium increases,
the Extent of Change in attitudes and
policies of the larger society increases to
a point at which it levels off. As it
reaches another critical point, disequi-
librium becomes so great that change is

again required 112

2.26 As the Extent of Change in attitudes and
policies increases, the Extent of
Restoration of Equilibrium increases to a
critical point at which the opposition
feels enough change has been made, at a
second critical point so much change
has caused the opposition to feel good
and generous 112

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School

of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

THE INDIAN INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF
MAHATMA GANDHI AND THE U.S.A. CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT UNDER

THE LEADERSHIP OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. :
A COMPARISON OF TWO SOCIAL MOVEMENTS TO ASSESS THE UTILITY
OF NONVIOLENCE AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY

Mittie Jo Ann Nimocks
May, 1986

Chairman: Norman N. Markel
Cochairman: Donald E. Williams
Major Department: Speech

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy

of nonviolent direct action in effecting social change. The

Nonviolent Efficacy Theory (NVET) was developed to describe

major variables interacting to influence the success or

failure of nonviolent social movements. The theory suggests

the manner in which these variables interact and offers a

method by which to estimate effectiveness or potential

effectiveness of nonviolence used in historical,

contemporary, or future movements. Two successful 20th

Century movements, the Indian Independence Movement under

the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and the U.S.A. Civil

Rights Movement under the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther

King, Jr., were analyzed using NVET to ascertain which
variables existing in and around these movements were not
essential for the successful utilization of nonviolence.
The salient variables of leader's style and personality as
revealed through language were analyzed using nine psycho-
linguistic measures. Word count measures used included word
and sentence counts, Type-Token Ratio, Adjective-Verb
Quotient, and Flesch Human Interest Score.

The content analysis measures used included
Discomfort-Relief Quotient, Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scale,
and Markel's Social Orientation Scales adapted from
Gottschalk. The author's hypotheses that a culture's
preference for nonviolence and appeals to higher authori-
ties, standards, and concepts common to the movement and its
opposition are the two most important factors to a success-
ful movement were neither proven nor disproven. However,
results indicate that high levels of political, economic, or
physical power are not essential to a movement's success.
Results of content analyses reveal no significant stylistic
differences between King and Gandhi. However, results show
that Gandhi experienced a significantly higher level of
speaker discomfort and King demonstrated a significantly
higher level of positive attitudes toward self and others.
Complete descriptions of each word count and content analy-
sis with coder's protocol and examples of coded speech
segments are included for easy reference to methodology.

CHAPTER ONE
NONVIOLENCE AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY: A
HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF TWO SUCCESSFUL MOVEMENTS

Introduction

In his work Essays in Sociology (1946), German soci-
ologist Max Weber discusses the structure of human society,
the ways in which this structure is stratified, and for what
reasons. He discusses intergroup conflict within society
and the causes of such conflict, identifying the major cause
as disagreement over the distribution of three areas of
societal rewards: class, status, and power.

The rewards of class are primarily economic: one's
income, property, and material possessions. The opportuni-
ties to attain wealth such as proper education and entrance
into lucrative occupations are also rewards of class.

Status rewards are given by society through rituals,
formalities, norms of politeness and etiquette, and forms of
address which bestow honor, respect, or prestige on an
individual or group. Power rewards are access to political
office and influence in the society's decision-making
process .

Intergroup conflict occurs in a society when one group
feels that it is not getting its due share of one or more of

these rewards. Such distinctions may be the result of
racism. The term "race" in this study will be used to
refer to a social definition based on perceived physical
differences deemed significant by a society (Gordon, 1964;
Marx, 1971). "Racism," then, is the uncritical acceptance
of negative social definitions of a group identified as a
race on the basis of such perceived significant physical
differences (Gordon, 1964; Marx, 1971). A study of Indian
society during its years as a British colony reveals such
disparity in the distribution of rewards of class, status,
and power between the native people and the alien rulers;
this disparity led to the Indian Movement for Home Rule.

A nation rich in natural and human creative resources,
India is also a nation with a history of invasions by
foreign warriors and merchants interested in enriching
themselves and their homelands with the endowments of this
mystic land--its mineral and agricultural wealth, its
beautiful and unusual crafts, and its strange and intriguing
ideas. Near the beginning of the 17th century. Great
Britain joined the ranks of Indian invaders with a plan to
exploit India's commercial potentials. The East India
Company was founded expressly for the exportation and sale
of Indian spices, drugs, cotton, sugar, and crafts. Slowly
but surely as the British Empire expanded in other parts of
the world so did its control of India. Frequently, this
expansion was made possible by less than respectable means

through the making and breaking of agreements with leaders
of the various and constantly warring states within India.
Britain would promise to aid the cause of the prince or
sovereign of one Indian province in return for land and
privileges but would take that land and those privileges and
forget the promise to the giver. It was in this way that by
the 1700s Great Britain had gained control of India's gov-
ernment completely, ruling it either directly through
appointed British governors or indirectly through Hindu
maharaja and Moslem nawab puppets.

With the dawning of the Industrial Revolution,
Britain's import of Indian goods waned as the export of its
own manufactured goods increased. India's industries sagged
under this loss of trade, and quickly the nation regressed
to a purely agrarian state that was neither fertile enough
nor sophisticated enough to supply the already huge and
growing Indian population.

Embittered by a history of exploitation, incensed by
discriminatory British laws and taxes, and driven by poverty
and hunger, Indians waged a major spontaneous and disorgan-
ized military uprising against its oppressive foreign
rulers. Many insults were experienced by the Indian popula-
tion but the catalyst to this 1857 "Sepoy Uprising" was, to
the British, the oversight of seemingly unfounded supersti-
tious beliefs. To the Indians it was an insensitive and
blasphemous disregard on the part of the British of

traditional Hindu and Moslem law. British-made cartridges
were newly distributed among the Indian-populated British
military units; the cartridges, which had to be bitten
before loading, were greased with cow or pig fat, an element
considered untouchable or unclean to Hindus and Moslems,
respectively. During the uprising, one Indian regiment
did manage to seize Delhi through much killing and vandal-
ism. Yet the fury of the rebellion did not make up for the
lack of cohesion and planning among Indian forces, and the
British were able completely to suppress the uprising within
but a matter of months.

However, the Sepoy Mutiny did cause a few minor
improvements in conditions and attitudes in India. British
rulers became more conscientious about their public trust,
improving living conditions and communication and transpor-
tation systems. British officials of this time period quite
commonly had lived most of their lives in this mysterious
and beautiful colony and considered it, much more than
England, as "home."

Britain postured as the benevolent but temporary gov-
erning power, "parenting" India until the time India was
capable of self-rule. Yet racism, hardly a condition con-
ducive to learning and taking on responsibility, continued
in India against Indians. All things native or Asian were
deemed second-rate by the British elite. In their own land
Indians were subjugated, as all real power to spend taxes.

to appoint leaders, and to decide policy was in the hands of
the British. Also, while India was supposedly gaining
political and economic independence under British tutelage,
its economic and political power was severely restricted
through British law.

In 1888 the Indian National Congress was formed as an
overt step in the direction of India self-governance, but in
reality that Congress was possessed of much ceremony and
little real power. Another organization, intended, in
theory, to train India for self-rule was the Indian Civil
Service. Yet, at no time was this organization comprised of
less than 95% British members. Instead of encouraging
national factions to unite, Britain seemed further to divide
the already splintered population against itself by favoring
first the Hindus then the Moslems as well as dividing the
nation into British India governed by Britain directly and
Native India governed by Britain indirectly through Indian
princes. Such division encouraged feuding among states
which kept India politically weak especially in comparison
to the mighty and united British empire.

Economically, Britain could be expected to do what was
best for England without regard to its "ward," India.
Indian shipping and shipbuilding were officially restricted
so that they would not impinge on demands for British
shipping and shipbuilding. According to Fischer (1950),
Indian historian and biographer of Mahatma Gandhi, Indian

industry and professional services were actively discouraged

through a system of "Education [which] was not designed to

train a technical staff for industry nor a professional

class to serve the country." Thus, dependence on British

talent and know-how was perpetuated rather than mitigated.

Under Weber's heading of rewards of class, great

disparity existed between British and Indians in the amount

of material goods and property owned and in the occupations

and salaries available to each group. The status of Indians

was low. Even members of the highest caste were considered

lower than the British. Field Marshall Lord Roberts, quoted

by Fischer, summed up this prejudice against Indians when he

stated,

It is this consciousness of the inherent superi-
ority of the European which has won us India.
However well-educated and clever a native may be
and however brave he may have proved himself, I
believe that no rank which we can bestow upon him
would cause him to be considered an equal by the
British officer. (Roberts, cited in Fischer,
1950, p. 171).

Such attitudes openly expressed, and translated into insti-
tutionalized racism through discriminatory laws and social
practices, made Indian discontent unavoidable and
British-Indian conflict inevitable.

In the midst of such conditions, a young Indian was
born by the name of Mohandas Karmachand Gandhi. Born into a
family of the Vaisya caste, considered of lower status than
the priests and warrior castes, the child Gandhi enjoyed a
happy homelife in a cultured and well-to-do household. The

youngest in the family, he respected his father but was
closest to his mother whom he revered as a near saint.
Although he was not a religious child, he respected his
mother's religious discipline which was to influence his own
religious discipline in later years. At the age of 13 he
was married to the girl, Kasturbai, through the traditional
parentally-arranged marriage of Hindu India, yet he remained
in his father's home and continued school as any other
typical adolescent. As a student, he was unremarkable, but
in high school he took a particular interest in comparative
religion and studied the scriptures of Moslem, Parsi, Jain,
and Buddhist philosophies. In 1888, Gandhi had the oppor-
tunity to travel to London seeking a law degree. He left a
pregnant wife, a small son, many friends, and relatives, but
it was the separation from his mother that most grieved him.
Upon his departure she extracted a promise from him that he
would not fall victim to English temptations of alcohol,
cigars, promiscuous women, and diets including meat.

Young Gandhi proved to be a conscientious student not
only of law but of many other human issues. In London, he
enjoyed the company and friendship of many native English
men and women and soon found himself to be a loyal British
subject much in tune with and enamoured of the "British way
of thinking." He took a particular interest in the study
and discussion of vegetarianism and Christianity. As a
vegetarian in a meat-eating society, Gandhi sought out the

company of other vegetarians and joined a society for vege-
tarianism. With the help of these associations, he was able
to formulate a rationale based on remaining on a meatless
diet for health and humanitarian reasons.

In London, Gandhi continued his explorations in com-
parative theology by studying the New Testament for the
first time at the encouragement of his many new Christian
friends. He was much inspired by many of Christ's teach-
ings, particularly the Beatitudes. Many Christian hymns
remained lifetime favorites. Still, Gandhi was never con-
vinced that Christianity was the one true religion for two
main reasons. One was that Christianity was basically
intolerant of other religions. The second was Gandhi's
observation that Christianity was the only major religion
that did not directly protect the rights of animals.

Three years of study in London changed Gandhi in many
ways. His beliefs about people and life became firm; he was
to remain a convinced vegetarian throughout his life, his
loyalty to England and Queen was unbounded, and his confi-
dence in himself was improved. It was on the crest of this
new-found selfhood that Gandhi first felt the indignity of
being considered a "colored, second-class citizen. "
Although he was attired as fashionably and educated as
reputably as any London barrister and although he had
purchased a first-class passage in travel to a legal case
in South Africa, he was told that he must move to the

second-class coach because of his race. Refusing to do so,
he was peremptorily ousted from the train altogether in a
little town called Maritzburg, miles from his intended final
destination of Durban in the province of Natal, South Africa.

Once in Durban, he anxiously conferred with other
prominent Indian residents of Natal about the anti-Indian
feeling and practices with which he had been confronted.
Not only was Gandhi greatly distressed to learn of more
blatantly discriminatory laws and social norms of British
South Africa but was even more distressed to learn of the
acquiescent and philosophical manner in which he was
expected to bear them.

In South Africa, all society was strictly segregated.
All Asiatics were disenfranchised. After 9 p.m. Indians had
to carry passes, and if caught without their "papers," they
VN?ere arrested. In some colonies, Indians were not allowed
to own property, set up business, or own farms. In others,
Indians could not own African gold. Everywhere, Indians
suffered a lack of status and respect. They were commonly
referred to by derogatory terms such as "Sammie" or "coolie"
and were described even in legal and educational literature
as "semibarbarous. "

Mohandas Gandhi felt a strong moral need and desire
to resist these insults and injustices. An avid student of
religion, he had learned all he could of the world's major
religions. He identified with Hinduism because it was the

10
religion of his mother, yet he respected all religions as
means to finding God, and he repeated all persons as
children of God. He was also greatly influenced by the
pacifistic philosophies of such people as Henry David
Thoreau, Leo Tolstoy, and particularly Jesus of Nazareth as
he instructed his followers in his historic "Sermon on the
Mount." Gandhi's personal and religious view placed all men
and women on an equal plane as brothers and sisters. Even
animals were kin to humanity; all life was interrelated and
interdependent. For this reason, violence in word or deed
against another living being was violence against oneself
and was abhorrent and never to be practiced.

Yet, to accept with no resistance the system of racism
in which he now found himself enmeshed was equally abhor-
rent. Gandhi was determined to act against the system yet
to do so in a nonviolent manner.

Thus, in time, Gandhi's doctrine of nonviolent direct
action developed. He coined the term "satyagraha" taken
from "satya" meaning truth and love and "agraha" meaning
firm grasp in Sanskrit or, more generally, "force"
(Bondurant, 1958). The means of satyagraha, therefore, are
the forces of truth and love. It was through this channel
that a person could most effectively persuade an opponent
and do so in a manner which uplifted the persuader and the
persuaded. Because of his faith in the oneness of all
people, he believed that through violence one only hurt

oneself. Responding to violence with courageous nonviolence
would make this truth obvious to a violent opponent, soften-
ing his or her resolve. He felt that changing society for
the better began with strengthening and purification of the
individual. Through a simple life of prayer, labor, good
health habits, and abstinence from worldly pleasures, a
person could begin the changing of society as a whole. It
was in this belief that Gandhi proposed and successfully
led a movement that started with a handful of devotees.
Over the next 40 years he masterminded a movement that
culminated in a nationwide struggle for social and legal
reforms; finally, India established its independence from
Great Britain.

While Gandhi and the nation of India struggled toward
national independence and an end to racial and class dis-
crimination, similar conditions of prejudice and institu-
tionalized racism were being endured by another oppressed
people in a country of contrasting history and located
halfway around the world from India. In the United States
of America, the Civil War ending in 1865 marked the end of
slavery, yet black people in this country could hardly
consider themselves free in the true and fullest sense of
that word. As late as the 1950s, nearly a century after the
Emancipation Proclamation of President Abraham Lincoln,
blacks shared disproportionately in their national society's
resources and rewards. Blacks and whites were segregated.

12
by law and by social norms, according to neighborhoods,
primary groups, and public services, facilities and institu-
tions. Many whites chose to believe that this was what
blacks wanted and that this was an equitable "separate but
equal" arrangement. Equal it was not. Returning to Weber's
theory which identifies class, status, and power as the
three most valuable resources of a society, the deprivation
of which is likely to cause intergroup conflict, great
disparity existed between American blacks and whites. In
terms of class considerations, the occupations available to
blacks were limited and lower in prestige than those avail-
able to whites. Salaries for the vast majority of blacks
were lower than for whites employed to perform equal labor.
Blacks were trapped in the lower socioeconomic group where
they were of lower status, trapped because low incomes and
assignment to inferior school systems did not provide the
opportunities needed in order to improve their position in
society. They were afforded little respect in the accepted
social hierarchy. Adults were referred to by first names or
as "boy" or "girl," yet were expected to refer to whites by
formal titles and by "ma'am" and "sir." The word "Negro"
v\?as often spelled with a small "n" when it was used;
furthermore, it was often replaced in common usage by the
derogatory word "nigger. " Black attitudes or accomplish-
ments (beauty in physical appearance, artistry in music,
literature, etc.) were viewed customarily as second-rate.

13
Statements of praise were often qualified: "She's pretty
for a Negro girl" or "He's smart for a colored" as though a
black could not really be compared with whites who would
obviously be superior. Black heroes, heroines, and
historical figures were conspicuously absent from history
textbooks .

Lack of power among blacks was an inevitable result
of this self-perpetuating system in which blacks could not
significantly improve their socioeconomic positions. Few
economic opportunities and poor educational background did
little to arm this minority with any sort of societal
power. Few, if any, blacks held a governmental position.
Few felt it worthwhile to try to overcome procedural
impediments giving sanction of law deliberately to keep
blacks from registering to vote. Blacks, therefore, had no
influence in making, changing, or enforcing rules by which
they lived and could not be certain that their constitu-
tional rights would be upheld. At every turn, this minority
group was met with barriers to their upward mobility. Even
those few who became famous or financially successful were
not given opportunities to assert fully equal power or to be
accorded social status commensurate with that enjoyed by
white people. Entertainers, such as Harry Belafonte, sports
figures, such as Jackie Robinson, though well-known and
wealthy, were many times denied access to common public

14
institutions and facilities that were clearly designated as
being for "whites only. "

An accumulation of grievances made the 1950s a time
ripe for confrontation between blacks and whites, particu-
larly in consideration of another major factor of that
time. Many blacks had served the U.S.A. in World War II.
Many were injured; many died. Surely, a country for which
blacks had gone to battle owed them basic rights. Addition-
ally, trips overseas by black U.S.A. servicemen broadened
the horizons for a large percentage of the young black
population, raising their goals and expectations. They
returned to the country for which they risked their lives
and found that it still offered persons of their race only
limited goals for their futures and minimal opportunities by
which to reach those goals.

So it was, that in 1929, a decade before the war,
Martin Luther King, Jr. , was born a second-class citizen in
U.S.A. society. He was more fortunate than most blacks in
the U.S.A. at that time for he grew up in a prominent, well-
educated, middle-income family in Atlanta, Georgia. The
Kings were considered an "upper-class black family." Unlike
Gandhi, King felt the indignity and insult of racism at an
early age when his best childhood playmate became too old to
play with "niggers" anymore. Like Gandhi, he was raised in
a devout household; his father and grandfather were both
Baptist ministers. He was a bright student and became

15
concerned with social problems at an early age. He pondered
becoming a doctor or lawyer in order to help others before
deciding that the ministry was the helping profession for
which he was best suited. Like Gandhi, he was an avid
student of the world's great religions and philosophies and
also went "abroad" from his native southland for a more
distinguished education. After he received a B.A. in
sociology from Atlanta's Morehouse University, he matricu-
lated to Crozer Seminary in Pennsylvania where he earned a
Bachelor of Divinity degree. Afterwards, he pursued a
doctorate in philosophy at Boston University. It was in
Boston that he met and married Coretta Scott, a voice
student at a local conservatory.

Throughout his study, King was greatly impressed and
influenced by the same pacifists who had inspired Gandhi:
Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Christ. In 1950, while a student at
Crozer, King heard an address on Gandhi and his philosophy
of nonviolence given by Mordecai Johnson, president of
Howard University. King was so inspired he signed up for a
seminar the following semester entitled the Philosophy of
Religion for which he researched and wrote a paper on the
Mahatma and his teachings. Gandhi's contributions to King's
personal philosophy can be best described in King's own
words :

Gandhi was probably the first person in history to
lift the love ethic of Jesus above mere inter-
action between individuals to a powerful and
effective social force on a large scale. Love for

Gandhi was a potent instrument for social and
collective transformation. It was in this
Gandhian emphasis on love and nonviolence that I
discovered the method for social reform that I had
been seeking for so many months. (King, 1958,
p. 97)

The two men took somewhat different theological routes.
Gandhi's ideas, though influenced by western Christianity,
are more firmly based in the Hindu religion; King's ideas,
influenced by Gandhi, are more firmly based in the teachings
of Christ. However, the two men reached similar conclusions
regarding the nature of humanity and the means to deal with
social injustices within society. Believing in the equality
of all persons. King could not accept the prevailing unjust
system perpetuated by society in his native land. He
believed it wrong to stand by stoically and excuse inaction
because "this is just the way things are." Yet, force or
violent rebellion was not acceptable either to a man steeped
in Christian instruction to love one's neighbor. Whatever
was to be done must be done in a loving and nonviolent
manner. The discovery of Gandhi's "satyagraha" seemed to be
the solution. He saw it as the practical infusion of action
into the philosophy of Christ. It offered a third choice
between the extremes of violent rebellion and passive acqui-
escence in reponse to the unjust status quo. It offered a
means of resistance which was courageous, active, yet
avoiding physical or emotional violence against the persons
toward whom it was directed. The first opportunity to adapt
satyagraha to the purposes of the Negro in the U.S.A.

presented itself, ironically, in the shape and form of Rosa
Parks, a mild-mannered seamstress from Montgomery, Alabama.

On a cold December day in 1955, Rosa Parks refused
to give up her seat to a white passenger which was the
common practice when no other seats were available. She was
quickly arrested. This arrest was the final insult in an
ever-increasing burden of grievances borne by the black
community, and it brought this dispersed community of
Montgomery solidly together to confront the norms of dis-
crimination as they existed. The response was a boycott of
that city's buslines which depended largely upon black
patronage as a source of income. After a year-long strug-
gle, during which blacks car-pooled, taxied, or walked,
often at great inconvenience, the boycott was finally
successful; the laws governing Montgomery buslines were
changed. Buses could not feature racially-segregated seat-
ing, and blacks were to be hired as drivers. This victory
marked the beginning of a national movement that would claim
a dramatic toll in terms of time, money, energy, and human
life before it ended. Though King was assassinated in 1968,
the early 70s found nearly every element of U.S.A. society
desegregated in terms not only of race but of gender and
creed as well. Perhaps, even more importantly, the goals
and purposes of nonviolent direct action, as well as its
relative success as a method of persuasion, set an example
of a method that was utilized by other similar movements to

18
claim rights for women, the disabled, and people asserting
nontraditional gender preferences.

The Question

These two movements, the Indian Independence Movements
led by Mahatma Gandhi and the Civil Rights Movement in the
U.S.A. under the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,
are the two most significant examples of widespread non-
violent movements for social change in the 20th century.
Each is significant in terms of the number of people united
and motivated to action in a single embracing cause. Each
is significant in the degree of positive results that were
allegedly caused by the persuasive methods utilized by the
leaders and followers of each movement. Finally, each is
significant because these persuasive methods, which were
taught by the leaders and used primarily by followers, were
nonviolent--nonviolent in situations in which violence,
rioting, and civil warfare seemed to many to be the most
obvious and expedient means by which to achieve the
movement's ends.

Both Gandhi and King believed in the effectiveness
of nonviolent protest because of religious and philosophical
convictions that all people are innately good. Each
believed that basic compassion and a desire to do that which
is right were two common characteristics of a "universal
audience. " Such beliefs prompted both of these charismatic

19
leaders to develop elaborate philosophies about people,
the world, God, right and wrong, and as an ultimate con-
sideration, about the use of nonviolent symbolic action as
the most telling persuasive rhetorical method. Not only did
Gandhi and King believe this strategy could achieve the
desired reforms, but also they believed it did so in a
manner which left the dignity of both the movement and the
opposition intact.

Acts of violence create bitterness in the surviv-
ors and brutality in the destroyers; Satyagraha
aims to exalt both sides. (Gandhi, cited in
Fischer, 1950, p. 77)

The nonviolent approach does not immediately
change the heart of the oppressor. It first does
something to the hearts and souls of those com-
mitted to it. It gives them new self-respect; it
calls up resources of strength and courage that
they did not know they had. Finally, it reaches
the opponent and so stirs his conscience that
reconciliation becomes a reality. (King, 1958,
p. 219)

King and Gandhi felt that nonviolent tactics of protest
accomplished by words that expressed a conviction in the
rightness of their cause and in the ability of the opposi-
tion to perceive this rightness could "break through" any
barriers between speaker and listeners generally. They
believed that such rhetoric would be able to touch a common
chord of humanity that they believed to exist in the heart
and mind of even the staunchest opponent.

One would like to agree that these idealists were
correct in their assessment of their fellow-beings. If
nonviolent persuasion through words and symbolic acts is

20
truly as powerful against any opposition no matter how
entrenched and strong, as Gandhi and King believed it to be,
then it is obviously a valuable method to effect influence
and should be understood, mastered, and utilized. By the
great majority of human beings, nonviolence, if effective,
would surely be deemed preferable to violent coercive tac-
tics such as rioting, terrorism, and warfare. In the period
in which we live, as many feel that our world quakes under
shadowy threats of a nuclear holocaust, the prospect of
nonviolent persuasion being a possible alternative if not
appearing feasible or efficient at first glance, is never-
theless certainly worthy of examination.

Thus, the major issue addressed in this study concerns
whether or not nonviolent symbolic action is indeed an
effective means of persuasion. Primary questions include
the following: 1) What were the results emanating from each
movement? Were most of the declared goals met? 2) Can a
reasonable causal relationship be drawn between nonviolent
strategies and realization of intended purposes or were
other factors present in the situation that better explain
this realization? Was the opposition predisposed to comply
to demands of the movement due to moral reasons primarily,
the nonviolent demonstrations notwithstanding, and/or were
other causal explanations, perhaps economic or political in
nature, more salient? Did the opposition most fear violent
reactions as extensions of the nonviolent activity, if

21
demands were not met? 3) Did the opposition feel pressure
from other parties not represented in the protest move-
ments--inf luential parties commanding attention? 4) In
summation, is nonviolent symbolic action effective? If so,
to what degree? Why is it effective? Is it effective in
any society and under any circumstances? If not, under what
culture-characterizing circumstances can it be predicted to
be an effective alternative to violent means of coercion?

Secondly, this study includes an analysis of Gandhi
and King as primary spokespersons for nonviolence as well as
an analysis of major spokespersons representing the opposi-
tion to the cause, and an analysis of the strategies of
these two nonviolent movements. An analysis of the leaders'
predominant verbal rhetoric that accompanied selected
significant symbolic acts will serve a three-fold purpose.
Primarily, this analysis should reveal major themes and idea
formats used to motivate movement followers as well as
themes and formats used to persuade the opposition. Such an
analysis should also reveal which common higher authorities
(i.e., church, state, etc.) were featured in the rhetoric of
Gandhi and King. Secondly, a content analysis of the
responses from representatives of the opposition should
yield information about the opposition's rhetorical strate-
gies, themes, and formats, as well as the opposition's
vision of social reality. It should also show what changes
occurred in this vision over time as the opposition's view

22
of social reality was represented by the rhetoric of the
movement as being in direct conflict with mandates of an
accepted higher authority (i.e., the Bill of Rights, the
Gita, etc. ) .

Finally, a content analysis that compares and contrasts
the style and personality traits of two leaders such as
Gandhi and King will yield a baseline of information by
which to compare the rhetoric of other powerful spokes-
persons. Such information could be utilized to predict the
power and interpret the intention of other charismatic
leaders of contemporary movements. This information might
also be used to compare the speaking styles and personality
traits of leaders of historical movements such as Adolph
Hitler, leader of Nazi Germany, to determine whether such
leaders have any similarities or significant differences by
which to be categorized.

Review of Existing Research

Rhetorical Studies in Intercultural Communication

One of the major problems confronted in a study of this
nature is that in an analysis of the rhetoric of movements
within and between differing cultures, the critic is often
comparing proverbial "apples and oranges." Most rhetorical
theory and methodology employed by researchers in our nation
is based on Aristotelian, if not more specifically. Western
logic, thought patterns, and communication behaviors. How

valid is such rhetorical theory when used to study nonocci-
dental rhetoric? Can any rhetorical theory or critical
perspective be thought of as being universal in scope? An
extensive literature review was conducted to find some
answers to these questions. Three dissertations dealing
with intercultural rhetoric and several essays describing a
need for intercultural rhetorical theory development and
discussing the problems such theorizing will entail were
discovered.

In 1969, Carlson of Northwestern University completed
her dissertation entitled "The Kenya Wildlife Conservation
Campaign: A Descriptive and Critical Study of Intercultural
Persuasion." As the title suggests, Carlson analyzed an
unsuccessful campaign by Americans and Europeans to intro-
duce wildlife conservation programs into the country of
Kenya. She concluded that the campaign failed for two
reasons. First, Western hypotheses about persuasion are
invalid in the Kenya culture. Secondly, no attempt was made
to "make adjustments to the traditional age-authority cus-
toms, tribal taboos, history, or tribal geographical varia-
tions" of that culture. She suggests that accurate theory
and practice of intercultural communication can be achieved
only after a careful analysis and understanding of the values
of the "audience" culture.

In 1973, MacDougall of Brigham Young University
conducted a study to link value systems to styles of

24
communication, source credibility and communication atti-
tudes. Value similarity was found to be the transcendent
factor in successful communication within and among cultures,

A third dissertation, the 1979 work of Nishida of the
University of Minnesota, compared Japanese and American
styles of communication. Nishida concluded that Confucian
philosophy exerts at stronger influence than any other factor
over Japanese values, thinking, and communication. Deeply
ingrained national values of "individuality" and "equality"
that dominate the U.S.A. thought and a complete absence of
Confucian philosophy cause U.S.A. rhetoric to be quite dif-
ferent from Japanese. In U.S.A. rhetoric the speaker most
often communicates the importance of the self and the other
as individuals. In Japanese rhetoric the speaker communi-
cates the importance of "us" as a joint entity. The U.S.A.
spokesperson, therefore, quite often seems egocentric, self-
serving, arrogant, abrasive, aggressive, and rude to the
Japanese listener. On the other hand, the Japanese speaker
to the U.S.A. listener seems self-effacing, wavering, overly
polite, and submissive.

Each of these studies provides support for the thesis
that cultural differences do cause differences in communica-
tion behavior from one culture to another. They also focus
on value systems as the key to understanding thought pat-
terns and communication behaviors in any given culture.
Therefore, in developing a rhetorical theory of intercultural

25
communication, the ascertaining of operating value systems
within cultures must be a primary factor.

In 1962, Oliver wrote Culture and Communication, a book
on effective diplomacy that necessarily deals with inter-
cultural rhetoric. Oliver stresses throughout that there is
not "one rhetoric but many rhetorics" and that quite often
intercultural rhetoricians take Aristotelian patterns to be
rhetoric itself rather than a rhetoric. In such cases,
communicators confront audiences of a differing culture with
arguments that would be effective only if that audience
shared a similar value system with the communicator. Such a
communicator is functioning from his or her own value system
as though it were the only system. An effective intercul-
tural communicator must consider that topic for discussion
through the filter of the audience's cultural value system,
building an argument accordingly.

The way the world looks to us is determined in
large part by the way in which we have been
brought up. . . . People in separate cultures and
separate nations are concerned about different
problems; and they have different systems for
thinking about them. What is important to us is
not necessarily important to everyone. Our logic
may not be theirs; and our very faith in
rationality may be countermatched by their faith
in irrationality. What we consider proof of a
particular proposition, they may consider
irrelevant. (Oliver, 1962, pp. 154-155)

One may correctly conclude from these studies and

statements that it is not possible to draw accurate

conclusions by analyzing the rhetoric of foreign cultures

using rhetorical theory based solely on U.S.A. values or

26
Western thought and language patterns. Yet, that is not to
say that it is impossible to develop theory flexible enough
to adapt to differences in speaker and audience cultural
backgrounds. Again, the key concern is value systems. It
is necessary for an intercultural rhetorical theory to
contemplate value systems, thought patterns, and argumenta-
tion behaviors as variables, as functioning elements of
culture rather than as static or stable elements. Rhetori-
cally to criticize any intercultural or non-U. S. A. inter-
action, one must, as Carlson stated in her study of the
Kenyan culture, gain an understanding of the values of the
audience culture through a careful study of that culture.
When the speaker or the critic has a working knowledge of
the cultural values functioning in a communication inter-
action, a knowledge of values that shape and are reflected
in that communication behavior, then he or she is equipped
to develop an effective argument for a specific audience or
accurately to analyze the effectiveness of that interaction.

The Indian Independence Movement and the U.S.A. Civil
Rights Movement are the subjects of this intercultural
rhetorical study. The former is obviously intercultural in
nature; the latter, a study of conflict between two distinct
subcultures within a larger national categorization. A
comparative study of the two movements is also of an inter-
cultural nature. It is important to establish what has
already been written about these two movements.

27
Indian Independence and Civil Rights Movements Research

The only speech communication studies conducted con-
cerning the Indian Independence Movement or the Civil Rights
Movement include an article by Merriam (1975) on Gandhi's
use of symbolic action and an article by Simons (1967) on
patterns of persuasion in the Civil Rights Movement. The
first of these is a simple description and interpretation of
the symbolic acts utilized by Gandhi in the struggle to aid
India in gaining independence from British rule. Merriam
identifies acts of fasting, propaganda tours, the Great Salt
March, silence, and bonfires, as well as symbols such as
spinning wheels and peasant clothing, as elements of non-
verbal persuasion. He then interprets the messages conveyed
through each nonverbal channel and explains the effect of
each on the audience toward whom such messages were
directed. In this analysis, Merriam touches briefly upon
the phenomenon of cultural myths and the part they play in
emphasizing common ground with an audience. Such myths are
reflected in symbolic acts with which they have a two-way
dynamic relationship. The myths shape the symbolic act, and
the symbolic acts confirm the myths. For example, the
symbolic act of fasting was highly appropriate for the mixed
audience of Indian followers and British opposition. The
practice of fasting for religious purification of the body
and spirit is an element of traditional Indian and Christian
religious practices. Also, hunger, a problem of national

28
magnitude in India, was a condition which spoke strongly to
the heart of the majority of Indian peasants. Therefore,
cultural values and conditions shaped the choice of this
symbolic act of fasting as well as the way in which it was
perceived. In turn, the fact that Gandhi was willing to
risk his life in this manner reinforces the cultural
religious belief in the saintliness of fasting. Merriam
offers important insights into Gandhi's use of symbolic
action as an alternative to violent action; however, he does
not fully explicate relevant myths of the Indian and British
cultures nor their importance to Gandhi, the Indian people,
and the British opposition forces.

In the second article, Simons refers to two types of
audiences against whom nonviolent symbolic action might be
used effectively and ineffectively. The "power vulnerable"
group includes persons who will lose either money or public
favor as a result of nonviolent protest. For instance, a
business owner who is boycotted or a police officer
photographed adminstering unnecessary violent punishment are
two "power vulnerables" to symbolic action. The "power
invulnerable" group consists of those who have nothing to
lose by voicing self-concerns. They have no businesses
which might be hurt financially and no public image to keep
clean. These are the vast majority of the general public,
and Simons theorizes that they can be reached only through
"communications aimed at a change in . . . attitudes." This

29
is an important observation for the study at hand since
Gandhi and King saw the primary purpose of nonviolent
symbolic action as changing the heart, the attitudes of the
opponent. Through changing the individual one can change
society.

Along these lines, Simons also identifies two broad
categories of persuasion utilized by Negroes in the 60s
protests, 1) peaceful persuasion and 2) coercive persua-
sion. Peaceful persuasion is reasoning aimed at the mind
and heart of the listener while coercive persuasion is the
inclusion of threat or employment of force such as that used
in boycotts, marches, and sit-ins. (Although the term
"coercive" implies force, it is force applied to hurt the
wallet, the public opinion poll, not the soul or the body of
the opponent.) Simons goes on to say that peaceful persua-
sion is the type taught in the public speaking classroom and
textbook. It is effective to the extent that the speaker
can analyze the audience correctly and appeal to that
audience's needs, desires, and values.

It is axiomatic, we are told, that effective
communication requires a shared frame of reference
and a common set of symbols in an atmosphere free
from fear and threat. By all our scholarly yard-
sticks, the effectiveness of the civil rights
advocates ought to be a direct function of their
psychological proximity to white audiences.
(Simons, 1967, p. 26)

In this way Simons recognizes the importance of cultural

values in discourse and the importance of knowing an

audience in terms of these values. Such recognition of

30
cultural values is also of utmost importance to the study
herein.

Rhetorical Studies about King and Gandhi

In this study King and Gandhi are identical and will be
analyzed as the single, primary spokespersons for their
respective movements. Much has been written on both in the
form of biographical, theological, sociological, anthro-
pological, historical, political, and even psychiatric
studies. However, a review of dissertation abstracts and
major journals in the field of speech communication uncovers
little research within the field of rhetorical criticism
that concerns these two significant communicators.

Two studies of Gandhi found in speech journals are the
aforementioned article on symbolic action by Merriam and
Beatty, Behnke, and Banks' "Elements of Dialogic
Communication in Gandhi's Second Round Table Conference
Address" (1975). The latter focuses more on the methodology
of a dialogic perspective in rhetorical criticism than on
Gandhi, his message, or his nonviolent persuasive strategy
and offers little insightful information useful to the
present study.

Rhetorical studies on King have indeed been more num-
erous than two but not by a large margin. One study concen-
trated primarily on the persuasive strategies utilized by
King. Simons (1967) characterizes King's ability to analyze

31
his widely diverse audiences comparing the Baptist minister
to a tightrope walker because of his agility in walking a
"thin line" when addressing both blacks and whites at one
time. Simons speaks of King's direct action tactics as
militant enough to appease angry blacks while his doctrine
of love won white sympathies. Smith (1967), in his study of
King, focused primarily on the distinguishing style of
King's oral discourse, noting his "Southern black baptist"
delivery. He describes King's rhetoric as filled with
striking images such as metaphors, analogies, and with
repetition and alliteration. Keele (1972) offers further
information on King as a speaker in her dissertation con-
cerning his rhetorical strategies. Keele identifies
recurring ideas in King's rhetoric. She theorizes that King
intended to inspire the average black audience member to
identify with higher ideals and rise above the current
operative hierarchy.

All of these studies contribute useful background
information for this study on Gandhi and King as
rhetoricians. However, it is clear that by no means has
study of these two charismatic speakers been exhausted. One
final study in which King is one of numerous subjects is of
particular instructive value to the purposes of the ques-
tions posed by this study. In 1973, Payne completed a
dissertation at Florida State University in which he
analyzed the speeches of six prominent black spokesmen using

32
several different content analysis measures not tradition-
ally used in rhetorical criticism. These are measures
developed for research in journalism and communication,
social psychology, and psycholinguistics and are used to
categorize content according to stylistic features or to
categorize speakers according to personality traits. The
purpose of Payne's study was to establish norms among black
spokesmen using these measures that could be used in further
comparative research such as that proposed herein. In his
introduction, Payne defends his methodology by quoting
Redding' s 1968 essay "Extrinsic and Intrinsic Criticism."
In it Redding recognizes the value of extrinsic data in a
rhetorical event (historical, biographical, cultural data,
etc. ) but urges a shift of emphasis in research to the
intrinsic data of content.

The measures used by Payne include syllable and word
counts/lengths, sentence count/length, Type-Token Ratio,
Adjective-Verb Quotient, Flesch's Reading Ease Scores,
Flesch's Human Interest Scores, Discomfort-Relief Quotient,
and Gleser-Gottschalk Anxiety Scales.

Features of style that have been measured are
represented in syllable, word, and sentence counts and
measures of length as well as counts of punctuation types.
These measures are usually taken by diagramming a frequency
distribution of one-word, two-word, three-word, etc.
sentences and similarly one-syllable, two-syllable.

33
three-syllable, etc. words in selected passages. Punctua-
tion marks are recorded according to relative frequency of
occurrence per one thousand marks. Comparison studies have
revealed stylistic differences between authors, between time
periods, between types of speeches, and between speeches of
one source over time.

The Type-Token Ratio is another quantitative speech
measure. It is designed to determine the diversity of a
person's vocabulary by counting the number of different
words (types) utilized by a source and then dividing that
number by the total number of words (tokens) in the passage
examined.

Vocabulary Diversity - Type

Token

Variations of the Type- Token Ratio (TTR) are the mean
segmental TTR, the cumulative TTR, and the decremental TTR.
The mean segmental TTR is calculated by dividing the word
sample into segments of equal length (number of words),
determining the TTR for each segment, and then finding the
mean TTR for the entire sample. Cumulative TTR is rep-
resented by a curve that shows successive TTR's measured at
various points in the sample. In the decremental TTR,
however, the passage is divided into segments of equal
length, and the number of words per segment is divided into
the number of new words in the passage which first appear in

34
that segment. The Adjective-Verb Quotient (AVQ) originated
with a German researcher, Busemann, in 1925 and was used in
the same year by an American, Boder. This method is
conducted by dividing language into two categories:
"qualitative" and "active." The qualitative or adjective
category includes adjectives, nouns, and verb participles
when used as descriptors of nouns. Into the "active" or
verb category are placed all verbs with the exception of
auxiliary verbs. By dividing the number of active words by
the number of qualitative words in a given passage, the AVQ
measure can be obtained. Busemann (1925, cited in Boder,
1940) and also Stern and Rorschach (1925, cited in Boder,
1940) used AVQ to measure emotional stability of speakers.
Boder (1940) borrowed from the fields of psychology,
psychiatry, and psycholinguistics to produce a baseline AVQ
for styles in various types of communication: legal,
scientific, and fictional writing. The AVQ can be used to
establish stylistic modes and to compare and contrast the
various writings of one individual, similar writings of two
individuals, and different types of writing.

Flesch's Reading Ease Score was devised as a method
to measure linguistic complexity and readability/listenabil-
ity of a particular 100-word passage. Flesch's Reading Ease
Score is calculated by finding the average sentence length
(si) and the average word length (wl) of a passage and
placing these figures in the formula

35
FRES = 206.835 - .846wl - l.OlSsl

(wl)

Norms for FRES are as follows:

DEGREE OF EASE (si)

8 or fewer 123 or^fewer

FAIRLY EASY H -^3^

STANDARD ^^ ^47

FAIRLY DIFFICULT IV ^^^

DIFFICULT 21

VERY DIFFICULT 29 or more 19^ °^ "^°^^

Not only can this formula be used to establish listen-
ability/readibility of a passage but it can also be used to
establish categories for types of word-productxon based on
FRES norms. For instance, Flesch established readibility
score norms for types of magazines with comics scorxng
highest and scientific journals scoring lowest in level of

readibility.

Flesch also devised a formula to quantify the level
of "human interest" contained in a given passage (1960). As
in the Reading Ease calculations, the passage is divided
into 100-word sections. The number of personal words (pw)
and personal sentences (ps) in each segment are then
counted. Flesch defines personal words as a) all first-,
second-, and third-person pronouns, except neuter pronouns
.f not used in reference to people, b) all words having
masculine or feminine natural gender, and c) group words
such as "people" and "family." Personal sentences are those
which a) include spoken sentences marked as quotations.

36
b) are questions, commands, requests, and sentences directed
to the reader or listener, c) are exclamations, or d) are
grammatically incorrect sentences of which the full meaning
must be taken in the context of the passage. The percentages
of personal words and personal sentences are substituted in
the following formula:

Human Interest (H.I.) = 3.63(pw) + .314(ps)
EVALUATION % of pw

DULL

2 or

less

MILDLY INTERESTING

INTERESTING

HIGHLY INTERESTING

DRAMATIC

17 or

% of

58 or

Several content measures give information about the
level of stress or anxiety present in the source of the
message. One of these measures is the Dollard-Mowrer ten-
sion index or Discomfort-Relief Quotient (DRQ) (Dollard &
Mowrer, 1947). The unit of analysis for this measure can be
clauses, thought-units, sentences, paragraphs, pages or
words. Units are analyzed and categorized as discomfort or
relief units. "Discomfort units" refer to suffering, pain,
distress, etc., while "relief units" refer to comfort,
happiness, enjoyment, etc. Other units are disregarded.
The DRQ formula is

DRQ = Discomfort Units

Discomfort Units + Relief Units

The Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scale (AX) measures "free
anxiety, " which includes only the psychological manifesta-
tions of anxiety as revealed in language (Gottschalk, Winget,
& Gleser, 1969). Anxiety is classified into six subtypes
which include l)death, 2)mutilation or castration, 3) sepa-
ration, 4) guilt, 5) shame, and 6) diffuse or nonspecific
anxiety. Output in each category is weighted according to
whether the reference is to the self (3), an animate other
(2), or an inanimate other (1). A denial of anxiety is
given a weight of 1 (1). The scoring unit is the thought
unit or sentence clause. Units are coded according to
subtype and weight. Once coded, the scores are totalled,
and this sum is divided by the total number of words. The
product obtained is then multiplied by 100 to attain a "raw
anxiety score." The square root of the raw score is used
for norms, comparisons, and inferences.

Three separate measures are derived from the Anxiety
Scale. They are the Hostility Directed Inward Scale (HI),
Hostility Directed Outward Scale (HO), and Ambivalent
Hostility Scale (HA).

The HI scale measures self-critical and self -destruc-
tive thoughts. Thought units are coded and weighted accord-
ing to a classification of 11 thematic categories which
range from references about feeling driven to meet one's own
expectations to references about suicide. The HO scale
measures critical or destructive thoughts toward others.

38
Twenty-five weighted thematic categories are used to code
thought units. These range in seriousness from references
to abusive language to references about murder. The 25
categories are further differentiated according to the
overtness or covertness of outwardly hostile thoughts.
Overtly hostile classifications include those units which
refer to hostile acts committed by the speaker tov/ard others
while covertly hostile classifications include references to
hostile acts committed by others against self. The HA scale
measures the intensity of units expressing destructive
actions of others against themselves. Eight thematic cate-
gories for coding units range from items referring to others
denying blame to others killing or threatening to kill
themselves.

Another formula devised by Flesch (1960) measures the
level of abstraction in a text. The total number of words
in the text is divided into the total number of definite
words. This quotient is then multiplied by 100. "Definite
words" include natural gender nouns, nouns denoting time,
numeral adjectives, finite verb forms, present participles,
personal pronouns, the definite article and the words "yes,"
"no," "here," "then," "there," "that," "these," "those,"
"now," "who," "whom," "when," "where," "why," "how," "this,"
"each," "same," "both," "what," and "which."

Finally, the Gunning-Fog Index (GFI), similar to
Flesch 's Reading Ease Scale, is based on sentence length and

39
number of polysyllabic words (Gunning, 1968). Polysyllabic
words are defined as those of three or more syllables which
are not capitalized nor are compound or hyphenated words
such as "bookkeeper." Verbs of which the third syllable is
a simple suffix such as "ed, " or "es" are also excluded.
The GFI formula is

GFI = Ave. Sentence Length + Polysyllabic Words (0.4)

As mentioned earlier, the content and style measurement
tools listed and described above were not initially devised
for the purpose of rhetorical criticism. Originating from
diverse fields of inquiry, their usefulness to rhetorical
critics is slowly and only now being discovered. Payne
used these measures to establish norms of style and person-
ality traits among prominent black spokesmen in the United
States of America during the 20th century. Although in his
single-page review of literature he states that no other
critical studies had utilized the above-mentioned content-
analytic techniques, at least one such study was in fact
previously conducted. In 1965, Gwin used the Type-Token
Ratio and Adjective-Verb Quotient in an analysis of the
speeches of Henry Cabot Lodge, Sr. Gwin chose this type
analysis to test the hypothesis that Lodge's feelings about
the president of the United States were manifested in his
speeches.

In 1973, Day used syllable/word/sentence counts, TTR,
AVQ, DRQ, FRES, and HIS to establish norms and to identify
trends in the inaugural addresses of Florida's 34 gover-
nors. She established that speakers in the 20th century
tend to be more "listenable" and more interesting.

Lower in 1974 employed the TTR, DRQ, FRES, GFI, FHIS,
and Gleser-Gottschalk anxiety scales in an analysis of the
speeches of Julian Bond. Lower hypothesized that Bond's
speeches would not vary significantly from the norms estab-
lished by Payne in his 1973 study. In 1980, Evans analyzed
speeches of black students enrolled in public speaking
courses at one predominantly black university and one pre-
dominantly white university. Speech samples were coded for
the following stylistic variables: word length, sentence
length, segmental TTR, AVQ, FRES, FHIS, and nonf luencies .
Significant differences between the two samples on mean word
length, mean sentence length, and reading ease were found.

One major purpose of this dissertation is to compare
and contrast King and Gandhi's speaking styles and personal-
ity traits as revealed in their speeches. Payne's study and
methodology therein comprise a workable model to use in
searching for similarities and significant differences
between the two leaders. However, since only speeches of
King and Gandhi will be analyzed and none of their written
rhetoric, it can be argued that the Flesch Readability Yard-
stick (1960) and the Gunning-Fog Index (1968) are not

41
necessarily valid measures for the purposes of this study.
It is true that in all the previously mentioned studies these
two measures were used to analyze spoken messages. However,
the two scales were originally developed for written mes-
sages. It is questionable that a passage that may be read
with general ease may also be heard with the same ease and
level of comprehension. DeVito (1984), in his text on public
speaking, reminds the novice public speaker that "oral style"
differs from written style. It must necessarily be more
simplistic because of the nature of the communication situa-
tion. The reader may read at a self-imposed rate while a
listener must comprehend at the rate chosen by the speaker.
Also, the spoken message is given once and is gone (unless
tape-recorded, of course) while the written message may be
reread as many times as is needed for clear meaning to be
obtained. Students and teachers of foreign languages can
attest that reading an unfamiliar language is much easier
than listening to it in terms of understanding what is being
communicated. The receiver of written messages also does
not have to contend with channel disturbances such as low
voice, a heavy accent, outside noise, or unfamiliar pronun-
ciations. Therefore, a sample of spoken words may be cate-
gorized as easy to listen to when what is really true is
that, if written, they might be read and comprehended with
ease. In order for the Flesch Reading Ease Score and the
Gunning-Fog Index to be valid for spoken messages, another

42
set of categories must be established specifically for
spoken communication. These two measures will not be used
in the analyses of the speeches of Gandhi and King in the
study at hand.

Research on the Use of Nonviolence as a Persuasive Device

Much has been written on the use of nonviolence as a
strategy to change society. In fact, journals such as
Conflict Resolution and the Journal of Peace Research
including articles on the use of nonviolence are published
quarterly. Numerous books including the works of King and
Gandhi have been written on the subject, and almost all
works by other authors refer to Gandhi and/or King as
philosophers of and practicers of nonviolent action.

Gene Sharp has probably produced the greatest amount of
literature dealing with the nature and efficacy of non-
violence and ways in which this strategy for changing
society might be analyzed, categorized, and improved upon.
In Social Power and Political Freedom, Sharp (1980) recog-
nizes the importance of effective communication channels
within the movement to that movement's strength and
stamina. He also theorizes about the reasons that non-
violent persuasion works against very powerful opponents,
describing an effect of the strategy which he terms "politi-
cal jiu-jitsu. " Jiu-jitsu is a martial art in which the
strength of the opponent is used against that opponent. The

43
practitioner of nonviolent action increases his or her
ability to evoke sympathy when the opposition intensifies
its repression. If the resisters can demonstrate courage
and the willingness to persist when the opposing power is at
its most unjust, most brutally violent, then they can turn
the power of the opposition to their advantage. Such
willingness on the part of resisters to endure hardships,
financial and physical, sometimes to the point of martyrdom,
has the potential to inspire others to resist the opposition
as well. As a movement gains momentum, the sheer numbers of
the noncooperative will be enough to immobilize a society.

Sharp continues by stating that the means and the ends
of a successful nonviolent organization are to strengthen
the oppressed within the society. He argues that a violent
oppressor depends upon centralized governing and strong
leaders to carry out orders and violent tactics in a
military-like, unquestioning fashion. The nonviolent
organization, on the other hand, although leaders will
emerge, must depend on the individual resolve and strength
of each member to resist and sacrifice in the face of ter-
rible forces. The oppressor depends on its ability to
coerce cooperation from the oppressed. If the oppressed can
steel itself to noncooperation, it relieves the oppressor of
much of its power. Sharp, like Gandhi and, later. King,
sees the primary aim of nonviolent action as not to attack
the oppressor but rather to strengthen the oppressed and

cites ways in which the philosophy and action of nonviolence

strengthens a people. It gives a people self-respect,

strengthens their institutions and gives them the ability to

act with solidarity.

Often — though not always — as people begin to
act, the qualities of courage, willingness to
serve others, and concern about the social and
political evils around them grow within them-
selves. Further, their example often helps others
to gain these qualities. This, along with other
results of nonviolent action, helps to improve
that society's capacity for freedom. (Sharp,
1980, p. 174)

Sharp also cites examples of intergroup communication
which may strengthen a nonviolent movement. It is important
to disseminate knowledge on the philosophy and practical
application of nonviolent action, how to organize for group
action, and how to respond to violent opposition. Also, it
is helpful for the group to be aware of what others have
done elsewhere in difficult situations and to witness the
example of some people among themselves resisting the
opposition. The group needs to be given a list of small
things that are within their capabilities to do in daily
resistance.

From this, one can see that interpersonal communication
effectiveness within the nonviolent oppressed organization is
more important than it is within the violent oppressing
organization. The latter is based on one-way communication
of orders from higher levels to lower levels while the
former depends on cooperation derived from multichanneled

45
expressions of beliefs, philosophies, and personal
conviction.

In his book on nonviolence and how it works, Bruyn and
Rayman (1979) highlights the importance of analyzing communi-
cation channels and messages to understand how nonviolent
methods work. He makes several important points about com-
munication in nonviolent movements. First of all, he
stresses that nonverbal communication is just as important as
verbal in expressing nonviolent arguments. He hypothesizes
that a good intergroup communication system is a prerequisite
for committed widespread resistance and that the more clearly
actionists communicate in a nonthreatening manner, the more
likely it is that opponents will respond in like fashion.

In the same article, Bruyn outlines a symbolic inter-
action theory of nonviolent action. Simply stated the
theory is that people generally believe that the daily
widely-accepted subjective view of "reality" is reality
until a new definition of the situation is introduced and
explained to them. The causes of violence can be mitigated
by the introduction of new symbols of power in nonviolent
action.

Another essay by Sharp (1959b) deals specifically with
the efficacy of the nonviolent strategy as used by Gandhi.
In it Sharp concludes that nonviolence is not an always
workable strategy and that it was effective in India only
because the conditions were conducive to its use there in

46
the years between 1918 and 1948. The two major conditions
which facilitated the effectiveness of nonviolent action
were that the British were heavily armed oppressors few in
number against the unarmed but burgeoning Indian popula-
tion. Working together, the sheer number of noncooperative
resisters was enough to overwhelm the social order, to
paralyze the workings of British rule, and to make measures
of punishment unfeasible. Also, the British represented an
audience to whom the moral symbolism behind nonviolence
would be appealing. Their Christian sympathies and national
pride in "fair play" and democratic principles were stronger
than their racial prejudices and hunger for wealth and
power. Sharp projects that a Nazi colonial rule in India
would not have facilitated a nonviolent movement since it
would not have permitted a group of intellectuals to grow
and become visible and vocal enough to organize themselves
in a movement against the regime.

Enholm in his 1975 dissertation on critical moments in
the German Resistance Movement notes the distinctions
between movements taking place in democratic and totali-
tarian social orders. He implies that a democracy allows an
amount of overt conflict between groups and even opposition
to the group in power. In a totalitarian government con-
flict must remain covert, for the system does not allow it.
Action and communication by and between would-be movement

followers is restricted if possible at all, and resistance

to change in the established order is greater.

For in a totalitarian state, established orders do
not crumble at the sound of the rhetorician's
voice. Instead — but in no way less rhetorical —
violence must be employed. (Enholm, 1975, p. xix)

Like Sharp, he views the effectiveness of nonviolent
rhetoric as a function of the situation and the nature of
the opposition.

A series of articles by Bowen (1963a, 1963b, 1967)
results in similar conclusions about the Civil Rights Move-
ment in the U.S.A. Written in the 60s in the midst of this'
movement, Bowen ' s articles reflect his concern about the
realistic measure of the efficacy of nonviolent persuasion.
In his first article, Bowen states that nonviolent per-
suasion is effective only if other "powerful social,
economic, and political forces admire and aid the cause and
its people." Although he recognizes the moral force of
nonviolence as it reflects basic religious and national
values of U.S.A. citizens, he again concludes in his second
article that its effectiveness is not inherent but dependent
on other forces.

Nonviolence is no panacea, despite theoretical
claims made for it. The technique cannot compel
Southern whites to surrender their own beliefs if
they do not recognize the humanity of either the
resisters or their cause. (Bowen, 1963b, p. 3)

In his final essay (1967) he identifies four assump-
tions of nonviolent protesters which he argues are not
necessarily valid. They assume that dramatizing a common

48
bond between themselves and their opponents will reform
those opponents; resisters love and sympathize with enemies
who attack them; willing suffering will bond fellow-
sufferers, appeal to third parties, and persuade the opposi-
tion; nonviolence attaches a moral aura to any cause. Bowen
seems to imply throughout his articles that many proponents
of nonviolence are idealistic and believe the strategy works
because of some "holy" aspect which it bestows on a cause
making it difficult to oppose. It automatically causes its
users to be in the right. He states that it is possible to
use nonviolent resistance to institute changes which are
not necessarily good or ethical changes. He, like Sharp and
Enholm, argues that some cultures do not respect a display
of love as much as a display of force.

Responding to King's assassination. Shepherd (1968)
wrote in a commentary for Africa Today that the means of
nonviolence are not for this world at all and that it
appeals only to a very limited audience. In the Journal of
the History of Ideas Steinkraus (1973) in a study of King's
philosophy stated that the philosophy and enactment of
nonviolent resistance is ethical but not expedient. He
admits that suffering is more powerful than violence in
converting an opponent, but if change and motivation to act
are the primary goals of the movement, then nonviolence is
not a practical method and not the best strategy to use.

49
Each of these studies sheds light on the inquiry at
hand and also raises a further question to be answered at
this point. If one is to evaluate the effectiveness of a
strategy, one must know what the primary goal of the
strategy truly was. Gandhi and King both defended non-
violent tactics as the best rhetorical method primarily on
moral grounds. Not only did nonviolence not inflict
spiritual or bodily injury on an opponent, but these two
proponents believed that it purified, enriched, changed
the resister and the opposition to better people. Yet, they
were also concerned with the more "practical" results in the
forms of legislated changes in societal practices. The
concern of this study is with the efficacy of nonviolence in
terms of these more practical results.

Movement Studies

The study presented here is one in which the rhetoric
of two movements is being analyzed. The concern is not
primarily a single speech given by a single speaker to a
single audience defined by one time and location. The lens
of the movement critic's "camera" is set at a wider angle
for the most part than that of the critic of single speeches
and speakers. Therefore, the methodology chosen for a
movement study must reflect these differences and adapt to
this multiplicity of speakers, listeners, channels, mes-
sages, and situations over time.

50
Rhetorical studies of social movements represent a
relatively recent development in rhetorical criticism.
Griffin's (1952) seminal article, "The Rhetoric of Histori-
cal Movements," was first to set forth the purpose for, the
theory behind, and a methodology for investigations of
historical movements. Griffin theorized that each movement
involves a two-sided conflict in which aggressor rhetori-
cians and defendant rhetoricians must be identified. Also,
three vital stages in movements may be isolated for analy-
sis: the period of inception, the period of rhetorical
crisis, and the period of consummation. This perspective
was a departure from the traditional speaker-centered
approach to rhetorical criticism. However, Brock and Scott,
quoting from Griffin, state that Griffin's innovation in
critical investigation

was not radical because he maintained an histori-
cal orientation; he recommended isolating the
rhetorical movement within the matrix of the
historical movement. Yet this shift in emphasis
to conceive histories "in terms of movements
rather than individuals" is significant and led to
what has become a major effort of rhetorical
criticism in the 1960's and 1970's. (Brock &
Scott, 1982, p. 397)

Griffin defended this focus on the movement as a whole

rather than on the individual representative by stating that

in looking at a broader rhetorical event than that of the

individual giving a single speech

we may come closer to discovering the degree of
validity in our fundamental assumption: that
rhetoric has had and does have a vital function as

a shaping agent in human affairs. (Griffin,
1952, p. 188)

It is easy to understand that a series of rhetorical events

would have a greater impact than a single event on the

society in which it transpires.

Griffin suggests that the student of a movement study
should begin by reading secondary sources of the movement.
Once this is completed and the student has a working
knowledge of the historical, political, sociological,
religious, and cultural factors in which the movement
originated and grew, then the student should begin readings
of movement rhetoric from primary sources. Such reading
should be done in chronological order so that the student
can become acquainted with movement discourse as it
developed. In this way, there is a better chance that one
can determine the origin of fundamental issues, the develop-
ment of appeals and counter-appeals surrounding these
issues, and the modification of these issues and appeals as
they are found to be successful or unsuccessful.

The critic will also become familiar with the major
spokespersons within the movement and opposition to the
movement and will be able to identify favorite styles and
arguments of each as well as ways in which they are modified
and adjusted according to the perceived effectiveness they
have in persuading the opposing forces. The critic should
also identify and study as many available communication
channels as possible, not just speeches, but pamphlets.

banners, buttons, radio, t.v. , magazines, periodicals, as

well as the way in which the movement is reflected through

art, clothing, etc.

Finally, Griffin states that the movement should be

evaluated for its effectiveness. Griffin has already

suggested that a situational awareness is important to

the critic when he states the first step the critic takes is

to have an understanding of the various societal forces at

work before and during the movement. He more clearly states

this need for the critic to step outside or beyond his or

her own values when he explains how the critic should assess

the rhetorical effectiveness of a movement.

The critic will operate within the climate of
theory of rhetoric and public opinion in which the
speakers and writers he judges were reared, and in
which they practiced. In other words, that he
will measure practice in terms of the theories
available, not to himself, but to the speakers and
writers whom he judges. (Griffin, 1952, p. 187)

It may be supposed that Griffin is still speaking in terms
of Aristotelian rhetorical principles and their differences
according to place and time. Yet, this guideline can be
expanded to include the evaluation of rhetorical effective-
ness within other cultures. Again, the first step for the
critic is to study that culture until a working knowledge is
developed of situational variables and culturally-based
rhetorical values which are functioning throughout a com-
munication event.

53
Most of the movement studies appearing in communication
journals and as theses and dissertations utilized Griffin's
classical historical approach. However, in 1969, Griffin
suggested yet another approach to the study of social move-
ments. He wrote that Kenneth Burke's dramatistic method
used in literary criticism is useful to the rhetorical
critic as well because it allows a clearer understanding of
the motivations behind the operation of identifiable
rhetorical strategies within movements. Hochmuth-Nichols
(1952) had already adapted Burke's pentad and critical
theory to the purposes of the rhetorical critic. Griffin
took this adaptation a step further, applying it to the
analysis of a series of rhetorical events. In viewing a
movement in terms of the Act (what was done), Agent (who did
it). Agency (how done). Scene (where and when), and Purpose
(why), the critic concentrates on the psychological environ-
ment in which the speaker and audience are functioning,
their attitudes concerning the major elements of the inter-
action as revealed by their communication behavior: their
motives .

One method for identifying speaker and audience atti-
tudes is through a content analysis of verbal rhetoric as
conducted in a dramatistic analysis. In this analysis, the
critic focuses on language as the starting point. He or she
argues a direct relationship between speaker discourse and
speaker attitudes and motives. Therefore, an analysis of

54
movement discourse should reveal the motives and attitudes
of leaders as well as followers. Such an analysis is based
primarily on two Burkean concepts. One is the earlier-
described pentad and the other is the concept of "identifi-
cation. "

Through discourse, the speaker constructs his or her
view of reality. In using the dramatistic method, the
critic reconstructs that view by isolating and labeling the
pentadic elements as they occur and are emphasized through
the words of the speaker. For instance, a speaker may
believe that the Scene is the most salient aspect of the
situation at hand. In a social movement, a speaker's
rhetoric may reflect that speaker's belief that components
of the Scene (place, time, etc. ) are the most significant
causes of the present conditions and are, therefore, the
component which needs the most change as a causal factor in
the present social reality. Through the understanding
gained by this reconstruction of the speaker's view of the
world, events, people, etc., the critic can more clearly
understand the speaker's attitudes and motives which guide
communication behavior.

The second concept, that of identification, concerns
the audience's view of social reality. The speaker, through
discourse, not only presents a personal view of reality but
attempts to persuade the audience that this view is accurate
and should be shared by that audience. "To the extent that

55
the audience accepts and rejects the same ideas, people, and
institutions that the speaker does, identification occurs"
(Brock & Scott, 1982, p. 352), and the discourse is likely
to be effective.

Burke suggests that the critic can isolate the language
which reveals the pentadic elements of a speaker's reality
and the common ground elements with which the speaker seeks
audience identification. To do so, the critic must list
recurring words, phrases, and themes in a chronological
schema until a sense of a pattern and predominant strategies
of persuasion can be recognized and labeled.

Another methodology which focuses on words as repre-
sentatives of attitudes and motives is Bormann's Fantasy
Theme Analysis (Borman, 1972). The critic is concerned
equally with social reality revealed through discourse from
audience members, as well as from primary speakers to
audience members. As in the Burkean analysis, the critic
gleans from discourse recurring words, phrases, and themes.
Moreover, the critic traces the transformation of social
reality as revealed in the transformation of these words,
phrases, and themes as they occur, are rebutted, modified, or
enlarged upon through consequent listener and speaker inter-
actions. The critic also takes special notice of the manner
in which various sources and channels of discourse represent-
ing divergent views of social reality influence one another's
views and finally shape what becomes the most widely-shared

56
and powerful view. This view is the one that will most
highly influence the outcome of the movement.

A final methodology which is also concerned with the
construction of social reality through communication inter-
action, is appropriately named the Social Reality Approach
(Brock & Scott, 1982). Unlike the dramatistic critic who
analyzes discourse to reconstruct the reality as viewed by
speaker and listener, the critic using the Social Reality
methodology focuses instead on the artifacts of popular
culture (frequently the mass media) in order to reconstruct
a culturally-shared reality based on culturally-shared
values. Primarily, the objective of this approach is to
gain insight into the two-way relationship between society
and cultural artifacts as channels of communication in the
belief that values expressed throughout popular culture
shape and are shaped by societal values. The critic
observes the attitudes and motives governing changes in
society through the representations of social reality and
the attitudes and motives governing it.

A more recent methodology is presented in a 1980 essay
"Coming to Terms with Movement Studies." In this writing,
Lucas looks at the "intrinsically kinetic nature of movement
rhetoric" but states that such rhetoric should be studied in
a chronological order since it is not a static entity but a
changing phenomenon influenced by many factors over time.
These factors are what he refers to when he states that

57
rhetoric is not the only thing that moves in a movement.
"Charting the temporal permutations" of rhetoric is only the
first step in an analysis of social movements; the critic
must go one step further and chart the temporal permutations
of situational variables surrounding that rhetoric such as
institutional arrangements, socioeconomic structures, tech-
nological developments, demographic patterns, environmental
conditions, and channels of communication as well as changes
in opinions, beliefs, and values. He divides these other
changing elements which influence and are influenced by
movement rhetoric into three broad categories:

Social movements arise out of and are shaped by
the dynamic interaction of multifarious and
effervescent forces. ... I shall focus on
three: objective material conditions, rhetorical
discourse, and the perceptions, attitudes, and
values--the "consciousness" held by the members.
(Lucas, 1980, p. 263)

This categorization helps the critic to organize
thoughts and analyze an overwhelming number of interacting
elements through grouping them into clusters under these
primary headings. Lucas posits that the clearest under-
standing of movement rhetoric is gained in this manner by
assaying how the metamorphosis of movement discourse
functions in response to emerging exigencies from within and
without the movement as well as how situational variables
and social attitudes change in response to movement
discourse.

58
Each of the methodologies for the study of movements
described above is instructive in formulating a means by
which to answer the questions posed by this study. Griffin
offers first a rationale for the study of movements in order
to understand the process of societal change. He also
recognizes the importance of understanding primarily the
situational variables, the background information, surround-
ing the movement before an understanding of the movement can
be gained.

One of the main questions asked in the present study
concerns the view of social reality of movement leaders,
movement followers, and of the opposition. How did these ,
social realities conflict? How did they interact,
influence, modify one another? The dramatistic methodology,
using the elements of the pentad and of identification,
suggests a manner in which one might analyze the speeches of
major representatives of the movement and the opposition.
Fantasy Theme Analysis suggests a means to reconstruct the
social reality of movement followers and to trace the manner
in which it alters. Social Reality approach to movement
studies offers a manner by which to reconstruct the
rhetorical vision communicated through the artifacts of the
movement.

Finally, Lucas offers a categorization of the many
influential variables which influence the communication
within a movement and its effectiveness. Utilizing his

59
framework, the critic can more easily organize and cope
with a great number of significant communication channels
within and between the movement and opposition groups.

Methodology for the Present Study

All the questions dealt with in this study revolve
around the persuasiveness of nonviolent communication and
the condition under which nonviolent symbolic action is an
effective tool. The rhetorical perspectives and critical
methodologies described in the preceding section are pri-
marily designed to use in the study of Aristotelian-based
rhetorical systems and within historical movements. As
such, any would be a valid choice of method by which to
analyze the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.A. Yet, a
study of the Indian Independence Movement involves a con-
sideration of nonoccidental rhetoric, values, philosophy,
and thought processes. Also, the primary objective of this
study is to find a valid methodology by which to analyze
contemporary movements in any culture in order to predict
the effectiveness of nonviolent direct action as a
persuasive strategy in that given situation rather than
explicating effectiveness in historical studies.

To address the first problem, the analysis of the
Indian Independence Movement under the leadership of Mahatma
Gandhi, the author argues that the critic, by taking
Carlson's (1969) and Griffin's (1952) advice, must study the

60
culture in question until a working knowledge exists in the
mind of the critic of that culture's value system and the
ways in which it is manifested in communication behavior.
Study of political, economic, social, technological,
religious, philosophical, and historical conditions sur-
rounding and influencing culturally-shared values must be
conducted. Proceeding from this base of knowledge, the
critic may then adapt U.S.A. -based methodologies to
compensate for cultural diversity. The most important
guideline is as Oliver (1962) stated, "Our logic may not be
theirs," or in fact logic may not play a large part in
another culture's rhetoric at all. Therefore, one of the
first steps in the methodology for this study is to examine
all of Lucas's "multifarious and effervescent forces" for
the U.S.A. black and white cultures and for the Indian and
British cultures in the time periods of these two
movements .

In Chapter Two, a theory developed by the author will
be described and discussed. It will be argued that the
Nonviolent Efficacy Theory identifies most of the signifi-
cant variables present in a society achieving intergroup
conflict and that the theory also presents explanations for
the ways in which these variables affect and interact with
one another and to what extent. Key terms will be defined,
basic theoretical premises, hypotheses, a path model, and
theoretical definitions will be discussed. Operational

61
definitions and linkages offer a means by which a researcher
may predict the feasibility of using nonviolent persuasion
in a given conflict situation and also estimate the appro-
priateness of its use with a social setting of the past.

In Chapter Three the Nonviolent Efficacy Theory will be
used to analyze the Indian Independence Movement and the
U.S.A. Civil Rights Movement as two conflict situations in
which nonviolence was used successfully. A description and
discussion of culturally based rhetorical values functioning
in India and the U.S.A. will be the first step in this
analysis. Dramatistic, Fantasy Theme, and Social Reality
analyses will be utilized in reconstruction of the
rhetorical visions of movement leaders, movement followers,
and movement opposition. In this way, an understanding of
how nonviolent symbolic action and verbal rhetoric were
effective in these two situations may be reached by tracing
the changing rhetorical visions of each group as they con-
flict, interact, and modify each other.

Chapter Four will contain content analyses of five
selected speeches of King and Gandhi. The focus of the
study will shift from the movement rhetoric to the rhetoric
of the movement leaders as the communicator styles and
personality traits of the two primary spokesmen of the
movements in question are compared and contrasted. Such a
shift is justifiable in movements in which the leader plays
so large a role in shaping the goals and the strategies of

62
so large a group. Identifying the similarities and signifi-
cant differences of leaders ' personalities and rhetoric in
two successful movements using nonviolence may reveal
elements in leadership variables neccessary to such
success. Analyses to describe communicator style will
be word and sentence counts, Type-Token ratio, Adjective-
Verb Quotients, and Flesch Human Interest Scores. Analyses
to determine leadership personality traits as revealed
through speech will include Discomfort-Relief Quotient,
Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scales, and Markel ' s (1986) Inter-
personal and Intrapersonal Relations Scale adapted from
Gottschalk ' s Social Orientation Scale. In the concluding
chapter the m.ajor findings of the study will be reviewed,
problems with the study will be discussed, and suggestions
for future research will be presented.

CHAPTER TWO
NONVIOLENT EFFICACY THEORY:
INTRODUCTION TO A METHOD FOR ANALYZING RHETORICAL OPTIONS
FOR THE PLANNERS OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

The theory of nonviolent rhetoric and symbolic action
presented in this section is derived from a mingling of
several diverse communication as well as sociological
theories. The impetus for developing this theory was a
desire to be able to project whether the many circumstances
surrounding a given social movement are conducive to an
effective utilization of nonviolent symbolic action and
rhetoric to achieve the ends sought by movement leaders and
followers. Such projections could be useful in historical
studies of past movements as well as useful in predicting
the efficacy of nonviolent strategies in contemporary move-
ments. Nonviolent Efficacy Theory (NVET) draws from
Korzybski's theory of General Semantics (1958), the rhetori-
cal theories of social reality, dramatism, and fantasy theme
analysis, Gordon's theory of minority-majority group rela-
tions (1964), and from general theories of persuasion.

In his work in General Semantics, Korzybski explained
that much confusion, or "un-sanity", is caused by the fact
that people do not realize that their "maps "--their per-
ceived subjective ideas about the world around them--are

64
simply that: maps. The "territory" is the objective
reality set apart from these maps. While maps are helpful
and even necessary guides, they should not be clutched
doggedly when obviously in direct conflict with "life facts"
or the "territory. "

For example, a person planning to travel from Town A to
Town B may look at a map and determine that traveling a
state road may be 45 miles shorter than taking an interstate
and, therefore, is the most efficient route to take in terms
of time. A traveling companion may argue that even though
the difference in actual mileage is greater, the interstate
is most time-efficient. However, the driver is not per-
suaded, so the two start out along the state road. Two-lane
traffic, many slow local drivers, many small towns with
lower speed zones, and general bad road conditions impede
the travelers' progress so that time of arrival in Town B is
later than planned by an hour. The passenger expects the
driver, through having experienced the life facts of
traveling on a state road, to adjust his or her ideas, his
or her map, about which route is faster. However, much to
the passenger's aggravation, the driver argues that the
circumstances were unusual; the road is usually not that
crowded; a bit of rain had slowed the travelers down; and at
any rate the highway would not have been faster even if it
had not been slower. The driver through language is chang-
ing the perception of the life facts so that they continue

65
to fit his or her map, the map that clearly shows that the
state road is the most time-efficient route. The two
travelers end up traveling back by the same route and again
end up being later to arrive than expected. It is easy to
imagine the passenger relating the story to a third party
and saying something such as "John (or Mary) made me so
mad--just insisted that old state road was faster than the
interstate! Just so hard-headed and won't admit to being
wrong!" Even in unimportant cases such as this hypothetical
one, people often find it easier to alter their perceptions
of life facts to fit their map of what they expect life
facts to be than to alter the map in their heads to fit
their encounters with those life facts.

In his book Symbol, Status, and Personality, Hayakawa
(1963) discusses this human tendency to trust one's mental
verbal maps of the world rather than to trust the actual
experienced, nonverbal encounter with it. He defines
Korzybski ' s term "intensional orientation" by saying that it
is "the habit of orienting oneself by means of words to the
more or less complete exclusion of a consideration for what
the words stand for" (p. 113).

Johnson (1972), another interpreter of Korzybski,
continues along these lines by stating that not only is the
mind-set of intensional orientation a pervasive human
tendency, but that it is one with far-reaching effects. It
causes changes to be slow, even when they are for the

66
better, and problems to go unresolved. It engenders a
reluctance to change maps, beliefs, theories, and policies,
even when they are in direct contradiction with reality.

In contrast, Hayakawa then goes on to explain the
opposite mindset or what Korzybski refers to as "extensional
orientation. " This is the "habit of orienting oneself in
terms of the nonverbal realities ... to which words are
often an imperfect guide and from which we are too often
shielded by verbal smoke screens" (p. 113). It is easy to
understand, therefore, that in rhetorical confrontation,
verbal messages which do not meet an audience's map are much
less disturbing than nonverbal messages that do not meet the
map. Although it is possible for words to be very powerful
and alone to cause changes in maps, they are still more
easily adjusted and scoffed at than nonverbal messages since
words are symbolic representations of the speaker's maps.
(Words alone are usually effective when an audience may be
considered moderate or to have a predisposition, religious or
social awareness or sensitivity, or economic or political
needs, to side with the speaker.) Referring once more to
Johnson (1946), he speaks of extensionalism as a state of
being attuned to nonverbal levels of information sources. He
writes that these nonverbal levels are from what our verbal
abstractions are derived and against which we may test and
evaluate our maps of reality. Adequate evaluation depends
upon constant gathering of data through nonverbal "having of

67
experiences" which allow a person to test the accuracy of
verbal mental beliefs and assumptions, what Johnson calls
"continuous testing of one's knowledge against nonverbal
experience or 'hard facts'" (1946, p. 203).

Yet most people will avoid gathering data or having
experiences if the information thus received contradicts
already formed beliefs. According to Hayakawa, we all
suppress to some degree that information which we do not
choose to face. Therefore, even though nonverbal messages
designed to persuade a listener that a given map is inaccur-
ate will be less easy to ignore or rationalize than similar
verbal messages, the rhetorician is still faced with the
problem of message avoidance on the part of the listener.

Symbolic action, then, in order to be effective must be
so designed that it will thrust an unsuspecting audience
into direct contact with the territory, to experience the
hard facts, before they can be altered or interpreted by
others' rhetorical "maps" of that territory. The purpose of
symbolic action is to confront the audience with the terri-
tory in such a way that it is simply too difficult to modify
in order to fit the audience's current maps; the purpose is
to place the listeners in actual touch with reality without
the chance for modification of that experience through
filter of language.

Modification is the mental process of interpreting
messages (received through all the senses, not simply

68
through the oral/aural channel) so that they support one's
social reality (i.e., one's map of what reality is). This
is the modification process most often used by the inten-
sional thinker, the person who places more faith in mental
maps than nonverbal experiences. Modification may also
refer to the reverse process by which one alters his or her
map of reality to coincide with messages which contradict
it. This is the process that Johnson uses to define the
extensional thinker, the person who continually tests his or
her map against real life experiences. In terms of the
preceding discussion, it is held that it is easier and less
threatening for a person to change his or her closely-held
beliefs about the subject of that message. It follows,
then, that modification will usually occur in interpreted
messages rather than in maps.

In order to persuade an audience to change behaviors,
beliefs, and attitudes, a speaker must somehow generate
changes in the audience's maps. In order to do so, the
message must be delivered in such a way that makes the
speaker's social reality conveyed thereby too difficult for
the audience to change, more difficult to change than the
map.

A basic rule in persuasion found in contemporary speech
textbooks by authors such as DeVito (1984) and Ehninger et
al. (1978), states that when presenting a persuasive mes-
sage, particularly to a hostile audience, it is strategic to

69
establish a common ground with that audience. Such areas of
common ground may include such fundamental characteristics
as beliefs in the goodness of people or beliefs in basic
human rights. It is important to evoke from the audience
empathy and identification with oneself and one's message
early in the sender/receiver interchange. In Burkean terms,
identification is an emotional state in which the listener
feels a personal involvement in the rhetorical vision as an
actor alluded to in either "god" terms or in "devil" terms-
Rhetorical vision refers to "an intersub jective world of
common expectations and meaning created in speaker-audience
transaction" according to Bormann (1972). It is the view of
social reality constructed within the rhetoric expressed by
the source of a message and perceived by the receiver.
"God" terms, then, are words or phrases which evoke goodwill
through allusion to culturally held values and their
antithesis .

General Semanticists also acknowledge the usefulness of
"god" and "devil" terms in persuasion. Hayakawa writes of
American school children being taught the "proper" automatic
responses to terms such as "'Christianity' ('a fine thing'),
'the constitution' {'a fine thing'), 'Shakespeare' ('a great
poet'), 'Benedict Arnold' ('a traitor'), and so on" (1963,
p. 24).

If a communicator is of low credibility to an audience,
he or she may acquire a credibility-by-association through

70
quoting or mentioning a higher respected authority to which
the audience will respond with an automatic and positive
response. Higher authorities are culture-bound but most
often include national or religious figures or doctrines
such as Jesus of Nazareth, Mohammed, Moses, the Declaration
of Independence, the Bhagavad Gita, George Washington, etc.

Just as source and speaker credibility give weight
to verbal rhetoric, they give weight to nonverbal rhetoric
as well. For nonviolent tactics to be effective, then, the
source of the message must be able to cite a culturally
respected doctrine or person which supports the use of
nonviolence over violence. In societies where violence is
not sanctioned, where peace and civility are dear, it is
most important that symbolic action be nonviolent. This
is so that in no way can the territory be compatible with
the opposition's maps concerning the movement and its fol-
lowers and allow the opposition to change, filter, ignore,
or rationalize a nonresponse to the movement's message. The
opposition can look at violent action of movement followers
and feel that the follwers are not "worthy" and so their
demands need not be met: "See how they act? We knew they
were like that! They only get what they deserve; it's their
own fault. "

Ironically, nonviolent direct action in societies, such
as those described above, is most effective when it is
calculated to evoke and is successful in evoking violent

71
responses from the opposition forces. In such cases, the
opposition's map must almost always be altered. In con-
fronting the life facts, the opposition itself has acted in
conflict with the mandates of a higher authority, be it
religious doctrine, laws, or societal mores and, therefore,
has acted in conflict with its map about itself. The fact
that the opposition did act violently without having been
provoked by acts of violence and acted violently against
people who did not return that violence leaves the opposi-
tion "naked" without defense for its own violent deeds
before the judgment of the group's closely held social or
religious values against violence or against unprovoked
violence. In these circumstances it takes a great bit of
logical acrobatics in order for the territory (i.e., we
acted violently against those who did us no violence) to be
adjusted by rhetoric to the map (i.e., we are good peaceful
people; we are better people than the movement's
followers). At this point verbal arguments excusing the
opposition's behavior are weak before the actual physical
experience of the circumstances surrounding the act and
the actual occurrence of that behavior. Left with no
choice, the opposition's maps must be altered in order for
the opposition to maintain what Korzybski refers to as
"sane-ness", or to maintain equilibrium. Sane-ness or
equilibrium is a psychological state in which any informa-
tion which will not coincide with a person's or culture's

72
social reality can be either discredited, ignored, or
filtered in order to support and retain that present social
reality. If such information cannot be modified to support
a person's maps, then the person is in a state of disequi-
librium, an uncomfortable, un-sane state which can only be
resolved through modification of the person's map of social
reality.

Another way of looking at this is through the Psycho-
logical Balance theory discussed by DeVito (1984). Based on
general theories of human motivation. Balance theory states
that humans expect a positive link between a source and
a belief that they like, or a source and a belief that they
do not like. People also expect a negative link between a
source they respect and a belief with which they disagree.
For instance, we want the people we like to believe as we
do; we want our best friend to like a political candidate
for whom we have chosen to vote. If our expectations are
not met, if this best friend believes our chosen candidate
to be a huckster, we experience psychological imbalance. To
regain balance, we must either reform opinions about our
best friend, our chosen politician, or both. This need to
regain balance causes us to be more persuasible.

Applying this balance theory to nonviolent direct
action as well as to verbal appeals to higher authority, it
becomes clear how these two rhetorical strategies can cause
an audience to be more easily persuaded. One does not

73
expect a spokesperson for a cause one is against to be able
to utilize highly revered sources in support of that cause.
To do so provides a positive link between a negatively-
valued speaker and a positively-valued belief or authority.
This link causes an imbalance that the listener may correct
only through altering values placed on the speaker, the
belief, or both. Similarly, if a culture, as in the case
mentioned earlier, is peace-loving and its people have
responded to nonviolence with violence, then it finds itself
in a state of imbalance. On one hand, the audience has
observed a positive link with a negatively-valued population
and a positively-valued behavior. On the other hand, it has
observed a positive link between a positively-valued popula-
tion (itself) and a negatively valued behavior. In Burke's
dramatistic terminology, it has acted in the role of "devil"
according to its values and the mandates of a higher
authority. At this point, the opposition must either accept
the role of "devil" or "repent" in some manner. Successful
repentence occurs when the opposition changes the territory
itself in order to build a new map or salvage an old map,
one in which it once again is acting the role in which it is
content. Such changes in maps will the be revealed through
verbal rhetoric and in the territory through nonverbal
rhetoric.

According to sociologist Gordon (1964) in his work
on intergroup conflict and racism, prejudice is the

74
attribution of characteristics to an individual for no other
reason that that he or she is a member of a specific group.
In other words, prejudice can be seen to result from inten-
sional thinking. The prejudiced individual will evaluate a
group member in terms of a mental map rather than utilizing
information gained through actual interaction with that
individual. Discrimination, according to Gordon, is a
result of prejudice and is the translation of prejudice into
institutionalized racism such as unfair laws, policies, and
procedures which allow inferior treatment of individuals
because they are members of a "second-class" group. Again,
such discriminatory practices are the result of intensional
thinking, using maps of how a group of people behave to form
policies governing their behavior, rather than evaluating
the policies against interaction with individuals in that
group. The objective of rhetoric for the elimination of
prejudice and discrimination, then, is to change the maps of
the audience concerning the disfavored group.

Map changes in an opponent's social reality which
eliminate prejudice are most often revealed through verbal
rhetoric. Changes in nonverbal rhetoric (hiring practices,
desegregation) more clearly indicate map changes which
lessen discrimination, according to Gordon. Therefore, fair
hiring practices and integration may lead to, but do not
indicate, unbiased attitudes.

75
A useful theory must not only provide explanation but a
means for prediction as well. The next section provides a
method by which the rhetorical critic or the movement
planner may predict the level of efficacy of nonviolent
direct action in a given movement. This is followed by the
presentation and discussion of the many significant vari-
ables in and surrounding a given social movement and how
they and their relationships to one another may be measured
in order to determine whether or not movement planners may
use nonviolent direct action to a successful end.

Major Propositions of NVET

NVET is based on four basic propositions gleaned from
the preceding discussion. These propositions are

1. Nonviolence is only successful when it can force
the powers it targets to identify with "devil"
terms and characters in the constructed rhetorical
vision. This identification will be revealed in
the words and actions of the opposition as they
attempt to rationalize, refute, or apologize for
their role as "devil."

2. Nonviolent symbolic action is only persuasive
when it appeals to a commonly held higher
authority. This authority provides standards by
which to compare the competing "maps" and by which
to judge the territory when it is confronted. The
rhetoric of a successful movement will contain
appeals to a commonly held authority.

3. Those who hold the prevailing vision of social
reality will go through four basic stages toward
agreement with the competing vision. These stages
are (a) awareness of a competing vision, (b)
empathy with those holding the vision, (c) identi-
fication with those holding the vision, and

(d) modification of their own prevailing vision.

4. The four stages of the opposition's social reality
will be revealed in words and actions. In the
inception stages of the movement the opposition
will describe itself in "god" terms. As the
movement progresses, the opposition's rhetoric
will change in an effort to reconcile inconsis-
tencies between the map of the opposition and the
territory as revealed through the movement's
symbolic action. The movement is successful when
in the final stage the opposition finds the incon-
sistencies between perceived social reality and
"real life facts" irteconcilable through rhetori-
cal justifications. In this case, equilibrium,
disidentif ication with the "devil, " can only be
accomplished through alterations in the territory.
Such alterations are produced by changes in atti-
tudes, words, actions, and policies.

For nonviolent symbolic action to be effective it must
be combined with verbal appeals, both of which should be
directed at practical material authorities as well as higher
spiritual authorities. Figure 2.1 suggests the manner in
which each of these appeals work to change the opposition's
vision, their maps that dictate their attitudes and actions
toward the movement. The changing vision of the opposition
represents the four predicted stages through which it moves
toward coinciding with the movement's rhetorical vision.
The attitudes of the opposition are placed on the right side
of the competing vision to indicate that these, according to
Gordon, are more deep-seated and therefore more difficult to
reach and change.

In stage 4, nonviolent direct action thrusts the
audience into direct sensual contact with the territory. In
the example given on the model, the Birmingham march ended
with "police dogs lunging at young marchers, of firemen

ACTIOHS ATTITUDES

ACTIONS ATTITUDES

verbal appeals to material
issues; financial; worker
concerns (Ex: Gandhi's
letter to Viceroy refusing
to pay salt tax. )

/ / /
/ / /
/ / /

/ /

ACTIONS ATTITUDES

little or no impression; no
change in policy

verbal appeals to common
higher authority (Ex: in
letter Gandhi mentions
British charity, dignity,
sense of fairness.)

////////
////////
////////

//////
/ / / /
/ /

ACTIONS ATTITUDES

evokes sympathy but little or
no change in policy and atti-
tudes

nonverbal appeals to
material issues (Ex:
Montgomery bus boycott
directly hurting city
finances . )

•7-7-7-7-7-7-7-.
///////
//////
/ / / /
* ' '

ACTIONS ATTITUDES

forces change of policy, atti-
tudes somewhat altered; inter-
dependence of groups
acknowledged

nonverbal appeals to common
higher authority (Ex: March
where children were attacked
by policemen and dogs; appeal-
ing to doctrines of "love ACTIONS ATTITUDES
they enemy," etc.) forces change of ideas and be-
liefs about the relationships
between the groups and the
desirability of the present
system

Four stages of change in the opposition's vision
of social reality.

Figure 2.1

raking them with jet streams, of club-wielding cops pinning
a Negro woman to the ground" (Oates, 1982, p. 235). With
the media bringing these images into the homes of millions,
citizens of the U.S.A. were faced with these acts committed
by the opposition against the movement. In no way could
such behavior be aligned with prevailing Judeo-Christian
doctrines or the American belief in punishment fitting
crimes. Certainly the fact that armed men were fighting
off unarmed women and children went against the nation's
sense of justice. Those audience members who felt them-
selves to be members of the opposition had to at this point
see themselves or at least their representatives in the role
of the "devil" in this particular drama. In order to
correct this, change in policy was necessary. In most
cases, it is probable, too, that a change in attitude toward
the movement followers, if nothing more than a grudging
respect, resulted from the march as well.

Note that even in the fourth stage the two visions
of social reality are not identical. Until two groups
become culturally indistinguishable, they will maintain
somewhat differing maps of reality as filtered through
differing value systems revealed in language. Complete
cultural assimilation usually occurs only through inter-
marriage according to sociologist, Gordon. The end result
of intermarriage is an elimination of two distinct cultural
groups, which in turn eliminates both differing cultural

79
values and social realities, and the possibility of
prejudice as a reaction to those who are different.

The path model in Figure 2.2 is designed to represent
the dynamic interaction of a few major forces of those
"multifarious and effervescent" forces present in a social
movement which Lucas (1980) talks about. The model incor-
porates elements within the three major forces of which
Lucas speaks: the objective material conditions, the
rhetorical discourse, and the ideologies of those persons
involved. It also contains Griffin's (1952) three stages of
social movements: the period of inception, the period of
rhetorical crisis, and the period of consummation. The
model does not illustrate a linear path of action but rather
a three-dimensional process. The left side of the model
includes the major factors which determine the basic psycho-
logical, financial, political, and physical strength of the
movement and its followers as well as of the opposition.
The culture's respect or disrespect for violence and non-
violence is also included. All of these factors play a part
in determining the rhetorical strategy of the movement,
verbal and nonverbal rhetoric, and how effective that
strategy is.

After rhetorical confrontation begins (Griffin's period
of rhetorical crisis), feedback from the audience affects
the movement's strategy and its effectiveness. The four
major interacting factors of this feedback include how

c o ,:-
^ <r> z>
\jj OC i±j

tr>

■

CT>

■o

CSi

O'l

■o

••:::

•V

.if ►-

*> 4> ■_

O Q_

2 .-

= £

CVJ

3 ?*

O 1^

> "

Jj Q.

u a

ii: "

~ >

m 3>

a> .a
O —

>-s

^ZI

> >

org
£ o >

O '^ 4>
CO"

s s «

>•- to -^
o ♦- c
— ^ *>

O) o n

W ^
O ^

Ck:

—I O)

< Q-

q; Csl

O Q)

K CT3

ct: CD

CD w

O Z

U Q.

LU O

< o

31 r

— I>

— QJ

CO u

5£

CD w

o en

• >

=t*:

0) x;

-p

■H

-p

(Tl

-p

-_^

<1J

i-i

■H

0 r-l

r-i

•iH

.c ^

-p

(T3

Q4M-J

1— 1

■H

4-1

tri

^ 13

81
strongly the verbal rhetoric embodies coimnonly held cultural
myths of right and wrong and how well the symbolic action
is able to catch the audience's attention and do so in a
manner which causes the opposition to play the "devil" in
the action. Verbal rhetoric containing many commonly held
and respected higher authorities and mandates of such will
be more difficult for an audience to discredit or ignore.
Symbolic action which causes the opposition to respond not
in accordance with these mandates such as acting obviously
unjustly or violently will cause the opposition to have
greater difficulty in justifying its actions and itself.

All these forces continue to interact, changing the
rhetoric and thereby the social realities of one or both
groups until a level of disequilibrium is reached that
forces the opposition to make changes in policies and atti-
tudes in order to regain its equilibrium.

Another outcome, of course, is possible. Through
the dynamic interaction of all elements, the case may be
that the opposition is able to reject or ignore the move-
ment's rhetoric and to justify its actions in response to
the movement. This feedback will normally tend to change
the rhetoric and thereby the social reality of the movement
more than the opposition. If indeed the strength of the
opposition's social reality and the rhetoric which reveals
it proves more forceful than the social reality and rhetoric
of the movement, then movement followers may be the ones to

82
reach a level of disequilibrium. At some point, frustration
may become so great, futility so obvious, that they believe
themselves to be wrong and foolish in their cause and their
attempt to change people, themselves, the world, society,
and "the way things are," With a new social reality tinged
with defeat and cynicism, they may give up and accept their
lot with a sense of fatalism. If neither side can succeed
in changing the rhetoric and social reality of the other
group, it may be projected that after some time violence
will erupt to decide the matter by coercion rather than
persuasion.

Operational Linkages

This section contains an explanation of the preceding
path model identifying a few significant variables in and
surrounding a social movement and projecting the ways in
which these variables influence one another. Graphs are
provided to give a clearer understanding of the predicted
relationships between variables. Each operational linkage
is a description of a relationship existing between two
variables in the path model (Figure 2.2). The linkage to
which each description corresponds is found in parentheses
at the end of the definition for that linkage under the
graph which depicts it. The variables are grouped into
Lucas' three major forces: material conditions, rhetorical
discourse, and ideologies.

83
Objective Material Conditions

The variables included in this section are those which
constitute the situation in which the movement forms.
Obviously people cannot be persuaded by rhetoric without
exposure to that rhetoric. Two important factors which
would greatly influence the amount of exposure are functions
of the cultural and political setting. These are the level
of freedom to question the status quo allowed to the general
populace and the channels of mass communication which are
open and accessible to speakers and listeners and exist
uncensored by the government. Limited freedom to
disseminate movement rhetoric or lack of technology or
access to efficient channels will limit that rhetoric's
effectiveness from the outset of the movement. Also,
obviously, an audience cannot identify with a vision to
which it has not been exposed. Too much exposure, on the
other hand, can cause movement rhetoric to meet a point of
diminishing returns. A "media blitz" or a "channel blitz"
of movement rhetoric may cause the rhetoric to be overwhelm-
ing. At a point of saturation the rhetoric may become
boring, irritating, evoking responses such as "Oh no, not
again" or "Who cares?" At this point, the perceptive
rhetorician will change tactics, or the saturation will
cause a loss of interest. (This may be a good point at
which to utilize symbolic action. ) It may be expected that
movement followers are more likely to have an immediate

84
increase in response to the rhetoric, whereas the opposition
will be slower to begin a response which will most likely be
completely negative to rhetoric so out of line with their
world view. Also, the opposition should lose interest at
the point of saturation more rapidly and to a greater degree
than followers. The following statements and graphs
(Figures 2.3 and 2.4) represent the predicted relationship
between the Degree of Exposure to the movement's rhetoric
and the Level of Identification of movement followers as
well as the Level of Persuasibility of the opposition.

A theoretical definition for Degree of Exposure (to
movement rhetoric) would be the extent to which the audience
is in contact with movement's ideas and demands as well as
the extent to which followers and potential followers are in
contact with movement ideas. The operational definition for
determining the Degree of Exposure is as follows:

Degree of Exposure = [g (ae+be+cf +df )+hi+2 ji+ki ] 1

The variables in this equation are replaced by numbers
determined by the following indices:

a. number of television stories on movement

b. number of radio stories on movement

c. number of newpaper stories on movement

d. number of magazine articles on movement

e. average number of minutes of aired stories

f. average number of words per written stories

g. average number of viewers/readers of news stories
among population

Degree of Exposure

Figure 2.3 The greater the Degree of Exposure to the

movement's rhetoric, the greater the Level of
Persuasibility (of the opposition) to a
critical point of saturation at which the
Level of Persuasibility lessens model).

LL -1

o 5

UJ =>

^■^^ ^\

-1 C/5

/^ \

/ \

_^ \

Degree of Exposure

Figure 2 . 4 The greater the Degree of Exposure to the

movement's rhetoric, the higher the possible
Level of Identification with the movement will
be until the Degree of Exposure reaches a
critical point of saturation at which the Level
of Identification lessens slightly and levels
off.

h. number of lectures and activities produced by

movement
i. average number of new listeners
j . number of proselytes
k. number of items of movement literature (brochures,

posters, pamphlets, etc.) disseminated
1. presence or absence of Freedom of the Press,

Speech, to Protest, to Congregate:

Presence = 1; Absence = .1

The Level of Identification refers to the degree to
which followers personally feel involved with the movement.
It is the point at which the listener can fully understand
and empathize with the characters and action presented in
the rhetorical vision and can see the rhetorical vision of
the movement as their own perception of social reality. The
Level of Identification with the movement by followers will
most directly effect the Level of Unity and the Level of
Motivation among followers. As followers perceive
themselves more strongly tied to a cause, they will have
feelings of commonality with others dedicated to the same
cause. An example would be that of two drug users who are
persons of quite differing backgrounds, interests, and
professions but feel a common bond because of this one
strong common interest (Figure 2.5).

If identification with the cause increases to the point
that linkage to and activity within the movement are central
to one's self -concept , then other considerations become of
lesser significance to that person. Therefore, when
introduced to another person, perceived similar or

87
dissimilar characteristics dim in light of the other's
involvement or uninvolvement with the cause.

As followers feel an increase in personal stake and a
personal calling to a cause, the more strongly will they
feel the need to act in the name of that cause. In some
instances, a follower's identity may become so immersed in a
cause to the point that life without that cause or with the
cause defeated has no meaning. In such instances the
follower is usually willing to risk property, position,
family, even life, for the sake of the movement (Figure 2.6).

The Degree of Identification is theoretically defined
as the degree to which followers feel personally involved
with the movement; can fully understand and empathize with
the characters and action present in the rhetorical vision;
can see the rhetorical vision of the movement as true to
their perception of reality. The operational definition
which enables one to determine the Degree of Identification
in given movement is

Level of Identification = (a + b + c + 2d) E

Indices :

a. average number of times a specific common higher
authority is invoked in verbal rhetoric (i.e.,
scriptural references, legal references, cultural
ideological or mythical references).

b. number of higher authorities invoked.

Degree of Identification

Figure 2.5 As the Degree of Identification (with the

movement by followers) increases, the Level of
Unity (among factions) increases model).

Degree of Identification

Figure 2.6 As the Degree of Identification (with the

movement by followers) increases, the Level of
Motivation (among followers) increases on
model ) .

number of nonverbal symbols used by leaders of the

movement that are common and meaningful to

followers (i.e., clothing occupation, housing, mode

of transportation, etc.).

average number of yards in distance followers can

actually approach leader.

Degree of Exposure = E

Both the Level of Follower Unity and Level of
Motivation will influence the potential power of the move-
ment. Infighting weakens a movement while a unified move-
ment can spend more energy persuading the opposition rather
than trying to persuade one another. A cohesive, coopera-
tive organization is capable of greater efficiency than a
noncohesive, argumentative group. Also, unity provides a
credible appearance to outsiders, at least a more credible
appearance than an organization which is divided against
itself. Even though all large organizations will contain
factions of disagreement, at a critical point the larger
faction of unified members will be stronger in controlling
smaller diverse factions. If a significantly large unified
faction exists and grows, it can suppress conflicts within
the movement or more easily convert conflicting factions
with a bandwagon appeal (Figure 2.7).

Motivation influences movement power because as move-
ment followers become more willing to act in the name of the
cause, the more attention they can command. As followers
become more willing to sacrifice, to risk life, limb, and
property, the resources and strategic options for the
movement become even more numerous (Figure 2.8).

Level of Unity

Figure 2.7 As the Level of Follower Unity increases, the
Extent of Power (of the movement) increases
steadily until it reaches a critical point at
which the Level of Unity increases
incrementally.

Level of Motivation

Figure 2.

As the Level of Motivation increases, the
Extent of Power (of the movement) increases
steadily until it reaches a critical point at
which the Extent of Power increases
incrementally.

91
The Level of Unity (among followers) may be theoreti-
cally defined as the extent to which an organization lacks
divisive factions, infighting, and feels a commonality and
willingness to cooperate with one another. The Level of
Unity may be determined through the following operational
definition and indices:

d
Level of Unity = ba + 1+e

Indices :

a. number of prominent acknowledged leaders

b. absence or presence of one overall leader:
absence = 1 ; presence - . 1

c. number of identifiable factions

d. number of followers

e. average number of followers in factions

f. number of issues over which disagreement occurs
("f" must be weighted according to the seriousness
of the issue. For instance, a disagreement over a
minor matter such as naming the movement may be
weighted "1." A breach over the primary goal or
strategy of the movement may be weighted "3").

Theoretically the Level of Motivation is the extent to
which followers are willing to act, to risk property,
family, injury, and death. Operationally, the Level of
Motivation may be defined using the following:

Level of Motivation = a + 2b + 3c + 4d + 5e + 6f

Indices :

a. number of people who are willing to say they are
part of the cause

b. average number of people participating in
activities

c. average number of people who donate time, money, or
resources

d. number of people who lost money, property, jobs

e. number of people injured

f. number of people who died

Two other factors which will influence how powerful a
movement may be are the Extent of the Movement ' s Power and
Economic Influence and the Extent of the Movement's Physical
Power. The movement's economic and political power can be
defined in terms of the movement's financial resources and
access to legal processes within the society. The move-
ment's physical power is the ability of the movement to use
force to achieve its ends. As both of these factors
increase, the power of the movement against the opposition
increases (Figures 2.9 and 2.10). Studies indicate that
appeals to power, to financial gain, and to fear are strong
motivational appeals. Yet, an organization without economic
resources has little leverage by which to appeal to
financial gain. It may have trouble meeting organizational
operating costs, and threats to withold business may prove
ineffective. An organization without political resources
has little leverage by which to appeal to legislators and
governing officials. A threat to withhold support will be
insignificant. Such an organization may also have
difficulty getting media coverage. Finally, an organization
without physical strength may threaten violence without
inspiring fear.

Extent of Influence

Figure 2.9 As the Extent of Economic and Political

Influence (of the movement) increases, the
Level of Power (of the movement) increases
until it reaches a critical point at which the
movement is so powerful that no "movement" is
necessary — change can occur on demand.

Extent of Physical
Strength

Figure 2.10 As the Extent of Physical Strength (of movement
followers) increases, the Level of Power (of
the movement) increases to a critical point at
which a "movement" is not necessary model).

94
The Extent of Economic and Political Power may be
defined as the financial resources and access to legal
processes available to the movement. It may be defined
operationally:

Level of Economic/Political Power = a + (e-d) + f. + H ■*" £

b h i j

Indices :

a. average income of followers

b. average income of the opposition

c. number of followers

d. average percentage of income obtained by opposition
from followers through work or payment

e. average percentage of income obtained by followers
from opposition through work or payment

f. number of voters among followers

g. number of governmental officials among followers
h. total number of voters in society

i. total number of governmental officials
weights: 1 = community lever

2 = state, provincial, territorial level

3 = national level
j. population of society

The Level of Physical Power (of movement or opposition)

is the extent to which the movement can use force to coerce

the opposition. It is determined through the following

operational definition and indices:

Level of Physical Power = a + c + n (e )

b d n(e)

Indices :

a. number of followers

b. number of opposition members

c. number of militarily capable followers

d. number of militarily capable opposition members

e. number of weapons weighted according to potency:

fists = 1

stones, rocks, bottles = 2

rifles = 3

bombs = 5

As mentioned in the earlier section, one of the main
strategies in persuading a hostile audience is to establish
a common ground with that audience, a common belief or goal.
Often these are drawn from commonly held national, religious,
or cultural beliefs usually contained in the words of a
credible person or doctrine. To the degree that the audience
perceives this higher authority as credible, the movement
gains power and the persuasibility of the audience
increases. The use of a respected source in movement
rhetoric will inspire the movement followers as well as
making them prouder to be identified with the movement and
prouder to act in its behalf, thus adding to the strength of
the movement (Figure 2,11). The use of a source deemed
highly credible by a source deemed not credible should also
create a state of disequilibrium in the audience which the
audience may attempt to alleviate. If so, the audience will
be more persuasible in an effort to reconcile the speaker
with his or her references (Figure 2.12),

The Degree of Credibility (of Higher Authority) is the
extent to which the authority is viewed as infallible and to
which it is used as a guideline for correct human behavior.
In historical movements this must be ascertained through a

Degree of Credibility

Figure 2.11 As the Degree of Credibility (of the Higher
Authority) increases, the Level of Power
(of the movement) increases.

1—

U. -1

o 5

> S

LU -J

_l CO

Degree of Credibility

Figure 2.12 As the Degree of Credibility (of the Higher

Authority) increases, the Level of Persuasibil-
ity increases.

97
qualitative analysis of available resource materials on the
subject. For a contemporary movement the following
operational definition might be used:

Degree of Credibility = a + 2b

Indices :

a. use of an instrument that measures public opinion
of higher authorities using a seven-point semantic
differential scale with questions such as the
following:

1. I am a devout Christian

2 . I am a devout Hindu

3. I try to live my life according to the
scriptures in the Koran.

4. The Constitution outlines the way in which this
country should be governed.

b. number of active members in institutions formed in
the names of these higher authorities.

The Level of Power (of movement) is defined as the
combination of all interacting factors which measure the
potential degree of influence which the movement has. This
is determined through the use of the following operational
definition:

Level of Power = A + 2(B + C + D) + 3(E + F + G)

Indices :

A. Degree of Exposure (to movement rhetoric)

B. Level of Identification (of followers with movement
rhetoric )

C. Level of Unity (among followers)

D. Level of Motivation (among followers)

E. Level of Economic/Political Power (of followers)

F. Level of Physical Power (of followers)

G. Degree of Credibility (of higher authority)

Rhetorical Discourse

Two main factors which will determine how receptive an
opposition is to movement rhetoric depend on how the view of
reality expressed in movement rhetoric threatens the
opposition's role in the social hierarchy by threatening its
status, economic benefits, and political power in that
hierarchy. The level of sociopsychological importance of
the opposition's original view of social reality is dependent
upon the degree to which the opposition's status and self-
worth depend on maintaining the society's status quo. On the
other hand, the level of economic and political importance of
the opposition's original social reality is influenced by the
extent to which the movement's conflicting view of reality
threatens the opposition economically and in terms of
political power. If a change in the initial social reality
will result in a lowering of status for the opposition, then
the rhetoric supporting that change will be perceived as a
threat and will be resisted. When a social reality has been
accepted for many generations, a change in it will also be
perceived as threatening, as not traditional, and will be
resisted (Figure 2.13). Also, if such a change is likely to
cause a change in the opposition's economic benefits or
political power, it will be resisted (Figure 2.14). For

1—

—1

UL ~-

O CO

-I CO

tH <

l^CO

^ri

Level of Socio/psychological
Importance

Figure 2.13 As the Level of Sociopsychological Importance
(of the opposition's original social reality)
increases, the Level of Persuasibility (of the
opposition) decreases.

H-

U. —

O CO

-I </i

LU <

H CO

^Qi

\^^

Level of Economic/Political
Importance

Figure 2.14 As the Level of Economic/Political Importance
(of the opposition's original social reality)
increases, the Level of Persuasibility (of the
audience) decreases.

100
example, in the antebellum South, wealthy plantation owners
resisted rhetoric which spoke of Negroes as men and women
with equal rights and as human beings with souls. If this
view of social reality was to be accepted, then men and
women of the Judeo-Christian moral code would feel the
necessity of freeing their Negro slaves. Freeing the slaves
would cause a significant lowering of plantation profits.
Therefore, such a view of social reality was resisted. Many
poor white farmers resisted this view of social reality
because although they were already very low on the
socioeconomic ladder, they could still consider themselves
"above" Negro slaves. Freeing slaves threatened their
social status of not being on the bottome rung of the
socioeconomic ladder. In southern counties with large
percentages of blacks, whites resisted this new and
revolutionary social reality, because if Negroes had the
vote, the whites would lose much of their political power.

The theoretical definition for the Level of
Sociopsychological Importance (of the opposition's original
social reality) is the degree to which the opposition's
status and self-worth depends on the status quo. It can be
determined through the following:

101

Level of Sociopsychological Importance = (a+b)c

Indices :

a. number of generations down through which the
present social reality has been passed

b. number of familiar songs, creeds, fables, etc.
which represent the present social reality

c. the presence or absence of the belief that the new
vision will lower the status of the opposition
group

presence = 2; absence = 1

The Level of Economic/Political Importance (of the
status quo to the opposition) is the extent to which the
proposed new social reality will threaten the opposition
economically and in terms of political power. This may be
ascertained through the following operational definition:

Level of Economic/Political Importance = a+b+c+d

Indices :

a. projected average increase of salaries for movement
followers

b. projected number of jobs given to followers
normally filled by majority members

c. increase in percentage of minority's voting power

d. increase in percentage of minority's governmental
positions

As a movement gains economic, political, and physical
power, as well as the psychological advantage gained through
allusion to a credible higher authority, the potential to
use nonviolent direct action effectively becomes greater.
If the power of the movement approaches the level of the

102
power of the opposition, then the potential for efficacy
will increase dramatically (Figure 2.15). The potential
effectiveness of nonviolence is also a function of the
persuasibility of the opposition. If the audience is not
predisposed to be persuaded, then the initial efficacy of
nonviolence is not high. If an audience is simply
apathetic, potential efficacy will meet with less resistance
but must still serve as a powerful and creative attention
gaining device. The audience predisposed to movement
rhetoric will obviously be most receptive to nonviolent
direct action. In fact, as persuasibility increases, the
movement may find "opposition members" participating in its
cause. Of course, at some point of high persuasibility,
nonviolent symbolic action becomes unneccessary (Figure
2.16) .

The Level of Persuasibility (of the opposition) is here
defined as the audience's predisposition to heed the
movement's rhetoric. It is operationally defined through
the following:

Level of Persuasibility = (a+2b) - (c+d)

Indices :

a. Degree of Exposure to rhetoric

b. Degree of Credibility of higher authority

c. Level of Sociopsychological Importance

d. Level of Economic/Political Importance of
opposition's present perceived social reality

103

LEVEL OF POWER

Figure 2.15 As the Level of Power (of the movement)
increases, the Degree of Efficacy (of
nonviolent symbolic action plus rhetoric)
increases incrementally.

LEVEL OF PERSUASIBILITY

Figure 2.16 As the Level of Persuasibility (of the opposi-
tion) increases, the Degree of Efficacy (of
nonviolent symbolic action plus rhetoric)
increases incrementally.

104
Probably the most salient variable influencing the use
of nonviolent action is a cultural one. If the culture has
no preference or respect for nonviolence, then the employ-
ment of such tactics will not only be ineffective but
probably scorned. The society with a greater respect for
nonviolence will give greater heed to the movement's cause.
In a society where violence is abhorred, the use of non-
violence may be effective in that the movement's requests
will be met in an effort to avoid being targeted for more
stringent violent methods. Nonviolent symbolic action is
often designed to provide a confrontation that the opposi-
tion can only meet with acquiescence or violence or inatten-
tion. If a society is strongly opposed to violence, then
its options are limited (Figure 2.17).

The Level of Cultural Preference (for nonviolence) is
the extent to which a society looks unfavorably upon the use
of physical force. This may be determined through the
following :

Level of Cultural Preference = la+lb+lc+5 ( 1-d )

Indices :

a. presence or absence of acceptable norm to bear arms
in public

presence = .1; absence = 1

b. presence or absence of law against possessing arms

presence = 2 ; absence = 1

c. presence or absence of religious mandate against
violence

presence = 1; absence = .5

105

Level of Preference

Figure 2.17 As the Level of Cultural Preference (for

nonviolence) increases, the Degree of Efficacy
(of nonviolent symbolic action) increases.

106

survey of citizens asking "Under which conditions
is violent behavior acceptable?"

In which of the following is violent behavior

acceptable?

war

self-defense

defense of another

defense of property

defense of honor

defense of rights

average number of checks is indicator "d".

As stated earlier, nonviolence is quite often most
effective when it evokes a violent response from opposition
members in a society in which nonviolence is preferred. If
an act of nonviolent symbolic action evokes an act of
violence from the opposition, then onlookers must neccessar-
ily view the violent party in a negative light, placing the
movement followers in the roles of martyrs and giving an
almost "holy" credibility to their cause (Figure 2.18). In
order to justify their behavior, the opposition may resort to
rhetoric which indicates that just provocation existed.
However, as the level of violent response increases, rhetoric
stating that the "punishment" fit the "crime" becomes more
difficult to justify (Figure 2.19). In this case, if the
opposition cannot sufficiently justify its behavior, then it
must accept the role as "devil" in the "act." This is a
modification of the original social reality. If the opposi-
tion is forced to modify its perception of itself to the
role of "devil" and cannot rectify this role change through
verbal means, it will then attempt to rectify the new vision

107

A3V3HJ3 dO 33^930

0) U3

•H

X! x: (P

+J 03

^ OJ

■H

•H

W S-i

M-l

OJ U

c
o

•H

■H

W 0)

fO TD
0

■^

^ >

4->

(fl

0 u

U-l

G nj

•H

■H U

-H

«*—

-^ y-i

•^

-I-)

-t-l M-l

■o

G W

-P

0)
(U 0

4-1

oj x;

0 QJ

1 1.1

x: -P

E OJ

-p

tjl

4-1

0) 0-

•H

CO 0 x: Qj

-P Ql

uonc^yipouj

-p

U-(

-p

x; 0) —
-p X

X! 03

M
CI
0)
Q G
O

x; -P
-p u

(T3
03 OJ

•.

•H

-P

•H

-P

1+-I

■H

-H

■H

ITS
0)
S-l
H U
03 0)
•H T>
>

H C

m 0

U -H

rH -P

U -H
O 03

P o

0) a

G a,

u o

<i;

<i>

ADVDIdd3 dO 13A31

03 I 0)

X OJ h^

+J > 03

O 03 0)

c e X 03

■H -P fC

03 03

T3 x: ■^ M

0) -P 03 U

^ 03 C
O >i 03 -H

> X! (T3
0)

c
o

OJ -H
X -P
-P u

03 0)

G M

0 U

•H G

-P -H

•H

U-l

03 '-

U-l

0 -P

Q. G

Q4 03

M-l

0 E

108
through action; change in policies which meet the movement's
demands (Figure 2.20).

The Level of Violent Reaction is the degree to which
opposition to nonviolent symbolic action responds in
accordance with "devil" terms in a given instance. It may-
be determined through the following indices and equation:

Level of Violent Reaction = b +n (e )+2n (f )+3n (g)+i

d{n) h

a +n(e)+2n(f )+3n(g)+i
c(n) h

Indices :

a. number of followers participating in activity

weights (n): men = 1; women = 2; children = 3

b. number of opposition members participating

c. number of violent acts by followers

d. number of violent acts by opposition

weights(n): against men = 1; against women = 2
against children = 3 ;
against the armed = . 5 ;
against the unarmed = 1

e. number of temporary injuries

f. number of permanent injuries

g. number of deaths

h. dollars worth of lost property of opposition
i. dollars worth of lost property of followers

Ideologies

The Extent of Modification is the degree to which the
opposition can rationalize violent behavior. Operationally
it is defined by

109
Extent of Modification = b(n) [A(c)]

Indices :

A. Level of Violent Reaction

b. number of observers

weights (n): followers = 1; opposition = . 5 ;
3rd party = 3

c. number of violent outbreaks

The new rhetorical vision expressed in the rhetoric of
the movement must utilize already established and accepted
beliefs of the opposition in order to establish credibil-
ity. If these accepted beliefs are utilzed to support the
movement's cause, they create an imbalance in the audience
members' minds who are comfortable believing that the myths
support the status quo. This imbalance keeps the audience
from being able to ignore or simply reject the new vision.
As the degree of this imbalance increases, the degree of
symbolic action efficacy increases.

The Strength of the Rhetorical Vision is the degree to
which verbal rhetoric contains commonly held ideological
myths. The indicator for this is the results of content
analyses of major speeches using a dramatistic analysis
which is to be explained further in next chapter.

The Degree of Possible Rejection (of rhetoric) is the
capability of the audience to discredit verbal rhetoric.

110

ADV3ldd3 dO 33^930

•H

•r—

4->

■P

-P

•

■H

■p

0) -H

x: M

-P 0

m a

lx<

< ol

^ 4-1

u: 0 0

OJ — -H •

w -p >i

ta >i

U rH

0) u

03 iH

S-l tC

0 u

U -P

c; -H

■H C

■H M-l

rH 0)

4-1

0 g

U W

j3 (U

■H

F; !-i

!-l U-J

>i u

0 0

U3 C

-P

■H

(P OJ

-p

x; 0)

C W

>^ S-l

0) CD

iH cn

OJ 0)

0 fO

>^ Q

•H OJ

0 > i-i

G (U C U

cn^

0 0)

H OJ

g j=

-p

-P

>i+J|

-p

■H

Cn 0)

0 x:

■H

5-1

-p

-P

[/]

-C

T^ 03
OJ

<U 03

s: -P

0) g

i-l 0)

O 5-1

c u

O -H -H

to <->

ADVDIJd3 dO 33b93a

'^J

CO 03 iT

0) O 0)

•H

-G

•H .,-( Q

T3 tJi CO

•H

0 0 QJ Q)

^ iH x; (fl

g 0 -P 03

'^"

QJ QJ OJ

TD - i-l

-p

■H CO O

■H

QJ G

5-1

TI C/3 -r-l

rH 03

r-t

-P

QJ 0) >i

x; s-l u

•

CIJ

U 03

r-H

>i G U

r-l -H -H

-p

OJ ^

G M-l

5-1

x; 03

0 CO LM

-P XJ

g x; w

5-1

g -p

■H

ifl OJ

0 >im

5-1

u S

Ill

Degree of Possible Rejection = ab

Indices :

a. number of times audience is exposed to rhetoric

b. strength of the rhetorical vision

If all factors of the rhetorical situation interact to
cause a rhetorical vision quite different from the generally
accepted view of social reality and if the new rhetorical
vision includes and is supported by strong cultural beliefs
and mandates of higher authorities, then the old social
reality cannot be defended. This will cause a psychological
disequilibrium in the minds of the audience (Figure 2.24).
As disequilibrium increases, it must reach a point of
intolerability at which the opposition must do something to
correct it in order to remain "sane." The level of disquiet
or disequilibrium will dictate the extent of the changes
which the opposition employs to rectify the situation. Great
disequilibrium will cause greater changes in attitudes and
policies (Figure 2.25).

The Degree of Efficacy is the extent to which elements
present in the rhetorical situation interact to cause
circumstances under which nonviolent symbolic action will be
effective. It is determined by

uoi^ejo^sd^

3buBq3 ;o iub^x^

cn cn 0

03 C +4

C E

x: 03

■H 1 D

■H

x: c

C -H

CD U 0

(1)

•H U

r-l 0

tn -H ■

Cn| u-i

03 Q.

c t3 x: 4-1 cn

cn 0

■H

u a

03 C 0 -H 3

■H 0

x: 0 3 cn 0

CJ 4-1

•H

4-1

u tj g 0 ^

■H C

■H OJ

0) a CD

rH 0)

M x;

x; cn 0 Oi c

U-l

0 4-1

0 4J

iji cn 0 (D

a X

3 03 01

U-(

03 x:

0 4-10)

«^

-p

T! 0

c 4-1 c x: 'd

C 0)

0 -H

OJ 03 -H 4-1 G

03 x: c

4J x:

0 03

^m»

4-1

4-1 0

cn ^ Oi'U

•

cn -H

rH QJ 0) T3

QJ ^ 4-1

OJ 4-1

0) T! rH cn 0

T3 03 (0

cn 03

0) 03 03 3 0

0) D 0) ^4

4-1 e u 03 cn

i-l

x: -p 0) 0

CD +4

•H 0

4-1 -H 03 +J

i4 C

C C 4J rH

4-1 0) cn

U -H

0 OJ -H cn CU

•H

W 4J ^4 CD

C 0

•H 0) ^ 03 Q)

< 03 O «

■H a 4-1 X! U x; 4-1

S -H

•H

uj cn rH

■H 0)

0 OJ 0) >4

^ tji

cn > 0)

X5 C

•H

cn 03 0) -C

•H 03

r-H

U-I

CU Q; iH 4-1

rH x:

■H

■H ^4 0

•H U

U CJ 4J c

■rH C -H 03

cr 4-1

iH -H

CD 03

0 x; cn

cn x;

^•m

■H

4-1

Q4 >, 0 01

■H 4-1

4-1 -H ^

T3 0) x; u

■MM

4-1

C -H 3 03

V (0 •

•^

QJ 03 O (U

4-1 OJ 'O

x: 0 4-1 V4

C ^4 QJ

•H

4-1 cn cn 03

■H cn iH

OJ 4J

0 -H

V T3 i-l 4-1 -H

a 0 3

•

cn 3 0) G

cn cr

rsi

►^

0) 4-1 iji-H cn

rH QJ

Cfl -H i-l 0 <

03 cn M

OJ 03 4-1 03 Oi

0 0)

^ (U 4-1 .H

H S C

4-1 V4 03 03 •

4-1 0 -H

U 0) 4-1

H U 03

•H

cn c c x; 0 4-1

^4 0) cn

•H

4-1

4-1 0

0 42 03

112

mnuqiinbdsiQ

0 -

•H

•H cn

4-1 0)

0 cn

■H

•H

03 03

14H

-H

0 ^4

•H U

rH C

0 -H

•H

h ^

>, 0

m -H

4-1 0

G 4-1

0) Q)

rH x:

QJ 0 >H

■H

h-l

G 3

O rH

C CU

113
Degree of Efficacy = A+B+C+D+E+F+G

Indices :

A. Level of Power of movement

B. Level of Cultural Preference for nonviolence

C. Level of Persuasibility

D. Extent of Rejection

E. Strength of Rhetorical Vision

F. Level of Violent Reaction

G. Extent of Modification

The Level of Disequilibrium may be redefined as the
Level of Efficacy since the purpose of nonviolent direct
action is to set a state of imbalance in motion toward
persuading the audience. Therefore, the Level of
Disequilibrium is operationally defined:

Level of Disequilibrium = Level of Efficacy

The Extent of Change in attitudes and policies is the
degree to which the movement's demands are met willingly.

Extent of Change = a+d+(b-c)

Indices :

a. number of laws changed

b. number of instances in which new laws are followed

c. number of instances in which new laws are violated
without punishment

d. number of symbolic changes (in creeds, songs,
wordings, etc. )

114
The Extent of Restoration of Equilibrium is the degree
to which the opposition can defend its map in terms of the
new social reality (Figure 2.26). This is indicated by

Extent of Restoration = a

a. number of "god" terms in rhetoric of opposition
determined through a content analysis to find
redemption for opposition through changes in
attitudes and policies.

Nonviolent Efficacy Theory (NVET) offers a means to
describe and explain the use of nonviolent direct action
with verbal rhetoric in a social movement. It also offers
a means by which to predict the usefulness of such rhetoric
in a given movement. Through analysis and measurement of
each of the variables described here in terms of a histori-
cal movement, the theory may be tested and refined. For
example, according to NVET the Level of Physical Power of
movement followers should correlate with the Level of Power
of that movement. If in the analysis of a successful
movement the researcher discovers that a movement weak in
physical power was still quite powerful, this would suggest
that a high level of physical power is not always essential
to the success of a nonviolent movement.

If after analyzing many successful movements, the
researcher finds that all of these movements contained a
high Level of Physical Power, this would then suggest that

115
physical power is an important asset for a nonviolent
movement to possess in order to reach its goals. If in the
analysis of unsuccessful movements, it is found that all
were weak in terms of physical power, this finding would
reinforce the theory that nonviolent movements must have the
potential for physical power in order to be successful.

Interactions of variables must be observed as well. A
low potential for physical power may be compensated for by a
strength in another area of the movement.

According to NVET, the two factors most important to
the success of a movement are the Level of Cultural
Preference for nonviolence and the Degree of Credibility of
the standards, authorities, and concepts relied upon by the
movement for the bases of logical and emotional appeals. If
a culture does not respect nonviolence but instead believes
reacting to violence with nonviolence to be a manifestation
of cowardice, weakness, or stupidity, then obviously, non-
violence will not work as a means of persuasion. If an
opposition group does not hold respect for the concepts,
standards, and authorities invoked by the movement through
its rhetoric, then such appeal will be easy to ignore or
discredit. Finally, the opposition must recognize the
personhood of movement followers. If the opposition does
not believe the movement member to be fully human or above
animal status, then the opposition will not perceive the
member to be endowed with human needs and wants and will not

116
feel a common human bond or a need to grant basic human
rights to movement followers.

These are the author's expectations. However, they may
be disproved if a successful movement is found to be weak in
the Level of Cultural Preference or Degree of Credibility.
In the following chapter, NVET will be utilized to analyze
two successful nonviolent movements, the Indian Independence
Movement, and the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.A.

CHAPTER THREE
NONVIOLENCE AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY IN THE INDIAN
INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT: NONVIOLENT EFFICACY
THEORY APPLIED

In this chapter, the Nonviolent Efficacy Theory (NVET)
will be considered as a descriptive and explanatory analysis
of the two historical movements on which this study
focuses. The Indian Independence Movement and the
U.S.A. Civil Rights Movement will be first described in
terms of the 16 significant variables in and around the
movements. Then the two movements will be compared and con-
trasted in terms of these variables and their indices. For
easier understanding the 16 variables are grouped into
four clusters. First, those variables which affect the
potential for power of the movement in terms of political,
economic, and physical power within the social structure in
which the movement occurs will be analyzed. Secondly, the
variables which affect the opposition's predisposition to be
or not be persuaded by the movement will be analyzed.
Third, the rhetoric of the movement and the opposition will
be analyzed, and, fourth, the aftereffects of the movement
will be analyzed. The third and fourth groupings of vari-
ables may only be analyzed in historical studies such as
this one. In the study of contemporary movements the third

117

118
and fourth clusters may be analyzed as events unfolding. In
the study of movements originating, predictions about the
efficacy of nonviolence might be made according to the
analysis of the first two clusters through comparison and
contrast of the movement originating with movements of the
past. The quotations used in support of various points in
the NVET represent consistent themes and arguments utilized
by King and Gandhi. These quotations were selected after
extensive study of Gandhi's works produced over the nearly
40-year period of his public activity and of King's works
available through his own books, biographies on his life,
and materials available at the King Center for Nonviolent
Change in Atlanta, Georgia.

Variables Affecting the Movement's Potential for Power

According to the NVET, seven variables affect the
potential for power of the movement. These include the
Level of Exposure (to Movement Rhetoric), the Level of
Identification followers feel with movement rhetoric, the
Level of Unity (among followers), the Level of Motivation
(among followers ) , the Extent of Economic and Political
Influence (of followers), the Level of Potential Physical
Power (of movement), and the Degree of Credibility (of
concepts, standards, and higher authorities) referred to in
rhetoric of the movement.

119
Level of Exposure (to Movement Rhetoric)

The Indian Independence Movement occurred prior to the
advent of television and also prior to the widespread use of
radio in India. Therefore, Gandhi relied heavily on the
print media and oral communication as he tried to convey his
message to India's vast population, as well as to British
leaders. Gandhi himself authored most of the movement's
literature. While in South Africa he published three pam-
phlets for the purpose of making known the injustice of
discriminatory practices against Indians. An Appeal to
Every Briton in South Africa (1894) and The Indian
Franchise; An Appeal (1894) were circulated in South
Africa. The third pamphlet, known as The Green Pamphlet
because of the color of its binding, was first published in
1896 with the 10,000 copies being sent to South Africa.
Gandhi later printed a second 10,000 which sold quickly in
India. In 1903, Gandhi helped found a weekly newspaper
entitled Indian Opinion, and he wrote his first book. Hind
Swaraj or Indian Home Rule, in 1909.

In 1919, Gandhi founded two weekly periodicals to use
primarily as personal organs to communicate with a limited
readership. Young India was an English-language weekly in
which Gandhi wrote a short article each week entitled My
Experiments with Truth. These articles were later combined
in a book by the same name. Nava jivan , a Gu jarati-language
weekly, was founded at the same time. Hari jan, a magazine

120
expounding the injustices of "untouchability , " replaced
Young India in 1933. In 1930 Gandhi wrote the book From
Yeravda Mandir while he was imprisoned in a Yeravda jail.
"Mandir" means "palace"; calling the jail a palace expressed
his pride in being imprisoned for a good cause. In this
book, he expresses his beliefs about God in relation to
humanity.

Louis Fischer (1950), in his work on Gandhi, states
that even though Gandhi's papers were not circulated to a
large readership, almost everything Gandhi wrote was
"reprinted in the entire Indian press." At that time,
though, the entire Indian press was comprised of only 174
publications with a combined readership of a meager 1% of
the entire Indian population. Also, even though Gandhi was
a prolific writer, as late as 1959 only 1% of India's popu-
lation had even secondhand access to a newspaper, and the
country had an illiteracy rate of over 50% (UNESCO, Handbook
of International Trade and Development, 1974). However,
newspapers were often read aloud to others by the literate.
Therefore, much information dissemination was dependent upon
the functioning of word-of -mouth channels. "Distances are
great in India," states Fischer, "and communications bad;
few people can read and fewer possess radios. Therefore,
the ear of India is big and sensitive" (p. 137). In other
words, word-of -mouth channels functioned well simply because
this was often the sole source of information.

121
Though Gandhi professed not to enjoy public speaking
and considered himself a poor speaker, he obviously realized
the necessity of utilizing this channel as a means of com-
municating with the Indian masses. He did much public
speaking. Because poor transportation systems and the
poverty of the majority of his intended audience made their
travel to hear him speak difficult to impossible, Gandhi
instead travelled to them. In 1920, he toured India for 7
months speaking to massive audiences, some of which numbered
more than 100,000. He stopped not only in large cities but
in small and isolated villages as well.

Again in 1926 he travelled through the country on a
speaking tour but was forced to cut the circuit short for
reasons of poor health. Everywhere he spoke, he enlisted
the support of his audience; he encouraged them to adapt the
lifestyle of the satyagrahi and to follow the principles of
nonviolence in their communities. Ahimsa (lacking any
desire to kill) and satyagraha were advocated not only for
relations with the British but for interpersonal relations
in the smallest communities between all individuals, between
family members, between friends, between Hindu and Moslem,
between untouchables and the rest of society.

He also explained the strategies of noncooperation
particularly when a call to mass demonstration was in the
foreseeable future. He charged his listeners to participate
in noncooperative measures with confidence, commitment, and

122
without violence in action, word, or even thought against
the opposition. Satyagraha was more than a persuasive
strategy; it was a way of life.

Multitudinous activities were generated by Gandhi's
charge to the people. Ashrams, or self-supporting farms,
were established to cultivate the lifestyle of the truly
committed satyagrahi. Meetings to explain the strategy and
lifestyle were conducted, marches were organized, and
literacy campaigns begun.

While Gandhi was walking his message to the four
corners of India, he was also reaching out to the British
through written appeals such as the earlier-mentioned pam-
phlet. An Appeal to Every Briton in South Africa, as well as
through letters to British newspapers and letters to indi-
vidual Britons of significant political power. Late in the
movement, he travelled to England to meet with British Prime
Minister Ramsay MacDonald in the Round Table Conference
concerning Home Rule for India.

The major purpose of the Round Table Conference was to
build a constitution for India. Yet, members of the British
delegation openly admitted that their purpose was to "give
effect to the views of India" while maintaining their own
position and control there (Fischer, 1950). Consequently,
the session resulted in little or no change in Indian Rule.

Gandhi, however, did not spend his time in London
speaking only with Conference delegates. While there, he

123
again took his message to the people by visiting the textile
mills and speaking with the workers. He wanted to speak
with these Britons especially, since these were the people
hardest hit by his instigation of the Indian boycott of
foreign goods. Gandhi wanted to explain to the workers the
reasons behind the boycott. The trip was recorded as a
newsreel that was shown in British and U.S.A. cinemas.

The first references to Gandhi in the London Times were
meager. He was mentioned in approximately 11 articles per
year until the beginning of World War I, during which he was
evidently not deemed newsworthy at all (Index of London
Times, 1906-1950). In 1919, his name and cause reappear in
the Times and are featured frequently from that year on.
Between 1926 and 1933, Gandhi and Home Rule are mentioned on
a daily basis and in 21 leading articles. This journalistic
interest was mainly in response to major direct action
campaigns such as the foreign goods boycott, the no-tax
campaigns, arrests of Gandhi and other movement followers,
hartals, and the Great Salt March (Index of the New York
Times, 1920-1930). By the mid-1930s and until his
assassination in 1948, Gandhi was a prominent news figure in
London, in India, and, in fact, throughout the world. In
the Times his stories gained more prominence as they began
to appear on pages 3, 4, and 5 rather than on pages 10-16.

Similar to Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., was also a
prolific writer and public speaker. However, unlike Gandhi,

124
King also had the channels of radio and television at his
command. Complete information on the number of news stories
in which King and the Civil Rights Movement were subjects
was not accessible. However, the Bulletin of Public Affairs
Information Service was of use in obtaining a list of major
news broadcasts. This index is not exhaustive since its
purpose is to index only those sources of information con-
taining current and significant statistical data for
utilization by governmental agencies and personnel. A
search of this index indicated that the earliest signifi-
cant news broadcast by or about King was a segment of
National Broadcasting Company's Meet the Press radio and
television program that aired April, 1960. King was inter-
viewed and allowed the opportunity to explain his views on
segregation legislation and on the nonviolent resistance
campaign in the south. He appeared twice more on Meet the
Press . On the first of these appearances aired in August,
1963, he was asked to speak about the upcoming march on
Washington, and in 1965 he was asked to speak on the future
of Civil Rights in the U.S.A. In 1963, National Educational
Radio and Television produced a documentary entitled The
Negro Protest, featuring interviews with King, James
Baldwin, and Malcolm X.

The Index of the New York Times listed an average of
between 100-200 stories on King or stories in which he was
mentioned per year. This figure represents an average of

125
nearly one story every other day between 1958-1968. The
Atlanta Constitution ran front-page stories on the issues of
segregation and legislation concerning it in nearly every
issue between 1958 and 1964.

The Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature lists 244
articles on King beginning in 1955 and waning in 1969, one
year following his assassination. These articles appeared
in 35 different magazines ranging from news magazines to
religious to fashion periodicals. During this period,
Newsweek ran 35 of these stories; U.S. News and World Report
and Time ran 21 stories each. Christian Century featured 31
articles. Magazines targeting a black readership included
the Negro History Bulletin and Ebony with 15 and 14
articles, respectively. Magazines for women manifested less
interest in the movement in only five articles, three in
Good Housekeeping, one in McCall ' s , and one in Redbook.
Reader's Digest, the periodical with the largest readership
of all, ran only four articles on King, three after his
death and the first as late as 1967.

The mass media constitute an important communication
channel in the United States because of their extreme perva-
siveness. According to UNESCO Report on World Communica-
tion, one radio per person existed in the U.S.A. in 1962,
and radios could be found in 97% of all U.S.A. homes.
Eighty-nine percent of the U.S.A. population had access to a
television set, and 31% had access to one of 220 daily

126
newspapers published at that time. Also, the literacy rate
for the nation in the 1950 's was estimated at a little over
90%.

Although King had the advantages of exposure to the
public via the mass media, he suffered the disadvantages of
such notoriety as well. Though the ethics of the journal-
istic profession require objectivity in reporter and report-
ing, it is easy to conjecture that much movement coverage or
lack thereof reflected at least some of the personal biases
of communication agents of media largely controlled by
members of the movement's opposition. Wisely, King did not
rely solely on the reports of others. He wrote four books
in which he described the plight of blacks in the U.S.A. and
the injustices in the nation's social system. He also
explained his philosophy and described the strategy of
nonviolent direct action. Each of these publications.
Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story (1958), Why We
Can't Wait (1963), Strength to Love (1964), and Where Do We
Go From Here (1967), were well received and sold over 20,000
copies apiece (Oates, 1982). King also authored many
articles, letters to the editor, and letters to individu-
als. His "Letter From a Birmingham Jail" (1965) has become
a literary classic, alone the subject of numerous analyses.

King, like Gandhi, relied heavily on speaking engage-
ments and meetings where he addressed hundreds to thousands
of listeners. Activities inspired by the movement included

127
organization of university student groups for civil rights,
nonviolent protest seminars, lectures, marches, and voter
registration campaigns.

To make a general comparison between the Degree of
Exposure (to movement rhetoric) for each movement, one can
conclude that exposure was extensive in both cases. Gandhi
did work under the relative handicap of not being able to
utilize a widely accessible mass-mediated channel, such as
radio or television. His limited channels of written com-
munication were more significantly hampered by the low rate
of literacy for India at that time. Yet, Gandhi compensated
for this through rigorous and comprehensive nationwide
speaking tours. King did have widely accessible mass-
mediated channels at his disposal, and this difference may
suggest a partial explanation for the temporal differences
in the length of the movements between the leaders' original
identification with the causes and subsequent significant
results. Gandhi was first identified with satyagraha and
Indian Home Rule in 1896, and India gained independence
August 15, 1947, after a continuous 51-year effort. King
was first strongly identified with nonviolence and Civil
Rights when he was placed in charge of the Montgomery bus
boycott in December, 1955. The Civil Rights Amendment was
passed in 1964 after a relatively short 9-year-long effort.

Further similarities in the Degree of Exposure of the
two movements include the fact that both leaders were

128
continuously, tirelessly communicating their ideas to fol-
lowers and opposition members through speeches, letters,
meetings, articles, books, and letters to editors. Both
virtually inundated all channels at their disposal with
movement rhetoric to the best of their human capabilities.
Finally, both men were allowed to communicate in a political
environment that for the most part did not place restric-
tions on their rights to speak, write, and organize meetings
in open opposition to the status quo and parties in power.

To summarize then, both movements were able to generate
many and frequent messages. One would have to be quite
isolated from or selective about sources of information in
order NOT to be exposed to the rhetoric of these impressive
movements. According to the Nonviolent Efficacy Theory
(NVET), such a high Degree of Exposure (to movement
rhetoric) should positively influence the Level of Identifi-
cation that followers develop toward the movement. It
should also directly influence the Level of Persuasibility
of members of the opposition as well as indirectly influence
other movement variables. To test this relationship, the
continuing analysis is necessary.

Level of Identification (of Followers with Movement)

The Level of Identification with movement rhetoric has
been defined as the degree to which followers feel person-
ally involved with the movement. Obviously, a viable means

129
of assessing attitudes in a contemporary movement would be
the utilization of a random attitudinal survey of the popu-
lation in question, a task not now possible, regretfully.
However, valid indicators might also include the average
number of times common higher authorities, standards, or
concepts are used in movement rhetoric. These would include
scriptural references, legal references, and ideological
values which are respected by the audience. Movement
planners or leaders may have also utilized cultural arti-
facts such as clothing or possessions which take on special
meaning for that audience. Of course, the Degree of
Exposure to movement rhetoric will affect an audience's
response to it.

As stated earlier, Gandhi and King both were tireless
communicators. An analysis of all their messages would not
be feasible. This analysis has been, therefore, limited to
two collections of quotations: The Words of Gandhi (1983)
compiled by Sir Richard Attenborough, student of Gandhi and
director of the Academy-Award-winning movie Gandhi and The
Words of Martin Luther King, Jr. (1983) compiled by Coretta
Scott King. The rationale for choosing these two collec-
tions for analysis is that they are similar in format and
both were compiled as representations of the "cream" from a
vast literature of oral and written philosophies. The
passages in each book were chosen by persons who knew these
leaders well enough to select quotations that capture the

130
essence of King's and Gandhi's messages. Each book was read
once. Then each was read again, and those concepts,
authorities, and standards to whom the speaker referred in
support of a point were recorded.

An analysis of Gandhi's selected quotations included
references to the following religious and national con-
cepts. The number of references to each appear in paren-
theses. A reference is regarded as a word or a phrase
employed by the message sender.

Religious authorities, standards, and concepts

God (21) Hinduism (1)

Creator (2) Mantra: Sacred formula

Atman: eternal, timeless, or chant (1)

imperishable, being (2) Brachmacharva : Vow of
Enlightened One (1) sexual abstinence (1)

Havana: in Hinduism; the Advaita: One of the

superhuman demonic op- principal branches of
ponent of Rama who is the Vedanta (1)

human form of God (1) Dharma: Preordained
Bible (2) duty of the

Gita: One of Hinduism's individual (1)

most important Ahimsa: Nonviolence (1)

religious writings (1) Golden Rule: "Do unto
Shastras: Orthodox sacred others as you would

books of India (2) have them do unto

Koran: Islamic sacred book (1) you (1)

National authorities, standards, and concepts

General Smuts: Minister Liberty/Freedom (5)
of South Africa Unity (1)

(1) Citizen's Rights (1)

Democracy (5) Excerpt from Declaration

India/Patriotism (5) of Independence (1)

Swarajya (1)

Cultural/scientific/philosophical/artistic concepts ,
standards, and authorities

Shakespeare (1) Strength/Force/Power/

Wordsworth (1) Courage (30)

Thoreau (1) Truth (7)

131

Newton ( 1 ) Love ( 4 )

Max Muller (1) Art (2)

King, in these selected quotations, referred to the

following :

Religious standards, concepts, and authorities

God (13) Higher Law (1)

Jesus (3) Bible (1)

St. Augustine (1) Biblical Excerpts (4)

Moses (1)

Church (1)

National standards, concepts, and authorities

Gandhi (3) America's glorious
Freedom (16) opportunity (1)

Justice (2) American History (1)

Democracy (2) American Life (1)

Citizenship (1) American Dream (1)

Boston Tea Party (1) Excerpts from National
First Amendment (1) Songs (2)

Excerpts from the

Declaration of

Independence (2)

Cultural authorities, concepts, and standards

Love (16)

Family Relationships (13)

Both King and Gandhi "keyed in" to values basic to the
religious, political, and social beliefs of their audiences
through allusions to personages, institutions, events, and
phrases that would trigger automatic positive responses in
their listeners. These responses could bring to mind whole
chains of connotations linked to a particular word or phrase,
The Indian population was predominantly of Hindu and Moslem
religious teaching. A familiarity with Christianity was an
inevitable effect of British Rule and missionary efforts in

132

the colonial state. Also, as a British colony, a value for

patriotism, national pride, and the privileges of democracy

was instilled in these subjects of the Queen. In a religious

vein, Gandhi believed in sacrifice, love, nonviolence in

action, word, and thought. At first glance, such rhetoric may

seem to suggest submission or passivity, yet Gandhi wove a

message of power, courage, and force throughout his words,

forming a seemingly contradictory theme which is common in

much Indian philosophy.

It is necessary to understand what the phrase
"strength to fight" means. ... It does not
mean only physical strength. Everyone who has
courage in him can have the strength to fight and
everyone who has given up fear of death has such
strength. . . . Thus, the day India gives up fear we
shall be able to say that she has the strength to
fight. It is not at all true to say that, to be
able to fight, it is essential to acquire the
ability to use arms; the moment, therefore, a man
wakes up to the power of the soul, that very moment
he comes to know the strength he has for fighting.
That is why I believe that he is the true warrior
who does not die killing but who has mastered the
mantra of living by dying. The sages who discovered
the never-failing law of nonviolence were themselves
great warriors. When they discovered the ignoble
nature of armed strength and realized the true
nature of man, they discerned the law of nonviolence
pervading this world all full of violence. They
then taught us that the atman can conquer the whole
world, that the greatest danger to the atman comes
from itself. (Gandhi, 1982, pp. 68, 69)

And so I am not pleading for India to practice
nonviolence because she is weak. I want her to
practice nonviolence being conscious of her
strength and power. No training in arms is required
for realization of her strength. We seem to need it
because we seem to think we are but a lump of
flesh. I want India to recognize that she has a
soul that cannot perish and that can rise triumphant
above every physical weakness and defy the physical
combination of a whole world. What is the meaning

133

of Rama , a mere human being, with his host of mon-
keys, pitting himself against the insolent strength
of ten-headed Havana surrounded in supposed safety
by the raging waters on all sides of Lanka? Does
it not mean the conquest of physical might with
spiritual strength? (Gandhi, 1982, p. 52)

The dominating theme of force and courage must have had
an almost compelling attraction to the masses of poverty-
stricken Indians who felt themselves to be helpless victims of
circumstances with no control over their own lives.

Similarly, King keyed in to two strong value systems
functioning within the culture of the U.S.A.; the Judeo-
Christian ethic and the spirit of democracy. A national folk
saying states that something is really "American" if it is as
"American as Mother, Home, and Apple Pie. " Another popular
motto relates to the honor of doing something for "God and
Country. " The values reflected in these sayings are reflected
in King's rhetoric as well. The U.S.A. is predominantly a
Christian nation, particularly in the deep south where the
black population is most dense. King acknowledges these
values that were, in fact, his own in allusions to Christian
doctrine. He also uses many family metaphors reflecting a
value concerning the importance of family and the responsibil-
ities of family members to one another. The following
excerpts are examples of King's use of words, phrases, and
concepts which indicate that his arguments are supported by
family, God, and country. The following statement, made at
the initial meeting for the Montgomery bus boycott, reveals
King's vision of blacks as Christians and Americans.

134

We are tired of being segregated and humili-
ated. ... If we protest courageously, and yet with
dignity and Christian love, when the history books
are written in the future, somebody will have to
say, "There lived a race of people, of black people,
of people who had the moral courage to stand up for
their rights. And thereby they injected a new
meaning into the veins of history and civiliza-
tion." (King, 1958, p. 63)

In the following quotations. King places the opposition

to his cause in league with communism and also refers to

familial duty.

Nothing provides the communists with a better
climate for expansion and infiltration than the
continued alliance of our nation with racism and
exploitation throughout the world. If we are not
diligent in our determination to root out the last
vestiges of racism in our dealings with the rest of
the world, we may soon see the sins of our fathers
visited upon our and succeeding generations. (King,
1983, p. 39)

Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the
stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." But
when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers
and fathers at will and drown your sisters and
brothers at whim; . . . then you will understand why
we find it difficult to wait. (King, 1964, p. 83)

The Negro cannot win . . . if he is willing to sell
the future of his children for his personal and
immediate comfort and safety. (King, 1983, p. 43)

There is nothing that expressed massive civil dis-
obedience any more than the Boston Tea Party, and
yet we give this to our young people and our
students as a part of a great tradition of our
nation. So, I think we are in good company when we
break unjust laws. (King, 1983, p. 42)

In these quotations King appeals to Christian ideals of
being one's brother's keeper, yet he adeptly includes non-
blacks and non-Christians in his appeal.

Every man must decide whether he will walk in the
light of creative altruism or darkness of

135

destructive selfishness. This is the judgment.
Life's most persistent and urgent question is "What
are we doing for others?" (King, 1983, p. 17)

In the final analysis the white man cannot ignore
the Negro's problem, because he is a part of the
Negro and the Negro is part of him. The Negro's
agony diminishes the white man, and the Negro's
salvation enlarges the white man. (King, 1983,
p. 22)

It is true that there are devout believers in non-
violence who find it difficult to believe in a
personal God. But even these persons believe in the
existence of some creative force that works for
universal wholeness. Whether we call it unconscious
process, an impersonal Brahman, or a Personal Being
of matchless powers and infinite love, there is a
creative force in this universe that works to bring
the disconnected aspects of reality into a harmoni-
ous whole. (King, 1958, p. 107)

Gandhi and King both spoke to "the People" through non-
verbal symbols that conveyed the message that each leader was
a true representative of the masses he was leading. Gandhi,
who had initially taken great pride in his manner of dressing
as well as any London barrister, shed his foreign garb in
1897 for a simple white loin cloth and sandals (Fischer,
1950). He walked almost everywhere he travelled, lived very
simply on the ashram where he enjoyed minimal possessions and
a simple diet. His days outside movement activities were
spent quite simply in reading, praying, walking, and
spinning. He made a special point to go out among the people,
even those in small remote villages. This great leader was
not someone far away and inaccessible but a man of simple
means with whom it was possible actually to meet and exchange
words. He even went among the class of Indian society who

136
were referred to as the "untouchables," squatting down among
them and conversing with them in their segregated groups.

King, along with Ralph Abernathy, his assistant, donned a
work shirt and blue jeans in attempting to identify with the
common black worker in the Birmingham march. Yet for the most
part. King's lifestyle, clothing, transportation, and material
possessions reflected not the common person but rather the
realization of a status to which most blacks believed it
impossible to aspire.

In reaching out to their audiences both King and Gandhi
utilized appeals that reflected the religious and political
values with which their audiences could identify. The differ-
ences in their appeals reflect differences in Indian and
U.S.A. values. While both leaders spoke of international
brotherhood and the worldwide interdependence of humanity,
Gandhi supported his rhetoric from a more eclectic array of
religious and political sources. He not only quoted Hindu and
Moslem leaders and doctrines, but Jewish and Christian as
well. He also quotes British, American, German, and Russian
thinkers, politicians, scholars, and writers. The people of
India are in general more concerned with religious differences
than political differences. According to Smith (1967), a
"common mistake in dealing with India is the tendency to
underestimate the influence of religion. . . . Educated
according to Western tradition and imbued with Western ideas
of nationalism, they are apt to forget that while patriotism

137
is a very modern concept in India the feud between Hindus and
Moslems has lasted for nearly a thousand years" (p. 2).
Gandhi could quote philosophers from other nations, statesmen,
writers, etc. without too many qualms of offending the politi-
cal beliefs of his Indian listeners. With the religious
beliefs of his Indian listeners, he had to be more careful.
Therefore, he called himself a Hindu by birth and upbringing
but made it clear that he believed in a universal religion
enveloping Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. In this way he
avoided alienating Hindus who might accuse him of defecting
while identifying with audience members of many other faiths.
Sometimes Gandhi emphasizes the similarities in people of
different faiths as in the following:

Notwithstanding the differences of nomenclature in
Hinduism and Islam, we all believe in one and the
same God. To pledge ourselves or to take an oath in
the name of God or with Him as a witness is not
something to be trifled with. (Gandhi, 1983, p. 74)

If we have listening ears, God speaks to us in our
own language, whatever language that be. (Gandhi,
1983, p. 74)

Other times, Gandhi emphasizes the similarities in

differing religions.

The Bible is as much a book of religion with me as
the Gita and the Koran. (Gandhi, 1983, p. 74)

Religions are different roads converging upon the
same point. What does it matter that we take dif-
ferent roads so long as we reach the same goal.
(Gandhi, 1983, p. 75)

I believe in the fundamental truth of all great
religions of the world. I believe that they are all
God-given and I believe that they were necessary
for the people to whom these religions were

138

revealed. And I believe that if only we could all
of us read the scriptures of the different faiths
from the standpoint of the followers of these
faiths, we should find that they were at the bottom
all one and were all helpful to one another.
(Gandhi, 1983, p. 78)

These references seem to reflect Gandhi's personal
beliefs and also an acknowledgment of religious differences
within his audience and the importance of downplaying the
significance of these differences and emphasizing the simi-
larities between all persons of faith.

King, on the other hand, addressed an audience more

homogeneous in religious beliefs. Although denominational

differences existed in the U.S.A., his audience was composed

almost exclusively of Christians and Jews, in a nation

strongly influenced by both religious doctrines. King's

rhetoric reflects this almost monotheistic and monodoctrinal

characteristic of his listeners. His religious references are

almost exclusively Biblically based.

It is pretty difficult to like some people . . . but
Jesus says love them, and love is greater than
like. (King, 1983, p. 37)

These developments should not surprise any student
of history. Oppressed people cannot remain
oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom
eventually manifests itself. The Bible tells the
thrilling story of how Moses stood in Pharoah ' s
court centuries ago and cried, "Let my people go. "
(King, 1983, p. 59)

But never forget that there is a first and even
greater commandment, "Love the Lord thy God with all
thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind. " This
is the height of life and when you do this you live
the complete life. (King, 1983, p. 64)

139

Whenever the church, consciously or unconsciously,
caters to one class it loses the spiritual force of
the "whosoever will, let him come" doctrine and is
in danger of becoming little more than a social club
with a thin veneer of religiosity. (King, 1958,
p. 25)

I still believe that one day mankind will bow before
the altars of God and be crowned triumphant over war
and bloodshed, and nonviolent redemptive good will
will proclaim the rule of the land. "And the lion
and the lamb shall lie down together and every man
shall sit under his own vine and fig tree and none
shall be afraid." I still believe that we shall
overcome. (King, 1983, p. 91)

Gandhi refers to God as "God," "Creator," "Atman, " and
"Enlightened One." King refers to "God" and to "Jesus." It
is predictable that King would have lost credibility if he
weakened his strong ties to the Christian Church by introduc-
ing other religious doctrines to his messages with any fre-
quency. Gandhi, on the other hand, spoke to an audience to
which it was necessary to include references to many doc-
trines .

Another significant difference among the authorities,
standards, and concepts used by each leader to support their
respective claims is King's utilization of family metaphors
and Gandhi's emphasis on power and strength of the
individual. Emphasis on the familial unit and on strength of
the individual may be indicative of the views each speaker
wanted their audiences to develop concerning the relationship
to the opposition and vice versa. King wanted blacks and
whites to see themselves as brothers and sisters in one large
Christian family. Gandhi wanted the British and Indians to

140
view India as a nation grown to independent adulthood, capable
of self-rule. The thrust of King's argument was that blacks
are not the servants nor even the stepchildren of the nation.
They represent full-blooded brothers and sisters who deserve
the same degree of nurturing, protection, sustenance, and
privileges as other family members. The U.S.A. is the parent,
the constitution a family agreement, and the white majority
"older" siblings who are bullying their younger brothers and
sisters. The "big kids" are denying equal shares of parental
provisions to the "smaller, younger children. "

Gandhi paints the picture of the independent adult who is
many years past the appropriate age for leaving the parents'
home. The emphasis is not on a familial tie that is being
neglected, rather a familial tie that is existing past a time
when it is appropriate.

Again, King's nonverbal artifacts, car, dress, house,
etc. , are those of the child growing up with all the advan-
tages that the nation as a parent can provide. Gandhi's
nonverbal artifacts reflect the child rebelling against paren-
tal authority and rejecting the parents' values. He rejects
the industrialization, the modernization, the progress of
Britain and surrounds himself with sparse, simple, handmade
items, such as his white loin cloth, sandals, spinning wheel.
He also lived on the ashram in simple quarters, living on a
sparse home-grown diet.

141
Though differing in many ways because of differences in
issues and audience, King's and Gandhi's rhetoric was similar
in that they do paint visions of reality that seem realistic
and compatible to the value systems of their respective
audiences. In both cases, therefore, the Degree of Identifi-
cation of followers with movement rhetoric was quite high.

Level of Unity (among Followers)

The Level of Unity (among Followers) has been defined as
the extent to which an organization lacks divisive factors,
infighting, and feels indicators of unity are the number of
prominent acknowledged leaders within the movement, the number
of followers each claims, and the extent of the differences
that exist between leaders and their respective factions.

In India, Gandhi figured as the one dominant leader, yet
this should not indicate that other leaders were not present
nor that they always agreed with him. Opposition to Gandhi
fell into three main categories: those who thought he was too
extreme, those who thought he was not militant enough, and
those who were offended or confused by Gandhi's reluctance to
work for the abolition of the caste system (Thursby, 1983).
The major issue of controversy dealt not with Home Rule, for
almost all of India was in support of swaraj. However,
Gandhi's extreme adherence to nonviolent tactics was not
always supported. Also, in the case of Home Rule, the issue
of whether or not to be a united independent state or two

142
states, one Moslem and one Hindu, was an issue that split the
movement in half.

Gandhi was in favor of a united India. Moslems and
Hindus formed the two major forces in Indian politics.
Jawaharlal Nehru was leader of the Hindu faction; Mohammed Ali
Jinnah led the Moslem faction. Nehru, for the most part, was
a follower of Gandhi, although sometimes he was doubtful and
frustrated by Gandhi's religious idealism and passive strate-
gies (Fischer, 1950). Jinnah, on the other hand, actively-
disliked Gandhi and opposed him directly on the issue of
partition (Fischer, 1950). Unlike Gandhi, Jinnah wanted an
independent India divided in separate Hindu and Moslem
nations. He feared that a united independent state would
simply change the nation's government from a British raj to a
Hindu raj. Jinnah had the support of wealthy land-owning
Moslems who stood to benefit economically from a divided
nation. He gained the support of the Moslem peasants by
stirring up religious controversies.

On the issue of Home Rule, as mentioned previously, no
significant factions emerged within the movement. The
conflict over this issue contributed to instances of
violence against British military forces, and these outbursts
saddened Gandhi greatly (Gandhi, 1969). However, on the issue
of partition, the population was split quite decisively
between Gandhi and unity on one hand and Jinnah and partition
on the other (Fischer, 1950). The equal power of these

143
factions, combined with the religious aspects and differences
between factions, caused enormous friction within the movement
to the point of civil war.

Within the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.A., several
significant factions existed; at one end of the spectrum were
the black moderate groups, upper-class blacks who had fought
hard for what they had and who did not care to risk the loss
of what gains they had made. These people were wary of King's
direct tactics, fearing that this would simply anger whites
with whom they had satisfactory relationships (Oates, 1982).
If change came, they were content for such change to be
effected slowly with less bold strategies and less challenging
rhetoric. In polar opposition stood the Black Power advocates
who were tired of waiting. These people were angry, were
ready to risk, and wanted to take by force, if necessary,
what they believed to be theirs. Theirs was a rhetoric of
swiftness, of demand, of violence, and of threats of civil war
(Marx, 1971).

Black Nationalist groups disagreed with the Civil Rights
Movement at large on the basic premise that integration was a
viable means to equality. Black Cultural Nationalists placed
primary emphasis on the development of black cultural art
forms, believing that blacks must be concerned with self-
determination, race pride, and the "pursuit of blackness"
(Marx, 1971).

144

A short-lived group of Black Revolutionary Nationalists
believed that the only answer to black oppression at the
international level was the attainment or seizure of power.
Equality was not the goal, rather domination (Marx, 1971).

Groups of Black Separatists such as the Black Muslims and
the Republic of New Africa sought physical, geographical
separation from whites as a means to equality and dominance,
Stokely Carmichael (cited in Marx, 1971) accused the Civil
Rights Movement and Martin Luther King, Jr., of not being
simply ineffective in nonviolent methods but of actually
causing further frustration and deeper anger in young ghetto
blacks. He spoke of nonviolence as an appeal to weakness that
could only work if human nature were basically good.
Carmichael differed from King when he stated that humanity is
basically selfish and that blacks could no longer depend on
the basic goodness of whites to right past wrongs (Marx,
1971).

King acknowledged the factions within the movement and
strove to unite them. Perhaps this contributed to his ability
to maintain overall leadership in the face of so many dis-
agreements on primary issues. A 1964 Newsweek poll of Negro
opinion revealed that 95% of active movement participants and
80% of the general black population regarded King as their
most successful spokesperson (cited in Dye, 1971).

To sum up, the Level of Unity (among followers) for the
Indian Independence Movement must be expressed in terms of two

145
major issues. On the issue of Home Rule, Gandhi was the
single acknowledged leader who united all of India in action
to gain independence of Britain. Yet, on the issue of
partition the movement was significantly and cripplingly
divided. Jinnah was a powerful leader in his own right and
was successful in undermining Gandhi's influence on the
issue.

For the Civil Rights Movement the opposite may be
observed. Factions and controversies concerning the goal and
strategies of the movement were numerous. Leaders of various
groups were quite vocal and were able to gather followers.
However, none were able significantly to weaken the movement-
at-large under King's leadership. King, among other influ-
ences, was even able to "convert" black extremist Malcolm X to
his goal of integration and peace between the races (Oates,
1982). For the most part, the Civil Rights Movement was a
united front.

Level of Motivation (among Followers)

The Level of Motivation is the extent to which followers
are willing to act, to risk property, family, injury, and
death. It may be indicated by the number of people willing to
say that they are part of the cause; willing to participate in
activities; willing to donate time, money, and resources; risk
loss of money, property, job, life, and limb.

146
Beginning in South Africa, Gandhi's first called meeting
to discuss the discriminatory practices against Indians in
1907 in Natal drew an audience of 500. In 1908, he inspired
2,000 Indians to burn their certificates, their passes issued
by the South African government. In 1913, 2,037 men, 127
women, and 57 children participated in a march to protest
unfair taxation, and all were arrested. Twelve thousand
participated in a strike on British sugar mills to protest
unfair labor practices. Fifteen thousand participated in salt
raids to protest a British ban on Indian salt manufacturing.
Two hundred ninety of those were injured; two died. Millions
joined in Gandhi's nationwide hartal, a day of strike,
fasting, and prayer for Independence. The nation also united
effectively to boycott the use of foreign products. Bonfires
were attended across the country to burn publicly foreign
cloth and products. As a result, 30,000 protesters were
jailed only to have 50,000 others gather to replace them
(Diwankar, 1949).

In every action taken, followers also risked loss.
Striking workers lost wages and jobs. Noncooperators were
publicly flogged. Demonstrators were beaten, arrested, and
killed (Fischer, 1950). The most tragic instance of such
punitive action occurred in Jallianwala Bagh when Brigadier
General Reginald Edward Henry Dyer, in his zeal to insure the
enforcement of a new ordinance forbidding public assembly.

147
opened fire on an unarmed group of Indians within an enclosed
garden. With no warning, no escape route, the villagers were
shot like fish in a barrel. Three hundred seventy-nine were
killed, and 1,137 were wounded. Records show that 1,516
casualties resulted from 1,650 shots fired. Only 134 bullets
missed a mark (East India Report of Investigative Committee,
1920, cited in Fischer, 1950).

These numbers indicate the willingness of movement
followers to continue their struggle even when faced with
great risk. Gandhi set a good example by risking his life on
more than one occasion in leading demonstrations and in
fasting.

In the U.S.A., the Civil Rights Movement under King's
leadership began with the Montgomery bus boycott in 1955. To
be successful, the participants had to be committed to the
cause despite the inconvenience of not using the city buslines
for over a year. Angry whites shot at busses carrying blacks,
shot a pregnant woman, and beat a teenage girl. King's home
was bombed, and he and others, such as E. D. Nixon, another
Civil Rights leader, received threats to their lives (Oates,
1982). Still, the boycott continued.

In 1962 in Atlanta, 75 students participated in a sit-in
at segregated lunch counters and all were arrested (Atlanta
Constitution, 1962). In Birmingham, 65 participated in
sit-ins and were also arrested. In March of the same year,
1,500 participated in a demonstration march in Birmingham. On

148
April 20, 1,000 participated in the Children's March during
which 250 were jailed and many injured by firehoses and police
dogs, but the number of marches grew instead of diminishing.
Then, on Sunday, May 5, 3,000 participants in the Birmingham
Prayer Pilgrimage were arrested only to have 4,000 more
paraders and picketers replace them (Gates, 1982).

In 1965 in Chicago, 30,000 people marched on City Hall to
join 6,000 more gathered to hear King speak. A later march
began with 600 participants, then swelled to a crowd of 2,500.

The 1966 march through Mississippi began with a troop of
1,300 which rose to 2,000. An average of 3,000 attended
rallies at stopping points around the state with 15,000 in
Jackson at the march's end. In Philadelphia, Mississippi,
marchers were attacked and beaten so King led a group of 300
back to the town to demonstrate their commitment and courage
in the face of such violence. In Memphis in April 1968,
13,000 black sanitation workers went on strike for equal
wages, and in Washington, 250,000 participated in the march
and rally there in 1963. According to a 1963 poll recorded in
the Politics of Equality (Dye, 1971), 12% of all blacks had
participated in movement marches, 9% had picketed, 8% had
participated in sit-ins, and 4% had gone to jail for civil
disobedience.

Movement participants faced dangers that were very real.
In 1961 two busloads of "Freedom Riders," groups of blacks and
whites who wanted to test the Deep South 's public

149
transportation facilities on its self-reported integrations
status, were beaten by angry local whites. In 1962, four
black churches were dynamited in Albany. In 1963, a bomb in a
Birmingham church killed four black preadolescent girls.
King's brother's home was bombed at the same time as a hotel
in which movement leaders were registered. In 1964, marchers
in St. Augustine, Florida, led by Andrew Jackson, were beaten
with bicycle chains and lead pipes. In 1966, the march
through Mississippi resulted in 80 beatings, 2 gunshot wounds,
32 church and 31 home bombings, and 6 deaths. In the same
year, marchers in Selma, Alabama, were beaten by white towns-
people, four of them abducted and beaten with brass knuckles
and ax handles. Two negro youths were also killed (Oates,
1981) .

Again, these numbers, like those from the Indian Indepen-
dence Movement, indicate a high Level of Motivation among
followers in the Civil Rights Movement. Obviously, both
groups felt their cause was worth suffering such atrocities
and risking enormous personal losses. The movements continued
in the face of terrible consequences. It is noteworthy that
both leaders also risked their lives and were imprisoned
several times. Both Gandhi and King stated that their move-
ment's cause was well worth dying for, and it is noteworthy
that both were assassinated for this refusal to be swayed by
violence and threats of violence by members of the

150

opposition. The night before he was killed. King ended his

speech at a Memphis rally by saying

Like anyone, I would like to live a long life;
longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned
about that now. I just want to do God's will.
(King, 1968, p. 94)

He seemed to foresee his death and the death of others and

tried to prepare followers frequently.

If you are cut down in a movement that is designed
to save the soul of a nation, then no other death
could be more redemptive. (King, 1983, p. 67)

A man who won't die for something is not fit to
live. (King, 1983, p. 23)

Expressing even less anxiety concerning death, even his

own, Gandhi expressed frequently that he was ready to die for

his cause.

I have to resist your decision (for separate elec-
torates for "Depressed Classes") with my life. The
only way I can do it is by declaring a perpetual
fast unto death. (Gandhi, cited in Fischer, 1982,
p. 306)

There is only one course open to me, to die but not
to submit to the law. . . . Everyone must be true to
his pledge even unto death, no matter what others
do. . . . Even if the unlikely happened and everyone
else flinched, leaving me alone to face this muse, I
am confident that I will never violate my pledge.
(Gandhi, cited in Fischer, 1982, p. 76)

Death is the appointed end of life. To die by the
hand of a brother, rather than by disease or in such
other way, cannot for me be a matter of sorrow. And
if, even in such a case, I am free from the thought
of anger or hatred against my assailant I know that
that will redound to my eternal welfare, and even
the assailant will later on realize my perfect
innocence. (Gandhi, 1983, p. 81)

151
Extent of Economic and Political Influence (of the Movement)

The Extent of Economic and Political Influence as defined
in the NVET is the financial resources as well as its leader's
and follower's access to legal processes available to the
movement. The indicators for this variable include the
incomes of the followers in comparison to the incomes of
movement members. Other indicators are the number of the
society's policy and decision makers found among movement
members compared to the number of policy and decisionmakers in
the society-at-large; indicators such as the number of voters
and governmental officials may offer this information. Also,
at which level in the society these decisions are made should
be noted, whether or not the official's function at a local or
national level is an important factor. Finally, the economic
interdependence of the two groups plays a role in the level to
which one group may hold leverage over the other. The number
of followers who depend on opposition members for an income
and the number of opposition members who depend on opposition
members for labor or for patronage are indicators of this
interdependence or lack thereof.

In India, heavy taxation and suffocating restrictions on
Indian industry and export in the financial interest of
England stunted the financial and industrial growth of Indian
society. The country, therefore, regressed to a purely
agrarian nation with neither the overhead nor technology to
make farming a profitable endeavor. According to Durant

152
(1930) in 1907 the annual average income for India's
100,000,000 farmers, that figure was as low as $5.00. In
1915, the Statistical Department of Bengal, which was the
most prosperous of all Indian provinces, reported that the
mean income of laborers in that year was $3.60 per month, and
one half of that was claimed in taxes by the British
government.

For those Indians who were successful in attaining jobs
as government officials, a significant discrepancy in pay for
equal work could be expected. In 1913, the population of
India was approximately 242,000,000 Indians and 100,000
British. One of 45 British in residence in India held
lucrative governmental positions, while 1 in 53,000 Indians
were so employed by the government. In the Report of the
Royal Commission of 1913-1915 (cited in Durant, 1930), it is
reported that 11,004 government officials in India received
pay of greater than Rs200 a month; 42% of those thus employed
were Indian. (The worth of a rupee during this time was so
unstable that it is difficult to translate its worth in terms
of pounds or dollars.) As salaries increased, percentage of
Indians receiving them decreased. Of those government
officials paid in excess of Rsl,000 a month, 8% were Indian.
Of this number, 97 posts paid over Rs,3000 a month, and
only 1 was filled by an Indian; he was half British by
birth.

153
Most Indians who were living comfortably to any degree
were able to do so because they were employed by British
government or industry. However, India as a nation was suf-
fering great economic losses to the economic interests of
Britain. Bertrand Russell reports in Freedom and Organization
(Durant, 1930) that the annual savings of the United Kingdom
in the years between 1840 and 1888 were estimated at
L110,000,000 or over L300,G00 a day. This was mostly profit
from sale of British goods in India, sale of Indian goods
abroad, and taxation of the Indian people. Also, in the 19th
century, India sent 800,000 soldiers, 400,000 laborers and
paid L450,000,000 to support British wars outside India
(Durant, 1930).

The Montagu-Chelmsf ord Reforms of 1919 did result in some
reforms in the raj. Under these laws one quarter of the
Indian population remained under native princes, who were free
with their councils to govern their territories. However,
their decisions were subject to approval by a British resident
appointed to safeguard the interests of the Empire. The
remaining provinces were "British provinces" which were gov-
erned by a hierarchy of legislative bodies. The provincial
legislatures were comprised of 70% elected representatives and
25% British appointees. Yet even those elected representa-
tives were subject to a property-limited franchise that
enabled only 1 out of 250 Indian citizens to vote (Durant,
1930). Above the legislature functioned an Executive Council

154
administering law and order and taxation of the land; it was
appointed and was responsible to the British authorities. A
Ministerial Council chosen by the Provincial Governor from the
leaders of the legislature also functioned in a higher posi-
tion than the legislature. Ultimately, the governor was
empowered to control the councils and the legislature.
Appointed by the crown, responsible not to the Indian
population but to the British Parliament, the governor was
authorized to overrule the legislature and to institute laws
whenever he chose.

The National or Central Legislature consisted of a lower
house or Assembly of 134 with 31 of these appointed by the
British and the remaining 103 elected by the populace meeting
restrictive qualifications. Similarly, the Upper House or
Council of State had 27 appointed members. Over these bodies
the Viceroy and his Executive council held omnipotent legal
veto and ratification.

As far as political influence is assessed, therefore,
what little influence Indians possessed was superficial and
insignificant. It is easy to see the appropriateness of
Gandhi's use of parent-child authority struggle as a metaphor
to describe British-Indian relations. Britain claimed to be
giving India more responsibility for itself, yet Britain
maintained ultimate control through its appointed governors
and viceroys.

155
Economically, India as a nation was poverty-stricken.
Those Indians with above-average living standards were
dependent upon the British government or military for income
and status. Those farmers subsisting on what they could eke
out of the land independently were forced to give up half
their meager earnings to taxation or lose their land and
homes. To this extent all India was economically dependent
on Britain. On the other hand, Indians outnumbered British
residents nearly 2,500 to 1. Great Britain depended on
cooperative laborers and taxpayers in order to realize their
Indian profits. Also, India did possess some economic influ-
ence that could only be brought to bear by a united effort
among the citizenry.

By contrast, in the U.S.A. in 1960, the median income
of a white family was $5,088, nearly double the $2,520
expected by the average black family (Dye, 1971). Most
whites completed 11 years of school compared to 8 years for
the average black. Unemployment among whites was 5%, less
than half the 10.2% suffered by the black population.

Blacks constituted 10.5% of the national population,
yet their number was concentrated in the southern states
where in some counties their numbers exceeded 50% of the
total population. In a few counties in Mississippi and
Alabama their numbers exceeded 8 0% of the total population.
Yet, according to Civil Rights Commission Report (Sept.,
1959), this was the area where blacks exercised the least

156
amount of political influence. In that year 62% of the
white population of voting age in southern states were
registered; only 25% of the black population claimed a simi-
lar status. This average did not represent a uniform pattern
since in rural areas where blacks constituted more than 50%
of the population, their de facto disenf ranchisement was most
prevalent. In 168 southern counties, blacks comprised
greater than 50% of the county's population, but in 16 of
these 168, not even one eligible black was registered to
vote. In 49 others of these countries, less than 5% of
eligible black voters were registered (Keesings Research
Report, 1970).

Although theoretically blacks had the same opportunity
to register as did whites, they were often intimidated by
legal subterfuges designed to stymie their successful regis-
tration. Economic coercion was also utilized to discourage
the registration of black employees. Thus, blacks were under-
standably apathetic about U.S.A. politics. Because of these
factors as well as their high level of general poverty and
lack of education, political issues seemed unimportant to the
masses of black people (Keesings Research Report, 1970).

It is not surprising, therefore, that blacks were con-
spicuous by their absence in governmental positions. In
1948, at the state level, blacks constituted 3.8% of the
legislators and 4.4% of the senators. In the executive

157
branch, only one black held a state office, that of state
treasurer, and three were appointed to state cabinet posi-
tions. No blacks were appointed to state courts. At the
national level, blacks constituted 1.3% of the U.S. Congress,
1% of the Senate, and approximately 2% of the judicial
appointees. This is not an equitable record for a group who
constituted 10.5% of the nation's citizenry (Stone, 1968).

To a large extent, upper- and upper-middle-class blacks
functioned in semiautonomous all-black communities and were
not economically interdependent on whites (Dates, 1982).
However, the masses of lower-class blacks were dependent on
the white community for job and salary, and the white com-
munity was dependent on the black population for labor,
often cheap labor, and sometimes for patronage.

The Political/Economic Influence of blacks in the
U.S.A. was almost nonexistent and differed significantly
from the influence of Indians in colonial India in one
aspect. Although both groups had access to severely limited
political and economic resources, blacks in the U.S.A. com-
prised only 10.5% of the population, 1 in 9, while Indians
outnumbered the British by approximately 2,500 to 1. Non-
cooperation within the economic and political machinery
of the U.S.A. could only be effective in isolated areas
where blacks did constitute a significant integral segment
of society. United noncooperation in India could bring the
entire country to a standstill. This discussion leads

158
directly into the assessment of the next significant vari-
able which is the Level of Potential Physical Power.

Level of Potential Physical Power

The Level of Potential Physical Power (of movement) is
defined as the extent to which the movement can use bodily
force to coerce the opposition. This may be determined
through comparing the movement with the opposition in terms
of military capability, weaponry, and sheer numbers. As
mentioned in the previous section, the native Indians in
India outnumbered the British there by nearly 250,000 to 1.
Additionally, within the British-trained military forces
only 60,000 were British compared to 144,000 Indian soldiers
(Durant, 1930). However, all the members of the Police
Service and all military officers were British. It is true
that Indians in the British Army were trained to serve the
empire and had more to lose by participating in an unsuc-
cessful revolt than their peasant fellow citizens. Yet, in
terms of physical power the British would be the key to
unleashing an effective Level of Physical Power that was
indeed present but latent, unorganized, unprecipitated in
movement followers.

Quite a different situation existed in the U.S.A. Civil
Rights Movement. Blacks, although comprising as much as 50%
of the population in some areas, comprised a merely 12% of
the national census. Blacks were members of the military

159
but were conspicuous by their absence on local, state, and
federal police forces. It can be assumed that in an out-
break of violence blacks had access to stones, rocks, guns,
and certainly fists while the government would have access
to federal troops and military weaponry such as tear gas.
The Level of Physical Power for blacks in the U.S.A., there-
fore, was limited and was never a real threat except in
isolated areas and there for short duration. If a true
Civil War had broken out, as some proponents of Black Power
threatened, it could never have been a serious campaign.

When one tries to pin down advocates of violence
as to what acts would be effective, the answers
are blatantly illogical. Sometimes they talk of
overthrowing racist state and local governments.
They fail to see that no internal revolution has
ever succeeded in overthrowing a government by
violence unless the government had already lost
the allegiance and control of its armed forces.
Anyone in his right mind knows that this will not
happen in the United States. In a violent racial
situation, the power structure has the local
police, the state troopers, the national guard,
and finally the army to call on, all of which are
predominantly white. (King, 1983, p. 73)

On the practical level, considering blacks in terms of num-
bers alone and then in terms of access to money and power, a
Civil War to end discrimination would have been futile,
foolish, and a certain disaster. Such a move would not be
unlike the boasts of proud Confederate soldiers who believed
they could beat the North in a matter of weeks. Blacks
simply did not have the adequate Level of Physical Power to
wage a successful military campaign.

160
Degree of Credibility

The final variable contributing to the overall Level of
Power of the movement is the Degree of Credibility of the
standards, concepts, and authorities which recur in movement
rhetoric. The Degree of Credibility as defined by the NVET
is the extent to which these subjects of reference are
deemed infallible by movement and opposition members. In a
contemporary movement an idea of the Degree of Credibility
might be ascertained through the utilization of an atti-
tudinal survey such as the one suggested in Chapter Two. In
the study of historical movements, this variable may be
viewed through an analysis of available sources on the
values of the cultures involved.

In India, the division of the population by religion
was approximately 68.2% Hindu, 22.16% Moslem, 3.65%
Buddhist, 2.36% tribal groups, 1,79% Christians, 1.24%
Sikhs, .35% Jains, .03% Parses, .01% Jews, .16% others
(Smith, 1938). With the Indian people, therefore, Gandhi's
references to many differing religious doctrines, but pre-
dominantly Hindu, supported his words through the use of
sources deemed credible by his audience. Additionally, the
Hindu-Jain-Buddhist and Christian doctrines heavily support
nonviolence. This religious heritage provided a background
for Gandhi to build his case for nonviolence with an audi-
ence who would be impressed by support taken from their
familiar religious teachings. The British were almost

161
totally Christian (World Almanac, 1960) so Gandhi's refer-
ences to the Bible and to Jesus were probably the bases of
strong moral appeals to the British opposition.

In the U.S.A., King was faced with a rather homogeneous
audience in terms of religious and political thought (World
Almanac, 1960). Argument supported by references to the
Bible and to the Constitution were difficult for the
audiences to refute.

Gandhi and King also charged their followers to view

themselves through the eyes of the opposition. This appeal

to cultural values of the opposition, that seemed to be

lacking in movement followers, gave great credibility to

Gandhi's and King's rhetoric for they used their opposition

members themselves as the source of information.

No paper contribution will ever give us self-
government. No amount of speeches will ever make
us fit for self-government. It is only our con-
duct that will fit us for it. And how are we
trying to govern ourselves? ... Is it right that
the lanes of our sacred temple should be as dirty
as they are? The houses round about are built
anyhow. The lanes are narrow and tortuous. If
even our temples are not models of roominess and
cleanliness what can our self-government be:
Shall our temples be abodes of holiness, cleanli-
ness, and peace as soon as the British have
retired from India? ... It is not comforting to
think that people walk the streets of Indian
Bombay under the perpetual fear of dwellers in the
storeyed buildings spitting upon them. (Gandhi,
1916, cited in Fischer, 1950, p. 135)

Let's do as Gandhi did in South Africa. Let's
consider what the whites say against us and con-
sider whether they have any good arguments. . . .
They say that we smell. Well, the fact is some of
us do smell. I know most Negroes do not have
money to fly to Paris and buy enticing perfumes,

162

but no one is so poor that he can't buy a five
cent bar of soap. . . . And we kill each other
and cut each other too much . . . there is no
excuse for our schoolteachers to say "you
is"--they're supposed to be teaching but they're
crippling our children. . . . There are too many
Negroes with $2,000 incomes riding around in
$5,000 cars. . . . The money Negroes spend on
liquor in Alabama in one year is enough to endow
three or four colleges . . . some things we have
it in our power to change. (King, 1958, cited in
Gates, 1982, p. 126)

Therefore, one might surmise that the Level of Credibility

was relatively high in both movements.

Level of Power (of Movement)

All of the variables mentioned to this point, the
Degree of Exposure, Level of Identification, the Level of
Unity, the Level of Motivation, the Level of Economic/Poli-
tical Power, the Level of Potential Physical Power, and the
Degree of Credibility, combine to constitute the overall
Level of Power of the movement.

To review, the Degree of Exposure to movement rhetoric
in the Indian Independence movement was considerable. Even
without the advantages of radio and television, Gandhi made
sure his messages reached to even the farthest recesses of
his audience, travelling to these places himself in order to
unite and inspire all of India. The Level of Identification
was also high. Gandhi constructed rhetorical visions using
well-known and highly respected authorities whom his listen-
ers could easily and wholeheartedly support. He also
presented himself as a representative of the people by his

163

dress and lifestyle. The Level of Unity, though fatally low

on the issue of partition, was almost 100% on the issue of

independence. In fact, the British were astonished that

Muslims and Hindus could be so committed to a mutual cause

that they would join hands to attain it (Gopal, 1967).

Through hindsight, it is obvious through the countless

sacrifices on the parts of followers that the Level of

Motivation necessary for a successful movement did exist.

The Level of Political Power of Indians was insignificant,

but because of their numbers in the labor force, their

buying power, and role as taxpayers, they were potentially

economically powerful against British employers, merchants,

and tax beneficiaries. "Potentially" is the key word in the

assertion above, since Indians could only utilize this power

through a united committed effort. Similarly, the Level of

Physical Power was potentially great simply because the

Indian population outnumbered the British by such a large

margin.

If we Indians could only spit in unison, we would
form a puddle big enough to drown 300,000 English-
men. (Gandhi, 1927, cited in Durant, 1930, p. 89)

They only needed unity and leadership to overcome the organ-
ized British Rule through military means. Although utiliza-
tion of military power would be outside the thinking of
nonviolence, the potential to do so should add to the move-
ment's overall influence.

164
The weaknesses in the Indian movement as analyzed
through NVET were in terms of political power only. In
retrospect, therefore, it can be concluded that lack of
political power alone is not enough to render the use of
nonviolence ineffective.

In the U.S.A., the Degree of Exposure to movement
rhetoric) was also great. The Level of Unity was weakened
by the various factions within the movement and their out-
spoken leaders. Yet, these factions were not enough to
prevent King and his constituency from being viewed as
comprising the heart of the movement. As in India, the
Level of Motivation was obviously great among blacks in the
U.S.A. as evidenced by the risks and hardships they will-
ingly took in the name of Civil Rights. The Level of
Political Power was insignificant, yet economic power
existed primarily in the South in the form of labor and of
purchasing power. However, this power only existed in
isolated areas and not in the nation as a whole. Also, the
Level of Physical Power was insignificant. An uprising
effective in an isolated area could be easily squelched by
the opposition.

The Degree of Credibility was extremely powerful within
the targeted population. Southern blacks placed high value
on the Christian religion and all its doctrines, institu-
tions, and representatives (Marx, 1971). King utilized such
references heavily in his rhetoric.

165
Therefore, the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.A. was
strong in the areas of exposure, identification, motivation,
and credibility; fair in terms of unity, economic power; and
weak in terms of physical and political power. Apparently
these weaknesses were either unimportant or adequately
compensated for by the movement's strengths or the opposi-
tion's weaknesses.

The variables in this section which factor into
assessment of the Movement's Power have been evaluated in
isolation, yet they interact with another cluster of vari-
ables which determines the degree to which the opposition is
receptive to the movement's demands. This second cluster of
variables is the Level of Persuasibility of the opposition
and includes the social, psychological, economic, political,
and cultural characteristics of the opposition group. The
following section is an analysis of these characteristics in
terms of NVET to determine the Level of Persuasibility of
the British to the rhetoric of the Indian Independence
movement and of the U.S.A. whites to the rhetoric of the
Civil Rights movement.

The Level of Persuasibility of the Opposition
to Movement Rhetoric

The Level of Socio/Psychological Importance

The Level of Socio/Psychological Importance of the
opposition's original social reality is the degree to which

166
the opposition's status and self -worth depends on the status
quo. It can be projected by determining the number of
generations down through which the present social reality-
has been passed and the number of ways in which it has been
channeled, such as through folk stories and songs. The
belief that the new vision threatens the current one will
strengthen a desire to protect the present vision unless the
new vision can be perceived as having overwhelmingly more
attractive attributes. As discussed in Chapter Two, the
pervasive human tendency of intensional thinking is the
tendency to trust one's mental, verbal maps of the world
rather than to trust the actual experienced encounter with
it (Hayakawa, 1963). Intensional thinking causes changes to
be slow, even when they are for the better (Johnson, 1972).
People will even avoid gathering data or having experiences
which contradict already formed or closely-held beliefs
(Hayakawa, 19 63).

Britain, although spoken of as a democratic monarchy,
has a history of feudalism. In fact, at the inception of
the Indian Independence Movement, Britain itself was going
through a period of governmental reform; the general popu-
lace was agitating for equal representation in Parliament to
replace the oligarchy functioning at that time. It is quite
likely that those of the British oligarchy who resisted such
reforms would find similar agitation in India totally

167

intolerable. Gopal describes the attitude of the British in

power by stating

The new variety of activity in India therefore
called for the transformation of a traditionally
and mentally subject society into one receptive to
democratic ideas ... in India the feudal system
that had existed for ages received very powerful
support from British rulers who tried to use that
system as a bulwark against the spread of demo-
cratic ideas (in Britain). (Gopal, 1967, p. 13)

He goes on to describe those Britons exercising ruling
power in India as belonging by temperament and training to
the feudal order and not tolerant of "such popular
manifestations that would encourage the growth of a
democratic society. "

It would seem that British rulers had been raised in a
tradition of superiority within a class-divided society of a
nation recognized as a world power. The idea that India
could rule herself as well as they was a difficult idea to
credit. "The sun never sets on Britannia" was a fond say-
ing. Though rule over its colonies was an economic boon for
Britain, British popular thought held that in bringing
civilized and orderly British rule and Christian doctrine to
those "semibarbarous" colonies was more an act of parental
kindness than of economic acumen. They believed Britain
would relinquish control if the indigenous peoples could
produce persons capable of governing their nation as well as
the British. Chirol, a British authority on India wrote
that "British officials in India honestly believed in an
autocratic form of government though they tried to make it

168
as paternal as possible" (1926, cited in Fischer, 1950).
The idea of democracy or independence being as workable as
colonial rule or class rule threatened the positions of
Britons in society; it threatened their ideas about who they
were and what their role in life should be. Understandably
then, complete democratic rule in India (or Britain) and
independence was an alarming proposal.

In the U.S.A. as in Britain, the prevailing social
reality was one in which the members of the opposition were
superior, but benign and generous "rulers." The U.S.A.
founders stated that "All men are created equal, " yet, in
general, most whites believed they were in some way superior
to blacks. They believed that in abolishing slavery they
had given blacks an equal opportunity, and if blacks had not
risen politically, socially, and economically to the average
white standard, then it must be because blacks were lazy or
less capable. Whites believed themselves to be fairminded
Americans and good Christians. They were "fond of coloreds"
and were fair and even generous with them. By some twist in
logic most even believed that in enslaving black ancestors
whites had done a great favor for U.S.A. blacks since it
removed them from Africa and made them American citizens.

Therefore, the idea that blacks were equal but had been
suppressed threatened whites in several ways. First of all,
those whites of low socioeconomic status were threatened by
the further loss of status. No matter how "low" their

169
current status, there was always a whole race of persons
below them. In support of this, a study of racial attitudes
conducted in 1967 and reported by Dye (1971) revealed sig-
nificant differences in the attitudes of whites of high and
low incomes toward social interaction with blacks. Whites
of low income were 10-20% more likely than whites of middle-
to-high incomes to object to living next door to blacks,
going to school with blacks, or even sitting next to blacks
on buses or in theaters.

The new social reality would upset the thinking of
whites about themselves, blacks, and the entire social order
as they knew it. To that extent it was very threatening
indeed. For instance, in 1954, the United States Supreme
Court outlawed segregated public schools; the response of
many southerners was that of righteous indignation. United
States Senator James Eastland of Mississippi spoke for many
southerners when he declared, "The South will not abide by
nor obey this legislative decision by a political court"
(cited in Lord, 1965). Often, major opposition spokes-
persons attempted to align all those involved in the move-
ment for integration with communism in order to discredit
them in the eyes of fellow Americans. Mississippi Circuit
Judge Tom Brady stated in a public speech on segregation,
"It is a fact that communist sympathizers and left-wing
organizers founded the NAACP and largely control it" (cited

170

in Lord, 1965, p. 62). In his book Black Monday (1959)

Brady had written

the negroid man, like the modern lizard, evolved
not . . . the loveliest and the purest of God's
creatures, the nearest thing to an angelic being
that treads this terrestrial ball is a well-bred,
cultured Southern white woman or her blue-eyed,
golden-haired little girl. (Brady, cited in Lord,
1965, p. 62)

Hugh V. Wall, spokesman for white supremacy, warned the

Mississippi State Bar Association

If the blood of our white race should become
corrupted and mingled with the blood of the
African then the present greatness of the United
States of America would be destroyed and all hope
for the future world gone forever. (Wall, cited
in Lord, 1965, p. 62)

The Jackson Daily News of Mississippi wrote in an editorial,
"we are up against enemies who would destroy our way of life
and put an end to the traditions so precious to our people"
(cited in Lord, 1965, p. 63). It should be noted that the
social reality of the movement was more of a threat in the
South and in other areas with a high percentage of blacks
within the population. Obviously, whites who had no inter-
action with blacks because of lack of proximity could accept
the new vision by blaming other whites. Northerners, for
instance, could blame southerners for suppressing blacks
and still maintain their self-concept of just and moral
people by believing that they would not similarly behave in
a similar situation.

In both movements, then, the Level of Socio/Psychologi-
cal Importance of the prevailing vision was high. This

171
should have had a negative effect on the opposition's
willingness to be persuaded that their vision was incorrect.

Level of Economic/Political Importance

The Level of Economic/Political Importance of the
status quo to the opposition is the extent to which the
proposed new social reality will threaten the opposition
economically and in terms of political power. This may be
assessed by looking at the projected average increase of
salaries for movement followers paid by opposition members,
the projected number of jobs filled by followers normally
filled by majority members, the increase in percentage of
followers' voting power, and the increase in percentage of
followers in governmental positions to be provided by legis-
lated change in response to the movement demands.

In India, the new society espoused in movement rhetoric
was directly threatening to British economic and political
authority. Indian self-rule or even increased Indian
representation in government would obviously decrease
political power of the British as well as alleviating
British officials of their jobs. British officers, gov-
ernmental officials, industrialists, and entrepreneurs stood
to lose positions, market monopolies, and pools of cheap
labor. The British nation stood to lose tax dollars, mili-
tary manpower, natural resources, and authority to restrict
the industry and trade of a marketing competitor. There was

172
nothing for the British to gain either economically or poli-
tically through agreement with followers.

Noteworthy is the fact that many Britons spoke out
against British rule in India stating that Britain was not
helping India but rather serving her own interests at
India's expense. One example of British sympathy is found
in the testimony of F. J. Shore, British Administrator to
Bengal, to the House of Commons as early as 1857.

The fundamental principle of the English has been
to make the whole Indian nation subservient, in
every possible way, to the interests and benefits
of themselves. They have been taxed to utmost
limit; every successive province, as it has fallen
into our possession, has been made a field for
higher exaction; and it has always been our boast
how greatly we have raised the revenue above that
which the native rulers were able to extort. The
Indians have been excluded from every honor,
dignity or office which the lowest Englishman
could be prevailed upon to accept. (cited in
Durant, 1930, p. 101)

Fischer (1950) theorizes how the British dealt with

conflicts between their maps of themselves as good people

and good rulers and territory of the actual results of their

rule in India. Torn between their political sagacity and

their power lust, "the British yielded as much of the

appearance of power as circumstances required and as little

of its substance as conditions permitted" (Fischer, 1950,

p. 169). The political and especially the economic

importance of the status quo was quite high for the British,

causing them to resist being persuaded even in the face of

173
ruinous mismanagement of a country that they claimed to be
"parenting. "

In the U.S.A., movement rhetoric could only be politi-
cally threatening to those isolated southern counties in
which blacks were a majority. Obviously, employers paying
wages to large numbers of blacks did not wish to have to
increase salaries of those who were traditionally counted
as "cheap labor." Although meeting the movement's demands
would mean the opposition would become a smaller percentage
of the voting block and that they would have to compete with
a larger number of potential candidates for jobs, this
threat was not nationwide, considering the small number of
blacks and their concentration in one national region.

The Level of Persuasibility

In this section, the Level of Persuasibility of the
opposition to movement rhetoric has been broken down into
two major variables dealing with the social, psychological,
economic, and political factors that would influence the
opposition's willingness to be persuaded. Two other factors
analyzed earlier in determining the Level of Power of the
movement also affect the opposition in terms of persuasibil-
ity. These are the Degree of Exposure to movement rhetoric
and the Degree of Credibility.

To review, the Degree of Exposure in both movements was
extensive. Although members of the opposition might.

174
through selective exposure and retention, consciously or
unconsciously avoid movement rhetoric, it is doubtful that
many were completely successful in so doing. Gandhi and
King sent letters to editors in papers of the opposition and
met or attempted to meet with opposition leaders. Most
notable, though, was their utilization of direct action. It
was in these instances that they confronted the representa-
tives of the opposition in such a dramatic and newsworthy
manner that the event often made inherently interesting copy
for newspapers, magazines, and television coverage. In this
way, both movements received wide exposure among the opposi-
tion as well as among followers.

In Gandhi's rhetoric, references to Islamic, Hindu, and
Jain disciples and scriptures probably carried little weight
in England. Yet, Gandhi's rhetoric also included numerous
references to an "unspecific" God and to Jesus specifically
as well as numerous biblical references. Probably the
references that spoke of the ideals of justice and fair
play, as well as references to the ideal of the British
gentleman, best caught the imagination and sympathy of the
opposition. The British prided themselves on fairness;
rhetoric which spoke of injustices and unfair labor prac-
tices probably struck a responsive chord in Gandhi's British
listeners. An example of such rhetoric can be found in this
excerpt from a speech Gandhi gave in Madras.

I discovered that the British Empire had certain
ideals with which I had fallen in love, and one of

175

those ideals is that every subject of the British
Empire has the freest scope of freedom possible
for his energy and honor and whatever he thinks is
due his conscience. I think that is true of the
British government as it is true of no other
government ... I have more than once said that
government is best which governs least. I have
found that it is possible for me to be governed
least under the British Empire. Thus my loyalty
to the British empire. (Gandhi, 1915, cited in
Fischer, 1950, p. 27)

Five years later he wrote a letter to the British
Viceroy saying, "I can retain neither respect nor affection
for a government which has been moving from wrong to wrong
in order to defend its immorality" (Gandhi, 1920, cited in
Fischer, 1950, p. 72).

In the U.S.A. King's rhetoric, featuring references to
the Bible and the Constitution, went straight to the heart
of the central values of the society in which he spoke. The
distinction between how the society should function accord-
ing to biblical and Constitutional mandates and the manner
in which society functioned in reality was so stark in many
instances that it caused great discomfort on the part of
opposition members (Gates, 1982).

In summation, both movements had adequate exposure to
movement rhetoric; the Degree of Credibility was fair for
the British and high for the U.S.A.; the Level of Socio/
Psychological Importance was high for both groups; the Level
of Political/Economic Power was fair in the U.S.A. and
significant in India. The composite of these factors, the
Level of Persuasibility , was relatively high for each

176
opposition group although for differing reasons, as indi-
cated by the differences in individual variables.

Variables Influencing the Potential Efficacy
of Nonviolence

Up to this point, discussion has been of those vari-
ables influencing the potential power of the movement and
the potential for receptiveness of the opposition to move-
ment's demands. In this section, variables occurring within
an interaction between the movement and opposition will be
observed. These variables are those which more directly
influence the efficacy of nonviolence in interactions
between the movement and opposition groups and are the Level
of Cultural Preference for nonviolence, the Level of Violent
Reaction of the opposition in response to movement demands,
the Extent of Modification of the perception of violent
reactions of the opposition, the Strength of the Rhetorical
Vision in capturing the ideals of the movement and opposi-
tion groups, and the Degree of Possible Rejection of that
vision by the opposition.

Level of Cultural Preference for Nonviolence

The Level of Cultural Preference for Nonviolence is the
extent to which a society looks unfavorably upon the use of
physical force. It may be determined by the presence or
absence of an acceptable norm to bear arms in public in the
society, by the laws regulating personal weapons and

177
assaults, religious mandates regulating violence, and a
survey among the population to assess attitudes concerning
violence.

In India, legal and societal norms did not allow
bearing arms. Many of the religious doctrines emphasize
noninvolvement, nonaggression, and nonviolence not only
against other humans but against all living things. Many
strict Hindus were vegetarians for this reason. Jain monks
even wore filtering veils over their mouths and noses to
avoid the inadvertent inhalation and execution thereby of
insects. However, the Indian philosophy includes the
concept of "dharma" as well. In Indian thought, each
person has a given role in life, his or her dharma. The
correct way to live is not necessarily what westerners
would believe to be the most "moral, " rather it is the way
in which one best fulfills one's role. For instance, if
one's dharma is to be a prostitute, then one would fulfill
that role as ably as possible. It is better to be the best
prostitute one can be, fulfilling one's dharma well, than
to be a mediocre sovereign. Therefore, some societal
members are supposed to be soldiers and warriors. Their
dharmas require violence. Thus, the society allows that
for certain persons in certain situations violence is
appropriate. Religious wars and soldiers fall into this
category (Zimmer, 1951).

178
The British and the U.S.A. cultures (black and white)
maintain a theoretical preference for nonviolence. Only few
instances existed in which violence was appropriate. These
were mostly when one had reasonable cause to fear danger to
self or others. Reactive rather than active violence was
acceptable. The Judeo-Christian ethic, strong in all of
these cultures, is saturated with doctrinal references to
nonviolence such as "Thou shalt not kill," "turn the other
cheek, " "the meek shall inherit the earth, " and "Love thy
enemies." It may be concluded that within both opposition
groups a decided cultural preference for nonviolence was
functioning.

Level of Violent Reaction

The Level of Violent Reaction according to the NVET
refers to the degree to which the opposition responds to
nonviolent symbolic action in accordance with "devil"
terms. This may be reasonably predicted by discovering the
number of followers participating in activities compared to
the number of opposition members, the number of violent acts
by followers compared to that of opposition members, and the
comparative injurious results suffered by both sides.

In India, several outbreaks of violence occurred
instigated by Indians. Yet, these were controlled by neces-
sary violence on the part of British officials. Gandhi made
it clear that to be a follower in his movement one had to be

179

nonviolent not only in offensive but in defensive measures.

Therefore, not only were the movement's campaigns nonviolent

initially, they were to remain nonviolent in the face of

violent reactions to their campaigns by the opposition.

This indeed is what happened in countless incidents. A

prime example was the result of a "raid" on the Dharsana

Salt Works. The raid was conducted in defiance of the salt

law restricting the Indian manufacture of salt. Despite

arrests and beatings, the works were raided continuously.

On May 20, 1930, volunteers marched in formation toward the

Salt Works. Systematically, each row was beaten away by

police guards. Two hundred ninety were injured and two

died. English journalist Webb Miller of the New Freeman

reported

In eighteen years of reporting in twenty-two
countries, during which I have witnessed innumer-
able disturbances, riots, street fights and rebel-
lions, I have never witnessed such harrowing
scenes as at Dharsana. Sometimes the scenes were
so painful that I had to turn away momentarily.
One surprising feature was the discipline of the
volunteers. It seemed they were thoroughly imbued
with Gandhi's nonviolence. (cited in Durant,
1930, p. 156)

The Working Committee's Resolution reported police action

such as

among others, beating of satyagrahis with lathis
until they dropped down unconscious and thereafter
trampling their bodies by hoofs of horses ridden
by European officers, striping (sic) satyagrahis
naked and thrusting sticks into their private
parts. (cited in Durant, June 4, 1930, p. 156)

180
Probably the incident which aroused the greatest indig-
nation on the part of all parties was the Jalliawala Bagh
massacre where 1,516 unarmed Indians were shot cold-blood-
edly by British soldiers for unlawful public assembly.
Although Dyer was not to receive punishment for his concep-
tion of his duty, his actions were investigated. The Hunter
Commission's official evaluation of Dyer's action called it
at best a "grave error" and at worst the cause of unneces-
sary death and violence not only at Jallianwalla Bagh but
also during an aftermath of retaliatory violence.

In the U.S.A. instances of ruthless exploitations and
cruelty evoked reactions similar to those found in India.
One of these incidents was the Freedom Ride emphasis of
1961. Two busloads of interracial riders left Washing-
ton, D.C., on a trip to end in New Orleans. They planned to
stop in the theoretically desegregated terminals throughout
the South to "test" them. One bus was bombed in Anniston,
Alabama, the passengers narrowly escaping injury. The other
busload was met by members of the Ku Klux Klan in Birmingham
and were beaten with lead pipes, baseball bats, and bicycle
chains. One of these passengers was a federal official sent
by Attorney General Robert Kennedy to participate in the
rides to "test" the manner in which southern stations had
carried out federally ordered desegregation. He, too, was
severely beaten. Widespread coverage of these instances of
brutality horrified the nation. By September federally

181
regulated desegregation of interstate bus stations began.
King reflected, "Without the presence of the press, there
might have been untold massacre in the South. The world
seldom believes the horror stories of history until they are
documented via mass media" (King, 1961, cited in Gates,
1982, p. 178).

However, the violent reactions that caused the greatest
consternation was the police action under Birmingham's
Commissioner of Public Safety "Bull" Connor in response to
the Children's March in Birmingham in 1963. Unarmed black
women and children marching and singing in protest of dis-
criminatory practices in that city were met with an armed
and helmeted police force complete with billy clubs, fire
hoses, and attack dogs. News coverage showed women and
children pressed against buildings by the onslaught of fire
hoses blasting water at them. Most disturbing was the
picture of a small boy being attacked by a German Shepherd.
As in India, movement followers were also the instigators of
violence, yet these were acts of individuals or groups with
whom King's movement claimed no association. Also, this
violence, such as ghetto riots in Chicago and Los Angeles,
was met by equal violence on the part of the opposition in
an effort to restrain black instigators.

In Birmingham, the situation was different. The action
on the part of movement followers was completely nonviolent,
yet it was responded to by great violence. And in the face

182
of this violent response, King's march continued, and
continued in nonviolence, ending on the steps of City Hall
in prayer for "Bull" Connor and his men.

In both movements the Level of Violent Reaction on the
parts of opposition members was high. More significantly,
it was high even when it occurred in response to nonviolent
acts on the parts of movement followers. It can be pro-
jected that such violence would be deemed unnecessary
especially in a culture with a preference for nonviolence.
The next variable then deals with the opposition's ability
to modify their perceptions of their own violent acts in
order not to feel guilty or not to feel called to respond to
movement demands.

Extent of Modification

The Extent of Modification is the degree to which the
opposition can rationalize the violent behavior it has
exhibited. Good indicators for this variable are the Level
of Violent Reaction, the number of times the opposition
responds with violence unnecessarily, and the level of
exposure these events receive.

The Extent of Modification was low in Britain and even
lower in the U.S.A. The nonviolent campaigns which were
responded to with great violence were numerous and were the
events which, because of their newsworthiness and sensation-
alism, received the most exposure through all available

183

channels. The Extent of Modification was probably low in

both opposition groups but was probably not as low in

Britain simply because of the physical distance between the

movement and the general populace of Britain and because of

the absence of television. This does not indicate, however,

that modification of the perception of violent reaction did

not occur or was not attempted. In India, for example.

General Dyer, when questioned by the Hunter Commission about

the event of Jalliawala Bagh, never apologized or indicated

in any way that he had acted wrongly. He perceived and

explained his actions as those that were necessary given the

circumstances.

I fired and continued to fire until the crowd
dispersed, and I consider this the lest amount of
firing which could produce the necessary effect it
was my duty to produce if I was to justify my
action. It was no longer a question of merely
dispersing the crowd, but one of producing a
sufficient moral effect from a military point of
view not only on those present, but more
especially throughout the Punjab. There could be
no question of undue severity. (Dyer, 1920,
cited in Fischer, 1950, p. 182)

In Dyer's defense and, obviously, of his same mentality.

General Drake-Brockman reported to the commission that

"force is the only thing that an Asiatic has any respect

for" (cited in Fischer, 1920, p. 183), The commission also

noted the opinions of other British officials. "The action

taken by General Dyer has also been described by others as

having saved the situation in the Punjab and having averted

a rebellion on a scale similar to the Mutiny" (O'Dwyer,

184
1920, cited in Fischer, 1950, p. 183). Yet the commission
indicates that after listening to these perceptions of
Dyer's actions and the situation surrounding them that the
commission members are unable to view the events in the same

It does not, however, appear to us possible to
draw this conclusion, particularly in view of the
fact that a conspiracy to overthrow British power
had not been formed prior to the outbreaks. . . .

It appears that the outburst on the 10th April
subsided in a few hours, there was no repetition
of any serious incident afterwards either on that
date or on subsequent dates. And even with regard
to the events on the 10th ... if the officer in
charge . . . had done his duty, the worst crimes,
viz., the murders of the bank officers . . . would
in all probability have been prevented. (Dyer,
1920, cited in Fischer, 1950, p. 183)

In the U.S.A., the rhetoric of Alabama Governor John

Patterson expresses the right to be violent against the

Freedom Riders by referring to them as troublemakers, the

federal government as overstepping its bounds, and white

resistors as brave people standing up for their rights.

There's nobody in the whole country that's got the
spine to stand up to the Goddamned nigger except
me. And I'll tell you I've got more mail in the
drawers of that desk over there congratulating me
on the stand that I've taken against Martin Luther
King and those rabble-rousers. Blood's going to
flow in the streets. (Patterson, cited in Gates,
1982, p. 174)

Yet, though many must have agreed with Patternson's view of

the situation, many others did not. Instead of helping his

cause, Patterson's vulgar call to resist integration of the

buses ended in systematic regulations which did just that.

185
Though modification of perceptions of violent acts on
the part of the opposition did exist in India and in the
U.S.A. to some extent, this Extent of Modification was not
effective enough to keep all opposition members from viewing
these violent acts as being unjustifiable.

Strength of the Rhetorical Vision

The Rhetorical Vision is defined as an "intersub jective
world of common expectations and meaning created in speaker-
audience transaction" (Brock & Scott, 1978). The Strength
of the Rhetorical Vision is the degree to which verbal
rhetoric of the movement contains commonly held ideological
myths held by the Indian culture that were probably ineffec-
tive in persuading the British. Allusions to Indian
philosophical and religious doctrine probably carried little
weight with the opposition. Yet, Gandhi also referred to
higher authorities greatly respected by the British, such as
Christian doctrines and to British cultural ideology.
Gandhi appealed to bravery:

Nonviolence and cowardice go ill together. I can
imagine a fully armed man to be at heart a cow-
ard. Possession of arms implies an element of
fear, if not cowardice. But true nonviolence is
an impossibility without the possession of
unadulterated fearlessness. (Gandhi, 1983, p. 44)

And to morality.

What may be hoped for is that Europe, on account
of her fine and scientific intellect, will realize
the obvious and retrace her steps; and from this
demoralizing industrialism she will find a way
out. (Gandhi, 1983, p. 101)

186

He used his own fine military record to appeal to British

patriotism.

It is not without a pang that I return the Kaisar-
i-Hind Gold Medal granted to me by your predeces-
sor for my humanitarian work in South Africa; the
Zulu War Medal, granted in South Africa for my
services as an officer in charge of the Indian
Volunteer Ambulance Corps in 1906; and the Boer
War Medal for my services as assistant superin-
tendent of the Indian Volunteer Stretcher-Bearer
corps during the Boer War. {Gandhi, 1920 cited in
Durant, 1930, p. 72)

He also made direct appeals to Christian ethics.

The British people seem to be obsessed by the
demon of commercial selfishness. The fault is not
of men but of the system. . . . India is exploited
in the interests of foreign capitalists. The true
remedy lies, in my humble opinion, in England
discarding modern civilisation . . . which is the
negation of the spirit of Christianity. (Gandhi,
1909)

In the U.S.A., King's rhetoric spoke to the heart and

values of midland America. Love, brotherhood, fairness,

justice, freedom — all of these themes helped to construct an

opposing vision that was more in tune with U.S.A. political,

cultural, and religious ideals than the opposition's

vision. King's vision featured a group of people who simply

wanted those rights that were expressed as theirs in the

Constitution and who bore no ill will toward the people who

had kept these rights from them. Such a group was difficult

to cast in the role of villains. The following quotations

are representative of the way in which King emphasized both

Christian and American ideals in his rhetoric:

It is a pretty difficult thing to like some
people. Like is sentimental and it is pretty

187

difficult to like someone bombing your home; it is
pretty difficult to like someone threatening your
children; it is difficult to like congressmen who
spend all of their time trying to defeat your
civil rights. But Jesus says love them, and love
is greater than like. (King, 1958, p. 139)

Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever.
The yearning for freedom eventually manifests
itself, and that is what has happened to the
American Negro. Something within has reminded him
of his birthright of freedom, and something with-
out has reminded him that it can be gained.
Consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught
up by the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers
of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of
Asia, South America, and the Caribbean, the United
States Negro is moving with a sense of great
urgency toward the promised land of racial
justice. (King, 1963, p. 91)

It is time that we stopped blithe lip service to
the guarantees of life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness. These fine sentiments are embodied
in the Declaration of Independence, but that
document was always a declaration of intent rather
than of reality. There were slaves when it was
written; there were still slaves when it was
adopted; and to this day, black Americans are in
economic bondage that is scarcely less oppres-
sive. Americans who genuinely treasure our
national ideals, who know they are still elusive
dreams for all too many, should welcome the stir-
ring of Negro demands. They are shattering the
complacency that allowed a multitude of social
evils to accumulate. Negro agitation is requiring
America to reexamine its comforting myths and may
yet catalyze the drastic reforms that will save
us from social catastrophe. (King, 1983, p. 52)

Compassion and nonviolence help us to see the
enemy's point of view, to hear his questions, to
know his assessment of ourselves. For from his
view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our
own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn
and grow and profit from the wisdom of the
brothers who are called the opposition. (King,
1983, p. 78)

These excerpts demonstrate some of the ways in which

Gandhi and King appealed to the values of the opposition in

188
portraying themselves as the protagonists in their
rhetoric. Throughout the duration of both movements, these
major spokespersons continued to construct and maintain this
perception of reality.

The strength of the rhetorical vision directly influ-
ences the degree to which the opposition is psychologically
capable of rejecting it. The valid use of closely-held
cultural, religious, and national values in support of their
arguments caused Gandhi and King to be difficult communica-
tors to "shut out." This brings the discussion to the
following variable, the Degree of Possible Rejection of
rhetoric.

Degree of Possible Rejection

The Degree of Possible Rejection of rhetoric is the
capability of the audience to discredit verbal rhetoric.
This will probably depend greatly on the strength of the
rhetorical vision and the Level of Exposure of the
opposition to it. In previous discussions both of these
variables have been determined to be high for both move-
ments. Although the Degree of Exposure may not have been
great initially, more and more members of the opposition
became familiar with the movement's rhetoric since the
leaders, their rhetoric, and their actions became newsworthy
to the mass media. Eventually, in both movements, the

189
Degree of Possible Rejection of movement rhetoric was low to
zero (or impossible).

Degree of Efficacy

All of the variables discussed in this section combined
with the variables of the previous two sections interact to
determine the Degree of Efficacy for a given movement. The
Degree of Efficacy as defined by the NVET is the extent to
which these variables interact to cause circumstances under
which nonviolent symbolic action will be effective. It may
be determined by combining the variables in this section:
the Level of Cultural Preference, Level of Violent Reaction,
Strength of Rhetorical Vision, Extent of Modification, and
Extent of Rejection. The previously assessed clusters of
variables which constitute the Level of Power of the move-
ment and the Level of Persuasibility of the opposition are
also important factors.

Therefore, to review and combine these variables for
the Indian Independence Movement, it has already been
demonstrated that the Level of Power was high in the areas
of exposure, identification, motivation, physical and
economic power, and fairly high in terms of unity. Level of
Persuasibility of the British was high since both the
socio/psychological importance and the economic/political
importance of the status quo was high as was the cultural
preference for nonviolence. The Level of Violent Reaction,

190
Strength of Rhetorical Vision were high; the Extent of
Possible Rejection or Modification were low.

For the U.S.A. Civil Rights Movement, the Level of
Power was high in the areas of exposure, identification,
motivation, and fair in terms of unity and political/eco-
nomic power. The Level of Persuasibility was low in terms
of the political/economic importance of the status quo and
high in terms of socio/psychological importance. Cultural
preference was very high. The Level of Violent Reaction and
Strength of the Rhetorical Vision was high; the Extent of
Possible Rejection or Modification were low.

Even though both movements had to overcome low per-
suasibility on the parts of their opposition, the strength
of other variables could have possibly compensated for the
weakness of this seemingly important situational variable.
Both movements were relatively strong in other areas, and
this must have allowed the Degree of Efficacy to be rela-
tively high in both movements.

Variables Affecting the Extent of Change

The variables in this cluster are assessed in the final
stages and aftermath of the movement to determine not so
much how persuaded the opposition was in terms of beliefs
but in terms of behavior modification. Did the movement
affect the goal it had intended? However, variables dealing
with the psychological changes in audience members are

191
included. It is not the purpose of this theory to determine
whether attitudinal changes affect behavioral changes or
that the reverse is true. Perhaps the two co-occur. How-
ever, the order in which the variables are assessed does not
indicate that this is linked to a perceived cause-effect
relationship by the author between changes in attitudes and
changes in behavior. The variables to be considered are the
Level of Disequilibrium among members of the opposition, the
Extent of Change in attitudes and policies, and the Extent
of Restoration of Equilibrium among opposition members.

The Level of Disequilibrium

The Level of Disequilibrium among members of the
opposition is the degree of discomfort experienced by
opposition members caused by the disagreement between the
old vision and the new vision which has now gained
credence. It is directly correlated with the Level of
Efficacy since the purpose of nonviolent direct action is to
generate this state of imbalance, thereby persuading the
audience. Therefore, since the Level of Efficacy was deter-
mined to be high for both movements, the Level of Disequi-
librium should be high as well.

The Extent of Change in Attitudes and Policies

The Extent of Change in attitudes and policies is the
degree to which the movement's demands are met willingly.

192
This may be determined through the number of laws changed,
the degree to which these laws are taken seriously, and the
number of symbolic changes in the society in recognition of
these legal changes.

Often laws or policies are changed, repealed, insti-
tuted, in theory but not in fact. In India, changes in laws
and policies regarding Indian participation in self-rule
were made at various intervals from the late 1800s to 1947
(Gopal, 1967). Yet, quite frequently these reforms, such as
the Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909 and the Mongagu-Chelmsf ord
Reforms of 1919, enabled the British to maintain ultimate
authority over India's government (Brown, 1972). When India
became an independent nation in 1947, however, the extent of
change was drastic and almost immediate. No longer were
Indians a second-class group but independent citizens of an
independent nation. National ceremony, flag, songs, govern-
mental structure — all reflected this drastic change in status

In the U.S.A., changes in laws were made and not always
enforced. Even following the Civil Rights Act in 1964, the
Civil Rights Movement had cause for grievance since they
still found that blacks were not being integrated into
American society as completely as the act guaranteed. In the
1980s, changes and progress toward complete equality are
still being made. Blacks have made advances in politics,
education, social standing, and employment opportunities.
They are most often referred to as "blacks" in public and

193
legal situations, which is the term favored by group leaders
representing the black population. They are also given the
same respect in terms of address as their white counterparts,
being referred to as Mr., Mrs., Dr., Miss, Ma'am, Sir, as the
situation demands.

In the case of each movement then, the Extent of Change
in the Indian and U.S.A. societies has been great as a result
of the demands of these movements. Such changes can also be
seen as the result of the changes in the maps of the opposi-
tion and the society-at-large, changes in their visions of
social reality, dictating who they are, who the movement
followers are, and what their relationships are to one
another within the society.

Extent of Restoration of Equilibrium

The Extent of Restoration of Equilibrium is the degree
to which the opposition can defend its map in terms of the
new social reality. In both cases the Extent of Restoration
is relatively high. The British were able to say that they
did give India its independence as they had promised to do
all along. The U.S.A. could say that it passed the Civil
Rights Act. Therefore, each could now believe that they had
rectified the situation. Since there is virtually no way
truly to "undo" past wrongs, the Extent of Restoration is
probably as high in both instances as is possible. It is
revealed through opposition rhetoric such as the following:

194

The story of our clash in the early days of South
Africa has been told by Gandhi himself and is well
known. It was my fate to be the antagonist of a
man for whom even then I had the highest respect.
(Jan Christian Smuts, Minister of South Africa,
1940, cited in Fischer, 1983, p. 117)

George Wallace, Governor of Alabama, well known for his

strict segregationist policies in the early 60s, explained

his change of politics.

The law changed. I didn't change. It was the law
in Alabama in 1962 that people of different races
be segregated. I became governor and swore to
uphold the law. (Wallace, cited in Greenshaw,
1976, p. 176)

In the context of the times, that's what we had in
our part of the country, that had been accepted as
lawful by the Supreme Court, that was practiced by
law, and even practiced by some who claimed other-
wise. We Southern people tried not to be hypo-
critical about it. But you must consider that an
overwhelming majority of the people in our part of
the country don't consider that as racist. You
have to consider what emanates from a man's heart.
If it emanates because he thinks it's in the best
interest of everybody, even though he's mistaken,
then his heart's right. (Wallace, cited in
Carlson, 1976, p. 175)

Synthesis

Among the British, the vision of reality at the incep-
tion of the Indian Independence Movement, whether a conscious
or unconscious one, was that the British were a superior
group, more civilized, more enlightened, more moral, more
capable, and better equipped to rule a nation than their
colonial subjects. In their vision, they were benign
parental figures who brought order, Christianity, and modern
technology to a semibarbarous people. If their rule in India

195
was profitable to the British, then it was only through the
good business management of India by Britain, However, they
believed they would willingly turn over the reins of govern-
ment to the people of India if they were able to govern
themselves as competently as the British. In fact, Indians
were not given the political, educational, or economic oppor-
tunities to advance to these positions. Until the time,
however, that Indians could prove themselves worthy of self-
government, the British claimed to be taking care of their
"ward" to the best of their ability. If India were indeed
poverty-stricken, then conditions could only be worse without
British governance.

The vision of the Indian people cast the British in the
role not of kind and helpful parents but rather as plunder-
ers who had wounded the nation economically, politically,
and spiritually. India had become more modernized and
westernized as a result of British influence but had done so
at the expense of burdensome taxation and severe trade
restriction.

In the U.S.A., whites believed they had set things
right when slavery was abolished and had even gone an extra
mile with the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) separate-but-equal
decision. Like the British, whether verbalized or not,
whites' vision of reality was one in which they were members
of a superior group. They held nothing against blacks as
long as blacks remained within the "black community" and did

196
not compete for limited available jobs, wages, and positions
of status and power. If blacks were living below the aver-
age U.S.A. standard, this condition was due to a lack of
initiative or intelligence on their parts rather than bar-
riers within the social system. Whites often felt quite
generous when they considered a black maid or worker as "one
of the family" without understanding that such condescension
placed the black in the role of little higher status than
that of a family pet.

Blacks' vision of reality was one of an overwhelming
social machine of prejudice and discrimination through which
they could never make their way. What was the use in trying
when their best, even if they could achieve it, would never
be acceptable? It was a hopelessly "white" world.

The visions of Gandhi and King were different from all
of these. Their rhetoric enjoined both follower and opposi-
tion member, charging each with a new vision in which fol-
lowers and opposition members could all enjoy roles as "good
guys" if changes in the prevailing reality, the currently
constituted territory, were made. Gandhi and King attacked
the social reality sponsored by the opposition; their
rhetoric never contained an ad hominem argument or an attack
on the individual opposition member. Each appealed to value
systems of the opposition. Through direct action as well as
adaptive rhetoric, each forced the opposition to examine the
discrepancies between their perpetuated maps of reality and

197
the territory of reality as it existed in life. The
resulting disequilibrium caused changes in actions and atti-
tudes on the parts of the opposition in order to conform
to a newly perceived reality and its demands on them.

Therefore, in India, continued reforms that finally led
to Indian Independence allowed British officials to see
themselves in the right again after continued exposure of
Indian grievances had placed them in the wrong. Their maps
had to undergo great change; they had to see that it was
better for India to rule herself and benefit economically
from her own natural resources than to "benefit" from British
rule. In the U.S.A., the passage of the Civil Rights Act and
continued patrol of its enforcement allowed whites to regain
their conscience equilibrium after extensive exposure of
inexcusable injustices committed by whites against blacks.
Their reality maps also had to undergo drastic change as they
began to realize that blacks were not necessarily lazy and
ignorant by nature but had been caught for generations in a
social cycle of suppression from which whites had benefit-
ted. Blacks had not been given ample opportunities nor
encouragement to alter their situations.

The role that nonviolent direct action played in these
changes was significant for two reasons. First, it created
newsworthy events that added great exposure of the movement
and at least caught the attention, if not the active inter-
est or agreement, of opposition members. These members

198
might have filtered out more orthodox rhetorical strategies,
had they been relied on, especially since it threatened
their vision of reality. Secondly, nonviolent direct action
dramatized visually the stark reality of extant intergroup
relations. In these confrontations members of the opposi-
tion saw themselves or their representatives playing the
role of the suppressor in a very physical and not-to-be-
denied manner. Such a demonstration was difficult to ignore
and more difficult to excuse. For these reasons, nonviolent
direct action had a significant impact on the opposition in
both movements.

Overall, the effectiveness of nonviolent direct action
cannot be attributed to the strength of any of the isolated
variables discussed in this analysis. Yet, the weakness of
identifiable isolated variables does suggest that these
variables, because of their weakness, may not be as impor-
tant as other variables in determining whether nonviolence
will be feasible in a given situation. Two variables were
found to be weak: The Level of Physical Power and the Level
of Political/Economic Power. One cluster of variables, the
Level of Persuasibility (of the opposition) was weak as
well. Since each of these variables was determined to be
significantly weak in one or both movements and since both
movements were successful in the use of nonviolent direct
action anyway, it follows that these variables need not be
high in order for nonviolent direct action to be a workable

199
persuasive movement strategy in a given situation. The
author projects that the most salient variables are the
Level of Cultural Preference for nonviolence and the Degree
of Credibility. However, since these factors were high in
both movements, this projection was neither proved nor
disproved through this analysis.

CHAPTER FOUR

THE RHETORIC OF NONVIOLENT MOVEMENT LEADERS:

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN COMMUNICATOR STYLE

AND LEADERSHIP TRAITS AS REVEALED THROUGH THE SPEECHES

OF GANDHI AND KING

Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. , were men of
education, strong religious and social beliefs, and of
charismatic leadership capabilities. Yet, as public
speakers, as sources of information, inspiration, and
instruction for their nonviolent followers, these two men
seem to have been of widely divergent traits in terms of
speaker styles and speaker personality.

Gandhi, the public speaker, is written of by Fischer in

the following manner:

Gandhi's speeches were delivered in a weak
unimpressive, conversational tone. He had been
heralded as the hero of Natal and the Transvaal,
the person who defeated Smuts. The Indian
nationalists had expected a new giant, a lion of
a man who might lead them to independence. They
were disappointed. Instead of a likely candidate
for succession, they saw a thin little figure
dressed in a ridiculously large turban and flapping
loincloth who could scarcely make himself heard
(there were no loudspeakers) and neither thrilled
nor stimulated the audience." (1950, p. 127)

King, on the other hand, is described as always being
immaculately dressed in gray and black suits and white
shirts and tie. Oates (1980) states that "the most mem-
orable thing about him [King] was his voice. It had changed

200

201
into a rich and resonant baritone that commanded attention
when he spoke" (p. 15).

These assessments seem true by each speakers ' own
admissions. King said that his own "greatest talent,
strongest tradition, and most constant interest was the
eloquent statement of ideas" (cited in Bennett, 1975,
p. 17). Gandhi in his autobiography speaks of his nervous-
ness as a speaker and recounts his first opportunity to
speak. Even though he had a written manuscript of his
speech in front of him, he was so overwhelmed with nervous-
ness that his vision blurred and he could not read. He
asked someone else to read his speech in his stead. He goes
on to state

It was only in South Africa that I got over this
shyness, though I never completely overcame it.
It was impossible for me to speak impromptu. I
hesitated whenever I had to face strange audiences
and avoided making a speech whenever I could or
would even be inclined to keep a meeting of friends
engaged in idle talk. (1969, p. 55)

By all accounts it seems evident that King was a much

more colorful and powerful speaker in terms of appearance,

voice, and manner than was Gandhi. By their own admissions.

King enjoyed speaking while Gandhi never became confident or

at ease in the public speaking arena. These are subjective

evaluations by these leaders and by those who were friends,

acquaintances, and audience members. The purpose of this

chapter and the measures described and utilized in this part

of the analyses of King and Gandhi is to make objective

202
evaluations about these factors of speaking skill and
manner. Such evaluations should support what has already-
been observed about King and Gandhi but may provide further
interesting insights into the ways in which these leaders
were alike as well as different.

"Content anlysis is a method of studying and analyzing
communication in a systematic, objective, and quantitative
manner for the purpose of measuring variables" (Kerlinger,
1964, p. 544). As part of this study, five of Martin Luther
King, Jr.'s speeches and five of Mahatma Gandhi's speeches
were chosen for content analysis. The purpose of this
analysis in the scope of the entire study is to provide a
means by which to compare and contrast the variable of
leadership as it existed in the Indian Independence
Movement and the U.S.A. Civil Rights Movement. Nine
measures were utilized for this analysis. Five are
measures of style in speaking, and four are measures of
speaker discomfort and social orientation. These latter
measures were employed to compare and contrast personality
traits of Gandhi and King as revealed through their words.
A description of the procedures used and a discussion of the
results of each measure follow.

203
Procedure

Selection of Speeches

The 10 speeches analyzed, 5 per speaker, were chosen
through the criteria of availability, date of occurrence,
and audience. In order to gain a sense of speaker style and
personality across each movement, the author felt it impor-
tant to select speeches from the earliest and latest days of
each movement, as well as from fairly regularly intervening
points of time. Also, the speeches were selected to rep-
resent presentations to various audiences to gain a sense of
speaker style and personality across situations, as the
speaker did or did not adapt to differing listeners.

Gandhi's speeches were selected from The Gandhi Reader
(Jack, 1956) and the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi
(1958), a 40-volume series compiled by the Navajivan Trust
and containing obtainable letters, speeches, and writings of
Gandhi. King's speeches were selected from the collection
of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s, papers at the Martin Luther
King, Jr., Center for Nonviolent Social Change in Atlanta,
Georgia. This collection includes articles, interviews,
speeches, and personal correspondence of King. Some works
are copied, some transcribed, and a few are in his own hand.

The first speech delivered by Gandhi that was selected
is from the first volume of his collected works. The earli-
est of Gandhi's addresses recorded in full in his collected

204
works was delivered in Bombay on September 26, 1896. In it
he spoke of the grievances of South African Indians. The
second address chosen was given by Gandhi after he had
returned from South Africa. Delivered in Ahmedabad in 1921,
it was addressed to an audience of "untouchables" at the
Suppressed Class Conference there. His topic was the evils
of untouchability . The third and fourth speeches occurred
in the same year, 1931, during Gandhi's visit to London for
the Round Table Conference. Although these two speeches do
occur in the same year, each offers examples of varied
audiences which were felt valuable for analysis.

The third speech was Gandhi's Appeal to America deliv-
ered over CBS radio and was his first mass mediated
address. The fourth was his speech to the Round Table
Conference. Both of these speeches dealt with the
importance for India to gain self-government. The final
speech was selected from the last volume of Gandhi's works.
It was delivered in Sevagram, India, on September 3, 1944
to the All India Spinner's Association (A.I.S.A.). In this
speech Gandhi tried to persuade the conference that the
charkha or spinning wheel should be embraced as the emblem
for nonviolence, for the Independence Movement, and for
India. It represents one of his last public speeches.

King's first involvement in the U.S.A. Civil Rights
Movement in a leadership capacity evolved in events sur-
rounding the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955. He was

205
selected as chairperson for this event. His speech before
the initial mass meeting of boycotters was the first speech
chosen for this analysis. Between this first meeting and
more publicized events of 1963, few of King's addresses
were available in full. The second speech, therefore, was
chosen primarily on the grounds of availability and the
fact that it was delivered in the intervening period. It
is King's statement before a court in 1958 and was a
response to false charges of loitering on which he was
convicted and sentenced to jail. King took this opportunity
to express to a nearly all-white audience the injustices
facing the black person who must deal with the white per-
son's judicial system. The third speech is his famous "I
Have A Dream" speech delivered from the steps of the Lincoln
Memorial to an audience of over 250 thousand. The fourth
speech selected was given as King accepted the 1964 Nobel
Peace Prize before an audience of international dignitaries
at a formal ceremony in Oslo, Norway. The final speech
selected was, in fact. King's final address, given at a
rally in Memphis, 3 April 1968, the night before he was
assassinated. The rally was in conjunction with the Memphis
Sanitation Worker's strike for equal pay and privileges.

206
Description of Content Measures

Word count measures

The measures employed to analyze the speaking styles of
King and Gandhi are Sentence and Word counts and lengths
(two measures), the Adjective-Verb Ratio (AVQ), the
Type-Token Ratio (TTR), and the Flesch Human Interest Score
(FHIS). These measures will be described here, and a full
transcript of the Coder's Protocol used in this study is
included in Appendix A. This Protocol is adapted from
Evans' (1974) instructions to coders.

Sentence and word counts/lengths is a tool used to
determine the elaborateness of a speaker's vocabulary and
the complexity of his or her sentence construction. This is
done by counting the number of syllables, words, and
sentences per 100-word passage selected from the speaker's
discourse. The average number of syllables per words and
the average number of words per sentence are calculated to
determine if a speaker is prone to use "big" words or use
long sentences (Flesch, 1960).

The AVQ is a measure of style which reveals how
"active" or "passive" the language of the speaker tends to
be by comparing the number of adjectives to the number of
verbs in selected 100-word passages from the speaker's
discourse (Boder, 1940). The TTR measures the language
flexibility of the speaker by comparing the number of

207
different words used by the speaker to the number or words
total.

The FHIS is a measure of "human" interest evoked by the
speaker's language. Flesch theorized that certain words add
an element of human interest to a passage which makes it an
easier message to which to be attentive (1960). To
determine the FHIS, one identifies the number of personal
words per 100-words and the number of personal sentences
divided by the number of sentences in a given 100-word
passage and substitutes these percentages into the following
formula :

FHIS = 3.635{pw) + .314(ps)

Content analysis measures

The four measures used in this study which analyze
personalized and emotional qualities in the speeches of King
and Gandhi are the Discomfort Relief Quotient (DRQ), the
Anxiety Scale (AX), and two parts of the Social Orientation
Scale, Attitude Toward Others Scale (AO) and the Attitude
Toward Self Scale (AS). The DRQ is a method of measuring
tension in transcriptions of speech (Mowrer, 1953). It is
taken by scoring the number of words indicating discomfort
in a given 100-word passage and comparing this to the number
of words which indicate comfort in the same passage.

208
Discomfort

Discomfort + Relief

The AX (Gottschalk & Gleser, 1964) is designed to measure
the level of anxiety a speaker experiences at the time of a
given communication. Each speech is coded by clauses
according to a scale provided by Gottschalk and Gleser
(1964) and listed in full in the Coder's Protocol (Appendix
A).

The Attitude Toward Others Scale (AO-score) and the
Attitude Toward Self Scale (AS-score) (Gottschalk & Gleser,
1964; Markel, 1986) is designed to determine the degree to
which a speaker is sensitive to others and the degree to
which the speaker is sensitive to self. Similar to the AX,
it is taken by coding clauses in 100-word passages according
to references to the self and to others. The scale used
for coding appears in full in the Coder's Protocol (Appendix
A).

For all the measures employed herein, each of the 10
speeches were analyzed through an evaluation of three
100-word segments taken from each. The rationale for ana-
lyzing these three excerpts from each speech rather than
the speeches in full was to be able to analyze segments of
approximately equal length for more reliable comparison.
The three segments of a speech were taken from the introduc-
tion, the conclusion, and the middle sections in a system-
atic procedure which is outlined in the Coder's Protocol.

209
Reliability of Measure

To insure that the measures used were reliable, the
author enlisted three cocoders to confirm that similar
results from each measure could be obtained no matter who
coded the passage. Before these cocoders were given their
assignments, the Coder's Protocol was pretested for
clarity. A fourth coder was also instructed on how to
code one 100-word passage for each measure. This coder was
alsoinstructed to ask questions and make notations concern-
ing instructions she found to be difficult to understand or
ambiguous. The Coder's Protocol was then revised, and
examples were included so that the instructions would be as
clear as possible for the three cocoders as well as for
anyone wishing to use these measures in the future.

The three cocoders represent a variety of national
backgrounds: one from the United States, one from India,
and one from Holland. Two considered English a first
language; two were fluent in more than one language. Two
females and one male comprised the group. This informa-
tion is important since the speakers and speeches being
analyzed are speakers from the U.S.A. and Indian cultures
and were speaking cross-culturally in much of their communi-
cation. A cultural diversity among coders helps to allevi-
ate reliability of measure brought about by similarities in
perceptions on the part of coders.

210
Reliability for each measure was determined by counting
all units coded similarly by the author and each cocoder,
comparing that number to all coded units, yielding the
percentage of all coded units coded alike. The intercoder
reliability for each coder on each measure is recorded in
Table 4.1. Coder A is a female native of India who
considers herself bilingual. Coder L is a male monolingual
English-speaking native of the U.S.A. Coder S is a female
exchange student from Holland for whom English is a second
language. Because Cocoder L misunderstood instructions for
the last three measures, his scores were not reliable and
were not used.

Table 4.1

Intercoder Reliability for Each Measure

Measure Reliability for cocoder

Clause per Segment
Syllable per Word
Word per Clause
Type-Token Ratio (TTR)
Adjective Verb Quotient (AVQ)
Flesch Human Interest Score (FHIS)
Discomfort Relief Quotient (DRQ)
Anxiety Score (AX)
Attitude Toward Others (AO)
Attitude Toward Self (AS)

1.00

.83

.91

1.00

.99

1.00

.83

.81

.89

.84

.68

.85

.62

.85

.80

.73

1.00

.73

1.00

.73

.91

211
Method to Determine Differences Between Speakers

Since three segments from five speeches of each speaker
were coded for all measures, the completed codings yielded
15 scores per speaker for each measure. In order to ascer-
tain whether Gandhi's 15 scores on a given measure were
significantly higher or lower than King's, the
Mann-Whitney U Test was utilized. The purpose of this
test is "to test whether two independent groups have been
drawn from the same population" (Siegal, 1956; p. 116).
In other words, this test is used to tell whether Gandhi's
scores and King's scores can be said to be drawn from the
same or differing classifications of speaking style and
personality. Appendices D and E contain the scores for each
speaker on the word count measures and for each speaker on
content analysis measures.

To apply the U test, all of the scores for both
speakers on a single measure must be combined and rank
ordered from the lowest to the highest score. Each score is
given a rank number of 1 through 30. In instances where
several like scores exist, all are given the mean rank score
of the ranks with which they correspond. So, for example,
if two scores of the same value would be ranked 4 and 5,
each is ranked 4.5. If five scores of the same value would
be ranked 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, all five are given the rank of

212
13. In the U test, the symbol U represents the number of
times that a score in the set of speeches given by Gandhi
precedes a score in the set of speeches given by King. "U"
is found through the following formula:

U = n-^in^) + n^(n2 + l) - R-|^ ,

where n, is the number of scores in the first group (scores
from Gandhi's speeches), n2 is the number of scores in the
second group (King's speeches), and R, is the sum of the
ranks assigned to the scores in the first group.
For these analyses, the null hypothesis is
H_ : the score for King is the same as the
score for Gandhi,
and the level of significance is .05.

Results

The results for each measure using the Mann-Whitney U-
Test are listed in Table 4.2. For the five measures of
speaker style, no significant differences were found to
exist between King and Gandhi. However, three of the four
content analysis measures (indicated by *) revealed
significant differences between the two leaders. Gandhi
demonstrated significantly more discomfort while King

213

Table 4.2

Score for Mann-Whitney U-Test

84.5

1.16

.12

133.5

.87

.19

144.0

1.31

.10

49.0

2.63

.0043*

95.0

.72

.24

180.0

2.80

.0027*

202.5

3.73

.0001*

Measure U-score z-score p value

Word per Clause 98.0 .60 .27

Syllables per Word 104.0 .35 .36

Type-Token Ratio

Adjective-Verb Quotient

Flesch Human Interest Score

Discomfort-Relief Quotient

Anxiety Score

Attitude Toward Others Score

Attitude Toward Self Score

demonstrated a heightened level of positive interpersonal
and intrapersonal awareness and concern.

Results of word count measures

Gandhi and King have been described by themselves as
well as by others to be of markedly differing oratorical
styles, and this seemed to be supported by a simple
examination of their scores on each measures (Appendices D
and E). Yet, these seemingly obvious differences were not
found to be statistically significant. One explanation for
this surprising finding is that even though King and Gandhi
differed in style, they differed within the limits of
similar rhetorical traditions. Although Gandhi was born and
raised in Eastern traditions, he was educated in

214
argumentation in London, and each speech analyzed herein was
delivered by Gandhi in English.

Results of content analysis measures

The Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scale is the sole
content analysis measure which revealed no significant
differences in the two speakers. This measure was
originally developed to use in the analysis of psychiatric
clients. Therefore, it would make sense that King and
Gandhi would not be significantly different in level of
abnormal anxiety and that both men would produce scores that
fall within the range of normalcy (stated by Gottschalk to
be between 2.0 and 3.0).

Results of the remaining three content analysis meas-
ures indicate that King and Gandhi did reveal through
language significant differences in speaker discomfort and
in positive speaker awareness of self and others. The
results of the Discomfort-Relief Quotient supplies addi-
tional validation to the independent reports by observers
and by the speaker's self-report. Gandhi was described as
and admitted himself to be an apprehensive speaker, whereas
King was comfortable as a speaker and even enjoyed speaking
in public.

The results of the Social Orientation scores indicate
that King had a significantly more positive sense of and
concern for self and for others than did Gandhi. One

215
interpretation of this finding would be to credit this
difference to the cultural and religious backgrounds of the
speakers. The Black Southern Baptist philosophy of life
places great emphasis on the New Testament directive to
"Love one another" and to "love your neighbor as yourself."

The Hindu religion, by contrast, places less emphasis on
interpersonal relationships and on persons in general,
placing greater importance on all people and all things
being one (Zimmer, 1951). For King, the emphasis was on the
individual, for Gandhi, the most important idea was the
universal whole. Also, King was a gregarious extrovert,
while Gandhi was frequently awkward in company.

Method to Determine Differences Among Speeches of One
Speaker

Methodology

To determine whether either speaker showed significant
differences in style or personality projection from speech
to speech and audience to audience, the Friedman Two-way
Analysis of Variance by ranks was employed (Siegel, 1956).
This analysis allows the researcher to compare and contrast
the scores among the five speeches of one speaker on one
measure. For example, the scores for segment #1 on each of
the speeches for one speaker were given a rank order number
of 1 to 5 from lowest to highest score. The same was done
for segments 2 and 3 of the five speeches for that speaker.

216
The rank order numbers for the three segments of each speech
were totaled, and these sums were placed into the following
formula :

12 , , , , ^

Xr = N(k+1) [(4^)^+(r^)^+(r^)^)+{r^)"+(r2) ] - 3N(k+i:

where N = the number of segments,
k = number of speeches,

r = sum of the ranks for the three segments,
a-e are speeches 1-5.

It could be hypothesized that one or both speakers might
adapt their speaking styles according to the audience to
whom they spoke and the situation in which an address was
delivered. Judging from the raw scores and from knowledge
of King and Gandhi, it would be more likely that King would
show greater differences in style between speeches (Appen-
dices D and E) . This hypothesis is further supported by the
results of the Mann-Whitney U Test which shows King to be
more interpersonally aware or positively socially oriented
than Gandhi. For the psycholinguistic measures, it could be
predicted that significant variances in personality factors
might be found in one or both speakers between speeches.
This could be accounted for by the passage of time and by
experience in speaking and in performing the duties of a
popular leader. It is more likely that Gandhi would show

217
such lessening of anxiety since King had been a public
speaker, a minister, as well as a community leader for many
years before the Montgomery Bus Boycott thrust him into
national prominence.

Results of Friedman two-way analysis

The results of the Friedman Two-way Analysis of
Variance are found in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3

Scores for Friedman Analysis

King

ndhi

Measures

score p-

-level

score

-level

Words per Clause

3.85

.342

.12

.910

Syllables per Word

0.95

.910

3.26

.446

TTR

4.76

.207

1.77

.727

AVQ

2.98

.446

6.03

.148

FHIS

12.04

.002*

0.73

910

DRQ

3.00

.446

5.41

175

2.03

.608

8.27

002*

I-score

0.73

.910

2.03

608

Il-score

2.81

.524

9.51

001*

As expected. King showed significant stylistic variance
across speeches although on one word count measure only.
King's style varied on the dimension of "human interest" as
measured by the Flesch Human Interest Score. King's scores
for this measure across the five speeches sampled are listed
in Table 4.4.

218

Table 4.4

King's Scores on the Flesch Human Interest Score

Segment Speech Numbers

12 3 4

First

16.52

Second

116

22.90

Third

45.23

King utilized many more elements of human interest in
his first and final speeches and significantly fewer in his
second and fourth speeches. The first speech was his
address at the initial mass meeting of the Montgomery bus
boycotters in 1955; his final address was before the Memphis
rally of striking sanitation workers in 1968. Both of these
speeches are analogous to an athletic "pep talk" designed to
inspire a group of movement followers to immediate and
specific action, to boycott the busses and to walk off a
job. To inspire listeners to very specific, immediate, and
risky action, King may have felt a need to establish quite
explicitly his understanding of his listener's needs and of
the possible sacrifices he was encouraging them to make. He
may have also been trying to establish a common ground,
a friendly rapport with a group of people who had to be
cohesive if they were to be successful and whose cooperation
with him and his directives were important to the goals of
the movement. Also, these are the only two audiences of the

219
speeches sampled which were comprised almost exclusively of
black members.

King's second speech was his statement before Judge Loe
in 1958. The statement was in response to King's conviction
and sentencing on charges of loitering. The fourth speech
was King's Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech delivered to an
audience of international dignitaries at the 1964 ceremonies
in Oslo, Norway. Both of these speeches were scored lower
in terms of human interest. Each was delivered in a very
formal situation, before a predominantly white audience, and
in a situation involving a formal evaluation of King as a
man. In the second speech, King's guilt or innocence was
being determined in a court of law; in the fourth, King's
life work was being recognized and rewarded. These factors
may explain the significant difference in level of human
interest present in his discourse in these instances. Such
variances may reflect King's stylistic flexibility along
this dimension of human interest as he may have consciously
adapted his discourse to the preferences and expectations
due to a given audience and situation. Variances may also
reflect King's degree of comfort or perceived similarity
with a given audience.

The Friedman Analysis revealed significant differences
among Gandhi's speeches along two content analysis meas-
ures: the Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scale and the Attitudes

220
Toward Self Scale. The Anxiety Scores for each of Gandhi's
speeches are listed in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5

Gandhi ' s Scores on the Anxiety Scale

Segment Speech Number

First

Second

Third

The Anxiety Score on the third speech is lower than the
scores for the four remaining speeches. This speech was the
appeal to America delivered over CBS radio in 1931. It was
Gandhi's first experience with radio broadcasting and
perhaps the fact that the audience was not visible lessened
his anxiety due to speaking in public. Gandhi experienced
normal levels of anxiety in his final speech given before
the Spinner's Association in 1944. The highest level of
anxiety was experienced by Gandhi in his very first speech
delivered before a group of fellow Indians in Bombay in
1896. An obvious explanation in the variance of anxiety
between Gandhi's first and last speeches would be that of
age and experience. In Bombay, in 1896, Gandhi was the
novice leader, young and inexperienced, and facing threats

221
of death and imprisonment for his noncooperation with South
African ordinances. In 1944, Gandhi may have benefitted
from a confidence born of many years as a prominent speaker
and leader. Also, the situation in which he spoke was
relatively nonthreatening in physical terms.

The second content analysis measure for which Gandhi's
scores showed a significant difference among the five
speeches sampled is the Attitude Toward Self Scale.
Gandhi's scores on this measure are listed in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6

Gandhi's Scores for the Attitude Toward Self Score

Segment

Bech

Number
3

First

.20

Second

.09

Third

Gandhi demonstrates his highest level of intrapersonal
social orientation during his first speech which was deliv-
ered in Bombay in 1896 before a group of Indians to discuss
their mutual grievances against the South African govern-
ment. The lowest score on this measure was recorded for his
fourth speech which was delivered before the Plenary Session
during the Round Table Conference in London in 1931.

222

Gandhi represented India to present an argument for and to
negotiate the terms for granting India self-government.
Perhaps, in Bombay, a very young Gandhi, fresh from London,
felt the need to analyze and express most carefully his
motives, his intentions, and personal commitment to the
movement and his willingness to accept unpleasant conse-
quences. Perhaps, as a novice in his cause, he felt a need
to defend himself. He may have been extremely self-
conscious due to sheer nervousness in a public communication
situation. As he became more secure in his own beliefs and
actions and more mature in his Hindu religious development,
the concern with self may have lessened, and, if so, the
need to explain or defend the self lessened as well. A
second explanation for this variance in intrapersonal social
orientation could be that Gandhi felt more comfortable with
self-revealing messages delivered to a group of fellow
Indians bound together by shared grievances and a shared
commitment to a common cause. He might have felt stifled or
uncomfortable in talking about himself in front of a group
of British officials in a foreign and formal environment.
Finally, in the first speech Gandhi was speaking for him-
self; before the Plenary Session he spoke as a representa-
tive of the Indian Nation.

Although the Friedman Analysis did reveal significant
differences in style and personality among the speeches for
each speaker, it was surprising to find that greater

223
variance was not found, specifically since King's raw scores
seemed to indicate more flexibility along stylistic
dimensions .

Referring to Appendix E, the most notable deviations
from the means are the numbers denoting the length of sen-
tences used by King in his speech to accept the Nobel Prize
and in his speech at the Memphis Rally. The average sen-
tence in King's acceptance speech was nearly 34 words in
length; the average length of the sentences in his Memphis
speech was under 10 words. Gandhi does not show this
flexibility judging the raw measures for his speeches
(Appendix D) .

To test these observations further, the Mann-Whitney U-
Test was applied once more to see if any significant differ-
ences in style would be found between speeches King deliv-
ered to audiences who were predominantly black (speeches 1
and 5) and audiences who were predominantly white (speeches
2 and 4). Speech number 3, the "I Have a Dream" speech, was
excluded since it is difficult to determine the exact racial
composition of the audience. Those of Gandhi's speeches
delivered to Indian audiences (speeches 1, 2, and 5) were
compared to his speeches delivered to Anglo audiences
(speeches 3 and 4). Results ((Tables 4.7 and 4.8) revealed
that Gandhi's style did not differ significantly between
Indian and English audiences. Yet King's style, according
to audience, did differ significantly on all word count

224
Table 4.7

Results of Mann-Whitney U-test Applied to Find Differences
in Gandhi's Speaking Style According to Audience's Racial
Composition

Measure U-score

Words per Clause 28.5

Syllables per Word 15.0

Type-Token Ratio 2 0.5

Adjective-Verb Quotient 28.0

Flesch Human Interest Score 39.0

Discomfort Relief Quotient 36.5

Anxiety Score 34.0

Attitude Toward Others 2 4.5

Attitude Toward Self 3 6.5

U-scores < 7 are significant at .02 level.

Table 4.8

Results of Mann-Whitney U-test Applied to Find Differences
in King's Speaking Style According to Audience's Racial
Composition

Measure

Words per Clause
Syllables per Word
Type-Token Ratio
Adjective-Verb Quotient
Flesch Human Interest Score
Discomfort Relief Quotient
Anxiety Score

Attitude Toward Others Score
Attitude Toward Self Score

U-score

P-value

6.0

.032*

7.0

.047*

5.0

.021*

13.5

.242

0.0

.001*

9.5

.090

14.0

.294

13.0

.242

19.0

.469

225
measures with the exception of the Adjective-Verb Quotient.
Figures indicate that before black audiences King used
shorter words and shorter clauses. He used more repetitions
of words and more elements of Human Interest. No differ-
ences in content analyses measures according to audience
were found for either speaker.

One explanation for these findings is that King adapted
his speaking style to the audience to whom he spoke and the
formality of the situation. The ceremony at which King
accepted the Nobel Prize was an extremely formal affair.
His immediate audience was composed of dignitaries from all
over the world. His mediated audience was, in fact, the
world at large since the annual awarding of Nobel Prizes is
a news event demanding international attention. The speech
delivered in Memphis was addressed to a group of black
sanitation workers who were on strike to protest discrimina-
tory practices against blacks in their job force in terms of
salary and working conditions. Although this was a "formal"
speaking engagement in the sense that King was asked to
prepare and present an address, the very term "rally" with
which it is referred indicates a sense of informality.
Another situational variable is the presumed socioeconomic
status and educational level of this audience as compared to
the audience in Oslo. The shortened sentences indicate a
simplified form of communication for a less sophisticated or
educated listener. Finally, a cultural variable or

226

expectation may have also influenced King's differing

speaking styles in these two situations. One obvious

difference between U.S.A. black and white speaker-audience

interaction, particularly in the delivery of sermons, is

found in the level of verbal feedback (Smitherman, 1974).

In the two speeches with the shortest sentences and words,

King was speaking to predominantly black audiences.

Shortened sentences with rhythmic cadences almost invite

audience responses. In the transcription of the tape of the

speech delivered at the mass meeting to begin the Montgomery

bus boycott, the audience's responses are included.

Now let us say that we are not advocating
violence. (No!) We have overcome that. (Repeat
that! Repeat that! ) I want it to be known
throughout Montgomery and throughout this nation
that we are Christian people. (Applause) We
believe in the Christian religion. (Yeah) (King,
1955)

Gandhi ' s lack of audience adaptation may be attributed

to one or a combination of many possible factors. Gandhi

perhaps lacked the insight or skills of audience analysis to

see a need to adapt his style of speaking to a given

audience. Speaker anxiety may have lessened his interaction

with an audience. Perhaps Gandhi's personal philosophy

required a consistency of manner in order to be true to

oneself. On the other hand, the answer may be that Gandhi

did analyze his ausiences correctly. Significant difference

may not exist between Indians and Anglos in terms of the

speaking style which is expected and deemed appropriate in a

227

public leader. In this case, the flexibility of King's
style may reveal differences between black and white
audience members, and the consistency of Gandhi's style may
reveal similarities between Indian and British audience
members rather than either revealing differences between
King and Gandhi in terms of audience adaptation skills.

Discussion

The fact that King and Gandhi did not differ
significantly in terms of speaking styles suggests that
their rhetorical styles may have been a vital factor in the
overall persuasive effectiveness of the movements which they
led. To provide more support for this idea, failing
movements of which the leader demonstrated a speaking style
differing significantly from King's and Gandhi's as well as
failing movements of which the leader demonstrated a similar
style would need to be analyzed. That King and Gandhi
differed significantly in terms of speaker discomfort and
social orientation seems to indicate that the level of
confidence or the interpersonal and intrapersonal relational
skills of a movement leader does not significantly influence
the success or failure of a nonviolent movement. Further
study of speaker personality traits relating to movement
success or failure are needed to more firmly validate this
conclusion.

CHAPTER FIVE
A REVIEW OF THE NONVIOLENT EFFICACY THEORY: RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR FUTURE RESEARCH IN THE STUDY OF NONVIOLENT SYMBOLIC
ACTION AND RHETORIC AS A RHETORICAL STRATEGY

The major questions addressed by this study concerned
the effectiveness of nonviolence as a persuasive strategy.
The Nonviolent Efficacy Theory was developed as a means of
explaining why or why not nonviolence was effective in
historical movements. More importantly, NVET offers a means
of predicting the efficacy of nonviolence in specific
contemporary or future social movements.

Nonviolent Efficacy Theory Analysis

Through comparing and contrasting 16 significant
variables in two successful nonviolent movements, NVET
suggests which of these variables or which combinations of
variables are not essential for the movement's success. In
the Indian Independence Movement weaknesses were found in
the organization's economic power. In the U.S.A. Civil
Rights Movement, weaknesses were described in the movement's
economic, political, and physical power. This suggests that
a group should not rule out the use of nonviolence by reason
of low economic, physical, or political power. Application
of NVET to other successful movements should enable

228

229
researchers to determine what level of weakness in these
three areas is tolerable in a successful movement. Further,
such applications of the NVET may also yield information
about the relative importance of other variables and
combinations of variables to the efficacy of nonviolence.

Psycholinquistic Analysis

Comparisons of the two movements in terms of the
salient variables of leadership style and personality were
made possible through the use of nine psycholinguistic
measures applied to the discourse of King and Gandhi. Word
count measures revealed that both men's rhetorical styles
are within normal western rhetorical traditional expecta-
tions and do not differ significantly from one another.
Content analysis measures, however, did reveal significant
differences in speaker personality traits.

The Discomfort-Relief Quotient yielded scores which
suggest that Gandhi was much more uncomfortable during the
delivery of his five sampled speeches than was King during
the delivery of his five sampled speeches. King scored a
much higher score on both Social Orientation Scales reveal-
ing a more positive attitude toward others and toward self
than Gandhi possessed. This suggests that King was more
"people oriented" than Gandhi as revealed in positive,
negative, or lack of references to others and self in their
respective speeches.

230
Comparing the scores on one measure across the five
speeches of one speaker revealed that King's Human Interest
Score varied significantly from speech to speech and
audience to audience. Gandhi's scores varied according to
level of anxiety and positive feelings toward self depending
on the speech, situation, audience, and time of a speech.

These findings suggest that, taken by themselves, the
movement leader's level of discomfort or confidence as a
speaker and leader and the level of a leader's positive
feelings toward others and toward self have no decisive
impact on the success or failure of a nonviolent movement.
The similarity in speaking styles leaves unanswered any
questions concerning the impact of speaker style on the
success of a nonviolent movement.

Research Limitations

The single major problem in this study was the fact
that NVET was applied to historical rather than contemporary
movements. Particularly in terms of the Indian Independence
Movement, uncovering information on many of the indices by
which each variable was measured was difficult and sometimes
impossible. Therefore, many indicators were estimated and a
few omitted because the information was unavailable. With
contemporary information gathering, storing, and retrieving
technology, the NVET is more easily applicable to present
day movements.

231
Another similar difficulty was presented by the fact
that both leaders are deceased. Videotapes, of Gandhi's
speeches, at least, are not easily available. This made
quantitative analyses of paralinguistic communication
impossible. Measures of speaker rate and volume, vocal
pitch and quality, as well as analyses of hand gestures,
movement, posture, eye contact, and facial expression could
have yielded a more complete description of Gandhi's and
King's speaking styles. Perhaps it is in these areas of
presentation manner instead of verbal content that the
speakers did differ significantly.

Suggestions for Further Research

This study is presented as a beginning in gaining a
sense of how the important variables in a movement work
together to constitute a situation in which nonviolent
direct action becomes a viable means of persuasion. To have
a truly clear picture, many movements must be analyzed with
this purpose in mind. In this study, two movements
containing many similar variables were analyzed. The Indian
Independence Movement and the U.S.A. Civil Rights Movement
were similar in terms of cultural preferences for nonvio-
lence and in terms of the high level of credibility for
common higher standards, concepts, and authorities used in
persuasive appeals. The author theorizes that these are the
two most important variables for determining nonviolent

232
efficacy. However, the fact that these variables were, in
fact, present in two successful nonviolent campaigns does
not prove this theory. Further analyses of movements weak
in terms of these two variables are needed in order to
provide support for these projections.

The two movements were also similar in terms of speaker
style. Again analyses of successful movements with signifi-
cantly differing speaker style as well as analyses of unsuc-
cessful movements with similar speaker style should be
conducted. Such studies would provide information about the
relative importance of a given speaker style to the success
of a nonviolent movement. They would also yield further
information on the ways in which this variable interacts
with other variables in a movement.

Analyses of style and personality of leaders of violent
movements should be conducted for the purpose of discovering
similarities and differences between the proponents of
violence and the proponents of nonviolence. Finally,
continued analyses of Gandhi and King will more fully inform
the researcher about these two proponents of nonviolence.

Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr., had an
abiding faith in the basic goodness of humanity. Each
believed that nonviolence was a means of persuasion that not
only did not fail but could not fail because it appeals so
strongly to this inherent goodness they believed all of
humankind to possess. This study does not prove nor

233

disprove their philosophy to be true. It is hoped that the

study of the use of violence versus nonviolence as effective

means of social change will continue. In King's words:

It is no longer merely the idealist or the doom-
ridden who seeks for some controlling force
capable of challenging the instrumentalities of
destruction. Many are searching. Sooner or later
all the peoples of the world without regard to the
political systems under which they live, will have
to discover a way to live together in peace.
Nonviolence, the answer to the Negroes' need, may
become the answer to the most desperate need of
all humanity. (1963, p. 169)

May this searching and researching continue until the
needed answers are found to eliminate violence and war as
acceptable problem solving strategies between nations,
groups, and individuals.

APPENDIX A
CODER'S PROTOCOL

Word Count Measures

Counting the 100-word Segments

Count all the words in the entire speech. A word is
defined as a) any group of sounds or letters having space
on each side (Flesch, 1974); b) contractions and hyphenated
words are one word; c) numbers or acronyms used as a single
unit, e.g., "nineteen-eighty-six, " "1986," "ten thousand,"
"10,000," "U.F.," etc.; d) all names of a person's name as
on word, e.g., "Frank Nimocks", "Cordelia Ann Jones", etc.,
but count titles as separate words, e.g., "Dr. Wallace" (two
words), "Dr. Bill Wallace" (two words), "Bill Wallace" (one
word); e) names of places, such as "South Africa", "Canary
Islands" as one word, but count towns, states, countries as
separate words, e.g., "Hattiesburg, Mississippi" (two
words), "Paris, France" (two words), "Niagara Falls" (one
word), "St. Simon's Island, Georgia" (two words); f) names
of businesses, organizations, books, people or objects,
which are most often expressed together are considered one
word, e.g., "House of Representatives," "J.C. Penney Co.,"

234

235
"National Rifle Association," "Nobel Peace Prize,"
"Encyclopedia Britannica," "Peter the Great," "Lawrence of
Arabia, " etc.

After counting all the words in a speech, not including
transcriber's parenthetical editor's additions, divide the
total number of words by two. If the total number is even,
then locate the words corresponding to the total divided by
two, and the word following it. Enter the total number of
words, the number of words divided by two and the two words
with which it corresponds on the worksheet. If the total
number is odd, the total divided by two will be a
fraction. Round the fraction to the nearest even number and
enter on the worksheet this number, this number plus one,
and the two words with which these numbers correspond.

To count the first segment, begin with the first word
of the speech and count the first 100 words. End the first
segment at the beginning or end of the sentence in which the
100th word is found depending on which end is closest to
that word. Obviously, segments will vary in size according
to where the sentence nearest the 100th word ends.

To count the second segment, start with the first word
corresponding to the midpoint and count 50 words backwards.
The segment will start with the first sentence beginning or
ending nearest the 50th word. Then, beginning with the
second word corresponding with the midpoint, count 50 words

236
down. The second segment will end at the sentence ending
nearest the 50th word.

The third segment is counted by starting with the last
word in the speech and counting back 100 words. Again, the
sentence beginning nearest the 100th word begins the third
segment.

Enter the number of words for each segment on the
worksheet, the total for all three segments, and the total
divided by three in the spaces provided. Finally, separate
the words in each segment by placing single vertical lines
between them.

Counting Syllables

Count all syllables according to standard word
division. When in doubt, use Webster's New Collegiate
Dictionary, 1980, first entry. Place the number of
syllables of each word under that word. Enter the number of
syllables for each segment, the total number of the three
segments combined, and the total divided by three on the
worksheet.

Counting Sentences

Sentences are actually clauses, either independent or
dependent, in which a simple subject/predicate sentence root
is found.

237

"The car we were riding in broke down, " would be
counted as two sentences: 1) The car broke down; and 2) We
were riding.

"The two of you may quit your work, go home, and sleep
all day", would be one sentence. "Go home", and "sleep all
day", are parts of a compound predicate. Neither contains a
subject.

"Steve, and all the rest of the people in Tokyo, have
decided not to go", would be one sentence. "All the rest of
the people in Tokyo", has no predicate but is part of a
compound subject.

Sentences which are fragments are also considered
sentences even though they do not contain a subject and
verb.

"No!" "Free at last." "An amazing man." Fragments
such as these, punctuated as sentences, are counted as such.

To mark sentences, place heavy vertical slashes between
them. To mark sentences which appear in the middle of
another sentence, set them apart with heavy double
brackets.

Enter the number of sentences in each segment, the
total number of sentences for all three segments, and the
total number divided by three on the worksheet.
Example :

It surprised mellthat Aunt Frances went.]] Really. ||
The day fehe lef^jwas just like any other. \\ She,

238
Aunt Gale, and another woman([t^hey knew"7]| just decided
on the spur of the moment and left.ij

Sentence and Word Counts/Lengths

To determine the average length of the words for each
segment, divide the number of syllables in the segment by
the number of words in the segment. The average length of
the sentences in a segment is determined by dividing the
number of words by the number of sentences. The mean
lengths of words and sentences in each speech may be
determined by totaling the average words per sentence, and
the average number of syllavles per words, and dividing each
of these numbers by three. Enter these numbers on the
worksheet.

Type-Token Ratio

The purpose of the Type-Token Ratio (TTR) is to
determine the flexibility of the speaker's vocabulary by
comparing the total number of words a speaker uses to the
number of different words. First, count all the words in a
100-word segment and enter that number on the worksheet.
Next, cross out all the words that have

already been used once in the segment. So, for example, in
the following sentence,

I don't think that anything thsrt I s*^^*- about the
topic will change ^sitc way that you think about it.

239
there are 20 words (tokens) but only 14 different words
(types). The six words that had been already used are
crossed out. After crossing through all repeated words in
a segment, count the number of types (those words not
crossed out) and enter this number on the worksheet. The
TTR is the number of different words in a segment (types)
divided by the total number of words (tokens). Therefore,
in the sample sentence above the TTR would be 14/2 0 or .7.
Words are counted as different even if there is only
one letter which is changed, omitted, or added. "Jim" and
"Jim's" are two differnt words as are "a" and "an," "car"
and "cars," and "sing" and "sang".

An average number of types and tokens for a single
speech can be obtained by totaling the number of types and
tokens for the three segments and dividing these numbers by
three to obtain the mean number of types and tokens.
Dividing the mean number of types by the mean number of
tokens will yield the mean TTR for the speech.

Adjective-Verb Quotient

The Adjective-Verb Quotient (AVQ) is a measure of style
which reveals how "active" or "passive" the language of the
speaker tends to be. The only words counted as adjectives
in each segment are attributive adjectives, those adjectives
placed before the nouns that they modify. You should only
count those adjectives that are in "adjective form. " In

240
other words, do not count nouns used as adjectives when an
"adjective form" of the noun exists. So, in the sentence,
"The river looked like some sort of mystical fire water, "
"mystical" would be counted as an adjective but "fire" would
not be counted. If the sentence had read, "The river looked
like some mystical, fiery water," "mystical" and "fiery"
would be counted as adjectives. If an adjective form that
differs from the noun form of a word does no exist, the word
is counted as an adjective if used as such but not counted
if used as a noun. So, in the sentence, "The British prefer
British food," the first "British" would not be counted but
the second "British" would be. Examples of other adjectives
used as nouns (not to be counted) include "the rich," "the
elderly, " "the moving, " etc.

Quantitative, ordinal, and numeral pronouns are not to
be counted, nor should the adjective "certain" because of
its indef initeness. For example, in the sentence "Many
people followed not only this format but the next as well,"
neither "many" nor "next" should be counted. However, the
quantitative words indicating a complete group or unit
should be counted when not used as nouns. "All doctors wear
white for a whole year even though all do not prefer to. "
In the preceding sentence the words "whole" and the first
"all" would be counted as adjectives; the second "all" is a
noun.

241
Possessive pronouns, "its," "my," "Lynn's," etc. are
counted. The adjectives, "this," "that," "these," and
"those, " and "the" are NOT counted. Also, if an adjective
is repeated in succession, it is only counted once (e.g.,
"the red, red rose").

Verbs in all forms should be counted. Infinitives and
participles should be counted except when used without nouns
and preceded by an article or possessive pronoun ( "the, "
"a," "my," etc.) or by the preposition "of." No forms of
"have" ("has," "had," "having") or "be" ("am," "is," "are,"
"was," "were," "being") are counted. "Could," "should,"
"would" are not counted.

In coding each segment for adjectives and verbs, under-
line each verb and place brackets around the adjectives.
Count the number of verbs and the number of adjectives for
each individual segment and for the total three segments.
Enter these numbers on the worksheet. The AVQ for each
segment is obtained by dividing the number of adjectives for
each segment by the number of verbs in each. The AVQ for a
speech is determined by dividing the total adjectives and
the total verbs by three. The mean number of adjectives
divided by the mean number of verbs yields the AVQ for the
speech. These figures should also be entered on the
worksheet.

242
Flesch Human Interest Score

The Flesch Human Interest Score (FHIS) is used as a
measure of "human" or "person" interest or referencing in
the speeches. First, code the personal words and the
personal sentences in each segment. Personal words are as
follows :

1. All first-, second-, and third-person pronouns
except the neuter pronouns, "it," "its," "itself,"
and the pronouns "they," "them," "their," "theirs,"
and "themselves" if referring to things rather than
people. Be sure to count "he," "him," "his,"
"she," "her," and "themselves" even where these
words refer to animals or inanimate objects.

Words beginning with the hyphenated prefix "self"
are not counted (e.g., "self-help").

2. All words that have masculine or feminine natural
gender, such as "Donna Howell," "Mary," "father,"
"sister," "son." Do not count common gender words
such as "scientist," "doctor," "nurse," "spouse,"
etc, , even though the gender may be clear from the
context. Count a phrase such as "Senator James
Flynn" as two personal words (using the same rules
for counting words measure). Dieties and fictional
characters are counted.

243
3. The group words "people", "folks", "humanity",

"children", etc. are counted. Names of countries,
races, religions, etc. are not counted.
Personal sentences are as follows:

1. Spoken sentences, marked by quotation marks or
otherwise, often including speech tags such as "he
said," and "they told you," set off by colons or
commas. Do not count as "personal sentences" those
that include quoted phrases or indirect
quotations--"The boy accused his father of
'reneging' on his duties as a father." Count all
sentences in a long quotation.

2. Questions, commands, requests, and other sentences
directly addressed to the reader/listener. For
example, "Does this sound impossible?" "Remember
to complete all steps."

3. Sentences including the word "we" when the speaker
refers to self and audience. Do not count
sentences in which "we" refers to speaker and
others not including the audience.

4. Exclamations, for example, "It's fantastic!"

5. Grammatically incomplete sentences, or sentence
fragments whose full meaning has to be inferred
from the text. "Couldn't type a word." "Pretty,
though. " "No doubt she would make a better wife
than secretary." (Flesch, 1960; Evans, 1974).

244
Before calculating the FHIS you must first ascertain
the percent of personal words and the percent of personal
sentences. Read each segment of a speech placing "p.w. "
above each personal word. Indicate personal sentences by
drawing a horizontal line above each and placing a "P.S." in
the center of that line. The percent of personal words is
the number of personal sentences divided by the total number
of sentences and multiplying this quotient by 100. All
these figures should be entered on the worksheet.

The FHIS is reached by substituting the percent of
personal words and percent of personal sentences into the
following function:

FHIS = 3.635{p.w.) + .314(P.S.)

The mean FHIS, or the FHIS for each speech is deter-
mined by totalling the percents for all three segments,
dividing them by three, and placing these quotients into the
formula above. This information should be written on the
worksheet.

Content Analysis Measures
Discomfort-Relief Quotient

The Discomfort-Relief Quotient (DRQ) is a measure to
determine level of anxiety relative to the level of elation
a speaker feels. To code segments for the DRQ you should

245
underline a word or phrase that indicates some sort of
discomfort and circle words or phrases that indicate
relief .

Therefore, words with negative connotations indicating
physical, mental, emotional, or even social, political,
financial discomfort or pain should be underlined. Words
with positive connotations indicating comfort, satisfaction,
pleasure should be circled. The number of discomfort and
relief words or phrases for each segment should be entered
on the worksheet. The DRQ for each segment is found by
dividing the number of discomfort words by the number of
relief words. The mean DRQ for a speech can be found by
totaling the number of discomfort and relief words from the
three segments and dividing these totals by three. Sub-
stituting the mean number of discomfort words and the mean
number of relief words in the formula will yield the mean
DRQ.

DRQ - Discomfort
Relief

Enter these numbers in the appropriate places on the
worksheet.

Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scale

The Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scale (AX) is a measure
of the speaker's anxiety level. Each clause is coded

246
according to the following scale which describes references
to particular anxiety-producing sources (Gottschalk &
Gleser, 1964).

1. Death anxiety: references to death, dying, threat
of death or anxiety about death experienced by or
occurring to

a. self(3)

b. animate others (2)

c. inanimate objects destroyed(l)

d. denial of death anxiety(l)

2. Mutilation (castration) anxiety: references to
injury, tissue, or physical damage, or anxiety
about injury or threat of such experienced by
or occuring to

a. self(3)

b. animate others (2)

c. inanimate others(l)

d. denial(l)

3. Separation anxiety: references to desertion,
abandonment, ostracism, imprisonment, loss of love
or love of object, or threat of such experienced
by or occuring to

a. self(3)

b. animate others (2)

c. inanimate othersd)

d. denial(l)

247

4. Guilt anxiety: references to adverse criticism,
abuse, condemnation, moral disapproval, guilt, or
threat of such experienced by

a. self(3)

b. animate others (2)

c. inanimate others(l)

d. denial(l)

5. Shame anxiety: references to ridicule, inadequacy,
shame, embarassment, humiliation, overexposure of
deficiencies or private details, or threat of such
experienced by

a. self(3)

b. animate others (2)

c. inanimate others (1)

d. denial(l)

6. Diffuse or nonspecific anxiety: references by
word or phrase to anxiety and/or fear without
distinguishing type of source of anxiety
experienced by

a. self(3)

b. animate others (2)

c. inanimate others or not expressed(l)

d. denial(l)

The numbers in parentheses are the weights by which
each reference in that category is multiplied. Each
sentence should be coded by placing above that sentence the

248
number of the category, the letter of the subcategory,
and the weight assigned accordingly. If none of the cate-
gories apply, then write "n.a." above the sentence to indi-
cate "not applicable."

The following is an example of a coded passage from

Gottschalk and Gleser:

n.a.-
The most interestin' part of my life is what's

happening to me) and why my sister and them so

interested in my life.) Why did they want to put

me away, land why did they want my kids away from me.l

And it all started back when my mother died. (1961,

p. 107)

To determine the AX, count each uncoded clause as zero,

then add the weights of all the coded clauses. This sum

will be the raw score. Add .5 to the raw score and multiply

this sum by 100. This number is then divided by the total

number of words in the segment. The AX is the square root

of that quotient. More simply,

1. Obtain the raw score by adding the weights of each
coded clause.

2. Increase this number by .5.

3. Multiply this number by 100,

4. Divided this product by the total number of words.

5. Take the square root of this quotient.

Enter the correct numbers on the places indicated on
the worksheet. The mean AX for a speech is found by

249
totalling the AX scores for the three 100-word segments
and dividing this by three.

Attitude Toward Others Score

The Attitude Toward Others Score (AO) is a measure of

the speaker's positive and negative feelings toward others.

Each code in the speech is coded according to the following

categories (Gottschalk & Gleser, 1964; Markel ; 1986).

I. Interpersonal references (including fauna and
flora. )

A. To thoughts, feelings, or reported actions of
avoiding, leaving, deserting, spurning, not
understanding of others.

1. Self avoiding others (3)

2. Others avoiding self{l)

B. To unfriendly, hostile destructive thoughts,
feelings or actions.

1. Self unfriendly to others ( 1 )

2. Others unfriendly to self (2)

C. To congenial and constructive thoughts,
feelings or actions.

1. Others helping, being friendly toward
others ( 5 )

2. Self helping, being friendly toward self (5)

3. Others helping, being friendly toward
self (5)

D. To others.

1. Being bad, dangerous, strange, ill,
malfunctioning, having low value or worth,
or in trouble(3)

2. Being satisfied, intact, healthy, well(4)

250
To score a speech segment for the Attitude Toward
Others Score (AO-score), place above each clause an "AO, "
the letter, number, and weight of the category which
applies. If none of the categories apply, place an "n.a."
above the clause. If the clause seems to fit two
categories, use the category with the highest weights. If
the categories are of equal weight, then either category may
be used. The sum of the weights of the coded clauses
divided by the total number of clauses will yield the
AO-score for each segment. The mean is the total of the
weights for each segment divided by three, divided by the
quotient of the total number of clauses divided by three.

This information should be entered on the worksheet in
the correct places.

The Attitude Toward Self Score

The Attitude Toward Self Score indicates the speaker's
feelings about the speaker. Each clause in the speech is
coded according to the following categories:
II. Intrapersonal references

A. To disorientation--ref erences indicating
disorientation for time, place, person, or
other distortion of reality--past , present,
or future.

B. To self,

la. Physical illness, malfunctioning

(reference to illness or symptoms due
primarily to cellular or tissue
damage ) , ( 3 )

251

lb. Psychological malfunctioning (references
to illness not secondary to cellular or
tissue damage). (3)

Ic. Malfunctioning of indeterminate origin
(references to illness or symptoms not
definitely attributable either to
emotions or cellular damage). (3)

2. Getting better. (5)

3a. Intact, satisfied, healthy, well;

definite positive affect or valence
indicated. ( 4 )

3b. Intact, satisfied, healthy, well; flat,

factual or neutral attitudes expressed. ( 4 )

4. Not being prepared or able to produce,
perform, act, not knowing, not sure. (2)

5. To being controlled, feeling controlled,
wanting control, asking for control or
permission, being obliged or having to
do, think, or experience something. ( 3 )

C. Denial of feelings, attitudes, or mental state
of the self. (1)

After reading each clause, decide which category best
fits and place a "AS," the letter, numeral, and weight corre-
sponding with that category above the clause. If no category
applies, then place "n.a." above the clause. After all
clauses have been coded, total the weights and divide
this number by the total number of clauses. To find the AS-
score for a speech, total the weights for all three segments,
total the clauses for all three segments, and divide each of
these two numbers by three. The mean segment weight divided
by the mean number of clauses will yield the ASI-score for the
speech. This information should be entered on the worksheet.

APPENDIX B
WORKSHEETS FOR CODERS

Word Count

Total words in speech

Total words divided by two ; words

corresponding with halfway point ;

Number of words in first segment
Number of words in second segment
Number of words in third segment

Total number of words in 3 segments
Mean number of words per segment

Syllable Count

Number of words in segment 1

Number of words in segment 2

Number of words in segment 3

Total number of words for 3 segments
Mean number of words for 3 segments

Number of syllables in segment 1

Number of syllables in segment 2

Number of syllables in segment 3

Total number of syllables for 3 segments
Mean number of syllables for 3 segments

252

253

Number of syllables per word in segment 1 (Number of
syllables divided by number of words)

Number of syllables per word in segment 2 (Number of
syllables divided by number of words)

Number of syllables per word in segment 3 (Number of
syllables divided by number of words)

Mean number of syllables per word for 3 segments
(Mean number of words divided by mean number of syllables)

Number of syllables per word for 3 segments combined
(Total number of syllables for 3 segments divided by total
number of words for 3 segments)

Sentence Count

Number of sentences in segment 1

Number of sentences in segment 2

Number of sentences in segment 3

Number of words in segment 1

Number of words in segment 2

Number of words in segment 3

Total number of sentences for 3 segments
Total number of words for 3 segments

Mean number of sentences for 3 segments (Total number
of sentences divided by 3)

Mean number of words for 3 segments (Total number of
words divided by 3 )

Number of words per sentence for segment 1, on the
average (Number of words divided by number of sentences)

Number of words per sentence for segment 2, on the
average (Number of words divided by number of sentences)

254

Number of words per sentence for segment 3, on the
average (Number of words divided by number of sentences)

Mean number of words per sentence for 3 segments (Mean
number of words divided by mean number of sentences)

Number of words per sentence for 3 segments combined
(Total number of words divided by total number of sentences.

Type Token Ratio

Number of Types for segment 1

Number of Tokens for segment 1

TTR for segment 1 (Number of types divided by number of
tokens)

Number of Types for segment 2

Number of Tokens for segment 2

TTR for segment 2 (Number of types divided by number of
tokens )

Number of Types for segment 3

Number of Tokens for segment 3

TTR for segment 3 (Number of types divided by number of
tokens)

Total number of types for all 3 segments

Total number of tokens for all 3 segments

TTR for 3 segments combined (Total number of types
divided by total number of tokens)

Mean number of types for 3 segments (Total number of
types divided by 3)

Mean number of tokens for 3 segments (Total number of
tokens divided by 3 )

Mean TTR (Mean number of types divided by mean number
of tokens )

255
Adjective Verb Quotient

Number of adjectives in segment 1
Number of verbs in segment 1

AVQ for segment 1 (Number of adjectives divided by
number of verbs )

Number of adjectives in segment 2

Number of verbs in segment 2

AVQ for segment 2 (Number of adjectives divided by
number of verbs )

Number of adjectives in segment 3

Number of verbs in segment 3

AVQ for segment 3 (Number of adjectives divided by
number of verbs )

Total number of adjectives for 3 segments

Total number of verbs for 3 segments

Total AVQ (Total number of adjectives divided by total
number of verbs )

Mean number of adjectives for 3 segments (Total number
of adjectives divided by 3)

Mean number of verbs for 3 segments (Total number of
verbs divided by 3 )

Mean AVQ for 3 segments (Mean number of adjectives
divided by mean number of verbs)

Flesch Human Interest Score

Number of personal words in segment 1
Number of words in segment 1

Percent of personal words for segment 1 (Number of
personal words divided by number of words; multiply this
quotient by 100)

Number of personal words in segment 2

256

Number of words in segment 2

Percent of personal words for segment 2 (Number of
personal words divided by number of words; multiply this
quotient by 100)

Number of personal words in segment 3

Number of words in segment 3 ^

Percent of personal words for segment 3 (Number of
personal words divided by number of words; multiply this
quotient by 100)

Total number of personal words for 3 segments

Total number of words for 3 segments

Percent of personal words for 3 segments combined
(Total number of personal words divided by total number of
words, then multiplied by 100)

Mean number of personal words for 3 segments (Total
number of personal words divided by 3)

Mean number of words for 3 segments (Total number of
words divided by 3 ) _^

Mean percent of personal words (Mean number of personal
words divided by mean number of words, multiplied by 100)

Number of sentences for segment 1
Number of sentences for segment 2
Number of sentences for segment 3

Number of personal sentences in segment 1
Number of personal sentences in segment 2
Number of personal sentences in segment 3

Percent of personal sentences for segment 1 (Number of
personal sentences divided by number of sentences, multiply
this quotient by 100)

Percent of personal sentences for segment 2 (Number of
personal sentences divided by number of sentences, multiply
this quotient by 100)

257

Percent of personal sentences for segment 3 (Number of
personal sentences divided by number of sentences, multiply
this quotient by 100)

Mean number of personal sentences (Total number of
personal sentences divided by 3)

Mean number of sentences (Total number of personal
sentences divided by 3 )

Mean percent of personal sentences

(Mean number of personal sentences divided by mean number of
sentences, multiply this quotient by 100)

FHIS for segment 1 (Percent of

personal words for segment 1 multiplied by 3.635 added to
the percent of personal sentences for segment 1 multiplied
by .314)

FHIS = pw(3.635) + ps(.314)

FHIS for segment 2 (Percent of

personal words for segment 2 multiplied by 3.635 added to
the percent of personal sentences for segment 2 multiplied
by .314)

FHIS for segment 3 (Percent of

personal words for segment 3 multiplied by 3.635 added to
the percent of personal sentences for segment 3 multiplied
by .314)

Mean FHIS for all 3 segments combined

(Mean percent of personal words multiplied by 3.635 added to
the percent of personal sentences multiplied by .314)

Discomfort Relief Quotient

Number of discomfort words for segment 1
Number of relief words for segment 1

DRQ for segment 1 (Number of

discomfort words divided by the sum of the number of dis-
comfort words and the number of relief words)

258

Discomfort
Discomfort + Relief

Number of discomfort words for segment 2
Number of relief words for segment 2

DRQ for segment 2 (Number of

discomfort words divided by the sum of the number of dis-
comfort words and the number of relief words)

Number of discomfort words for segment 3

Number of relief words for segment 3

DRQ for segment 3 (Number of dis-
comfort words divided by the sum of the number of discomfort
words and the number of relief words)

Mean number of discomfort words for all 3 segments
(Total number of discomfort words divided by 3)

Mean number of relief words for all 3 segments (Total
number of relief words divided by 3 )

Mean DRQ for all 3 segments

(Mean number of discomfort words divided by the sum of the
mean number of discomfort words and the mean number of
relief words)

Gottschalk-Gleser Anxiety Scale

Number of clauses in segment 1

Number of clauses in segment 2

Number of clauses in segment 3

Total number of clauses for all 3 segments

Mean number of clauses (Total number divided by 3

Raw score for segment 1 (Sum of the weights assigned to
coded clauses)

259

Raw score for segment 2 (Sum of the weights assigned to
coded clauses)

Raw score for segment 3 (Sum of the weights assigned to
coded clauses)

Total Raw Score for all three segments

Mean Raw Score (Total Raw Score divided by 3

AX score for segment 1 (Raw score divided by the number
of clauses)

AX score for segment 2 (Raw score divided by the number
of clauses)

AX score for segment 3 (Raw score divided by the number
of clauses)

AX score for speech (estimated) (Mean Raw score divided
by the mean number of clauses)

Attitude Toward Others Score

Number of clauses in segment 1

Number of clauses in segment 2

Number of clauses in segment 3

Total number of clauses for all three segments

Mean number of clauses for speech (Total number divided
by 3)

Raw Score for segment 1

Raw Score for segment 2

Raw Score for segment 3

Total Raw Score

Mean Raw Score (Total divided by 3)

AO-score for segment 1 (Raw score divided by number of
clauses )

260

AO-score for segment 2 (Raw score divided by number of
clauses )

AO-score for segment 3 (Raw score divided by number of
clauses)

AO-score for speech (estimated) (Mean Raw Score divided
by mean number of clauses)

Attitude Toward Self Score

Number of clauses in segment 1

Number of clauses in segment 2

Number of clauses in segment 3

Total number of clauses

Mean number of clauses (Total divided by 3)

Raw score for segment 1

Raw score for segment 2

Raw score for segment 3
Total raw score

Mean raw score (Total divided by 3

AS-score for segment 1 (Total raw score divided by
number of clauses)

AS-score for segment 2 (Total raw score divided by
number of clauses )

AS-score for segment 3 (Total raw score divided by
number of clauses)

Mean AS-score for speech (estimated) (Mean raw score
divided by mean number of clauses)

APPENDIX C

SPEECH SEGMENTS CODED FOR WORD COUNT AND

CONTENT ANALYSIS MEASURES

Speech Segments Coded for Word Count Measures

GANDHI/#l/BOMBAY/18 96
First IQO-word Segment

pw pw

1 1 stand I before I you, I today, ) as [ representing] the|

1 1 2 1 2 1 4 1

signatories f to i this I document ,ii who i pose [a-s 1 representatives 1 1 of
^^ 113 111 5 1 '

th-el;_l , OOD , 0 0^ L British i Indians' at] present; residing[ inl South

Africa "t-l-a (country I which | has i sprung iinto [sudden 1 prominence!
4 12 11 '~^ — 2 2 3

owingl ttrl trheirvastlllgold] [fields | of (Johannesburg; and i th« IITat'i!
2 11 —1-^1 ^ 1 1 4 111

pw pw

Jameson Raid. II Th-i-3-lisirmy|irsolellqualif ication. ii ^-laml-al personl
4 11 ^r^l -' ^ 5 1 1 1 2 PS

, . fr= pw

of few I words. 11 Tire [cause, ( however, I fori whi-eh-li lami fee i plead I

111 1 1 3^1 1111 — E

be-fuxel ytTrr [tirrs-l evenindj rs jsol greatlj thatj ± i venture 1 t-ol think 1
2 .1 1 3 ^111 11 --2 Ps~ 1 — T-

pw 1 ; 1

ttra-tl ytru-lwill | overlook | the ff aults I of !-bh« Isoeaker 1 or .'rather ,|
1 1 r~ 3 1 1 1 1 " 2 1 2

ttre I reader |of-|th-i-si paper .ij
1 2 11 ^

GANDHI/#1

Second 100-word Segment

tted'

With i the iigreatestl defer encelto |these|view,| wei submi
11^2— 3 11 11 j-

pw pw pw
t-o Mr . ! Chamberlain) in i a. memorial ,li f ori-w-ei did i not i succeed;
12 3 114 11' —r^" 1 2

bef orei t+rei Natal j Parliament, '■ thati f enri fe-he; purposes of , th«
2 12 3 111 3'll

261

262

Bill, I th&t. lis, I legally I speaking, ilndiaj -d-idi andi d-oe*. possess I
1 1 13 '- ^ 2 ^ ' 3 • 3—' 1 ' i 1.^^- 2 '

ielectivelllrepresentativell institutions! founded! oni-t-f^tei

parliamentary j franchise . I i Such] i-s |t-he I opinion i expressed ibyl
5 ^ 2 lll'3 ' — ^^^—2 1

■fch-e , London Times ,u 3i±ehl i-3- ife-he-|©Bd.-n-i-eH I o#l fe4=>e-i newspapers I i«l
1 ■ 3 lll''^3 11 ^3 1

Na-t-e-t,II-a«d- js-tteh-ii-s i alsoi t-hel oe-iH-i-ofi-1 e-f ! t-hei membersll who L

2 'l'l'l2'l'^3 11 2 1

voted if-CHMth-ei Biii,l aft-d-l, ar±s-ei o-§i anirabli'i juris ti i-n-i Na4>^i.|i ^vtel
^ — 'll 1 1 2 11^2^-^2 1 2 "l

.re |!ver\ni anxious | t-e-l know| th-e-i o-Bi-fWro-Hj' of-i feh-e iliegal] lluminariesi
1 '- 2-^' 2 1 r- 1 3 1 1^2"^ 3

here jj
1 ^

GANDHI/#1

Third 100-word Segment

pw
All! thisi should! servel asl a| warningi andl ani impetus.! I wel
111 — i- — 112^11 ^3 l'

are I hemmed! in| onlfe-i-ill sides! i-n-( South Af rica.l I -wel^-E^e I yet j
1 1 1 l"- P 1 1 4 PS 1 1 ' 1

pw-

inf ants . I ! W-e| havel-a-l right I to I appeal! t-o-l youl fori protection
2 1 1 l' I 1 -^5^^^^:^i 1 ' ^ 1 1 ^ 3 pg

-pw ; — : pw-

We-i place |ouri position! bef orel-y€Hih,li andl now I the I responsibility!

1 1 l'3 2 ^11 ll' ^6
. _ — pw-.

will Irest it-o-ia- i(veryli;fgrea~Bi extent! o-n liyourj i shoulders, I if I th^\
1 — 1 — 1 1^2 ^LH-i-n I j^ili^^-J 2 11

yokel of | oppression! is i noti removed if rom iiea-rii necks ,,1 Beingi

11 3 ■ 1 1 2 1 ■- 1 1 2 '

-pw-

under! it! we! can[only| cryiouti ±fl|anguish.|i -ttf i-s i &©i-i you, iPourii
2 PS 1 1 — T 2 -T— 11 ^ 11 1 1 '- 1-'

^i:^; ^_ = pw pw pw

[elder' I cHrtd lif ree'rl! brethren, i4:-o i remove !-i-4i-. ii I i am [surei we-l shall i
— 2^1-2-' 2 1 2 1 1111 3— '

ft<>fe- 1 h-ave- 1 cried I €rtit-i i-H( vain.ii
1 1 — 1 111

263
GANDHI/#2/T0 THE UNTOUCHABLES/1921

First 100-word Segment

pw ,

1 1 regard! untouchability ! as i thel' greatestl blot I oni
l' 2 6 11—2^1 1

Hinduism. r I Thisi ideal wasi not] brought i home' tolmel by!:^nv]lFitte'i]|
4 1 3 11 ~rilll -k-^ — 2 -"

experiences! during I th« j South African I struggle. I i It | is! rrotj
5 21 5 '2 111

pw I .

d«« I fee|-t4^e! fact I thatt I I wars I oncel an| agnostic. 1 1 i-t i irs lequallyl
111111111 3 11 3

wrong! t-e)- 1 1 h i nk , (fas I somel people I dojl thptl^' ha.vel takenl^^l

views I f romifmyji study l of i Christian|f religiousll literature.?!
1 1 -1^ 11 2 — i -^ 4

These! v-i-ewsl date! as I far I back I arsi ^bi^el timeMwhenl^l was! neitherl
1 1 — I — 111111 1112

enamouredl of , I nor! we-s! acquainted i with, ' the I Bible I or I tirel
3- 1 11 "^ 1 1 2 11

followers I of! t-he l*-irb±e-Jl
3 112

il wa-s! hardly I yetl twelve Iwhen-! this! idea' had; dawned j on;

112 1 1 1 1 3 1 I 1

me. l>
1

GANDHI/#2

Second 100-word Segment

Weiarel guiltyi of i havingi suppressed t'Su^l brethren;li^^
112 12 2 r' 2 1

ish

make 1 them] crawlj omrEhei^i bellies ;|l ^i havei made 1 trS&rr j rnib

— 2~ 1 — T 1 ~ 1 2 11 r— 1 r-

r«i«-i3l nosesi -eHv thei ground;! I with I eyes | redi w-i-^^l rage, I ^!p^\ guj

1-^21 1 1 1 -I 1 1 I PS 1 r

tfe-«iH-|out |of| railway! compartmentstt-whati more] thani thisi hasl

11 1 2 3 11 i Lps_2

British! Rulei done? n Wh-a^^i charge ,1 ifthati wei bring iagainst| C^r!
2 1 IPS 1 1^111 2 -S

andi C^wyerjli may 1 not i othersi -e«d ievenil€HH:!iiOw3i pe^le, 1 la^ latl

1 3 ^ , „ 1 1 ^ 12 PS 1 ~ I 2 ~T • 1

loupll doors? l.^^eTought I toi purae 1 oiF:?selves 1 ei 1 t-4^isi pollution. ||
"-11 1 -T— 1 — T^ '211 3

It I is| idle! te[ talki-o-f I Swaraj! 1 so 1 longi asi-^J^fe-ido | R€>t-i protect |
112 1 ""~r" 1 2 111111 r

264

thej weak i a-H^m^bel helpless, liorl s© | loagl-arSi i^iisipossibleilfor |
11 112 111111 3 1

a i[s"ingle]| Swarajist! to| injurei the i f eelings| rrf i any! individual Ji
1^2-^ 3 12 1 2 12 5

GANDHI/#2

Third 100-word Segment

1 1 cai^not! understand iwhyl ^ou i should! you3?selves |

countenance 'the I distinction! between; Dheds . andi Bhanqis .i :
3 1 3 2 1 1 ' 1

There , is I no i difference] b^e-twrgen i them, il Even! inlln'ormall times
111 3 2 1 21-2^1

iTneirji occupation, i-s- las I honorable i a^ , that! of! lawyersi of|
•-1 4 11 4 111 2 1

Government! servants.];
3 2

Tk-e-lHindusI are Inot 1 sinful! byi nature ;ii t^ey[ HTg i s unk I inl
1 2 112 12 11 I~ 1

ignorance. [1 Untouchability )must| be j extinct! i-rrl this ifveryll
3 6 11211-2 -'

year. 1 1 Twol e*(-the (strongest!! desires (thra-ti keep! M^l in ! flesh!
1 111—2 2 '^l 1111

a«d^bon"^f a-j?e!4:4te I emancipation! af i -tire I untouchables |-a:n^| "trhe '
11^11 5 11 4 11

protectioni eil^hel cow.\ f Wheni thesefptwojl d^s±-r^s\ ax^l
3 1 11 I'l'-l-* 2 l'

f ulfilled,|i t-he^re I i-s-! Swaraj ,1 -arrrd-j therein! liesipmvliPawtT]! Moksha,
2 : i 1 2 ] ? ~T -1-^' H. -' 2

May I Go^i give l-jK&tji strength! to! work I out! lySurjl salvation.i i
— I ' 1 ~r — 1 1 1 T" 1 "^ 1 3

GANDHI/#3/APPEAL TO AMERICA/1931

First 100-word Segment

Inlimyjlopinion, 1 thel Indian (struggle! bearsi rnl itsi con-
I'l 3 13 2 1 11

sequencesl not 1 only 1 upon 1 India I buti-t^pon l-tHre i(whole]l world. \; It|
4 122 3121^ 1 1

contains lone -fifth lofl th^ ! human! race . li ^-t j represents |One | of i
T 2 11 2 1 ' 1 ~T 1 1

t-he |,mostlii'ancien'8| civilizations . il i-t ■ has i traditionsi handed!
l'~l^"2-' 5 11 3 2"

265

down I f romj tens i ei\ thousands ! &§ ! years ,|| some' -©f. 'which, ' toi -fctre'
11 ll' 2 11 111 11

astonishmenti-of l-tire IworldJ remain; intact .' I Nol doubtlH^^ei
4 111 2 2 111

ravages I of i time| havej affected] t4^ei purity i -of I that;
3 11 1 3 1 3 11

civilizationiasi theyi-herve j-HratJ -cr^\ many (othe^i culturesi andl
5 1111122 2 1

nrairy Jinstitutions.ll
2 4

If( fndiai isl be I revivei t-he | glory I o-S jf"8e2ira*H>-i-eH5i past,j
13 11 ~2 1 2 ^-1-2 1

she I can I only I doi soi whenll s«e I attains![?te;^| freedom J i
22'211112 1 2

GANDHI/#3

Second 100-word Segment

It I is ' ai matteri of ritilll^eepe'^! humiliation! tol Wei that!
1 11 2 l~l^-2^ 5 111

wei Hindus! regard I several! millionsl e^ll^urjirSwn)! kithi andl kini as!
1 2 — ^ 3 2 1 ^r^-1^ 1111

(to'^i degradedl eveni f orl^H^ ltouch.|l ^^i referi-feel the ilso-calle^l

^r 3 2 1-1 11 ~^ 1 1 •- 2

"untouchables" .! I
4

Thesel are • nolfimall' weaknesses I in' a ! nation! struggling! t-e'
1 1 1 ~ 1 3 1 1 2 PS 2 1

be! f ree.ii An-di hencei youl will] find; t.4«-fe! 4.-n\ thisi struggle!
1 1 1_ 1 11 ~T 111 2

through i self -purification! ^ , havei assignedi-a'[f oremos"5f place'
1 ' 6 11 2 1 2-^1

^re It-he 'removal I of- i t^>e| curse| &f! untouchability! -a-Hdl 4:-4*ei
113 1111 6 11

^^^1

ttainmentl &i i unity| amongst! all I th^'dif f eren'^l classes '^-n^
3 1 3 2 ^^_^_^

itiesl ef i India | representing I t4^a i'di£-f-ef-<afvtJ [creeds .
' 1 3 —^ 1^3 - 1

commun
4

266

GANDHI/#3

Third 100-word Segment

And( from! thati day| forward! India ihasi become llprogressivelyl
11112 312^4

poor,

Nol matter I what I mayl be\.aaidl to l the I contrary ,H itl isl al
12 111111 3 111

fhistoricalJl fact l\ttrHlr\ before i-t±re \ advent \ of \ trtre- 1 East India
""41 1 2 1111^ 7

Company, \ thesel villagers 1 were\ notl idle,i\ andv^en^hoi wajli^imay i

seel todayl|th-a-tl th^HHlvlirJrager^larei not-irdi-e-ll it,i therefore,!
^211 3'' 112 1 2

requiresi-rroi(greati\ ef f ort 1 or* learningi txriknowl\th"art"l thHHB'l
— 2 11^2 1 2'^11 1_1

vi-i-ia:qHT-s-tmust I starved if I they I cannoti work if orlTijSI months 1 ini
3 1 I 1 1 2 I 1-1 11

thie I year.H
1 _]

Ma'y-\fVn-otr, I then,i on \ behalf! xrf-l th-eHHlfs"emi-starve"ail

millions, I appeal! txi( th-e-i conscience I of |-ttre Iworldl trri come > tp 1
? ^ 1 ] 2 1 1 1 l-_ZXZ_l_

tire! rescued of Uai pec^lei dyingi troi regain \itsl liberty? i\
1 2 1 1^2^ "^^T-^ 1 ^ 1 3

GANDHI/#4/T0 THE PLENARY SESSION/1931
First 100-word Segment

fVdojnotl thinklthatl anything fftha^l f i^cani sayf thisi

1 1 1 ~r~ 1 3 "^ '^ r^ 1 1 — r 1

eveningli e«-n| possibly I influence I the I decision | of I t+rel Cabinet .|i
2^1 3 T~ 1 3 113

Probably I the |-d^ciT?i:on 1 has 1 been! already! taken. || Mattersi-of 1
3 1 3 1 1_ 3 2 2 1

th«-l liberty! trf-ipractically la ilwhole"li continent \ canl hardly/ be|
1 31 411^ 3 12 1

decided! bylfmere]! argumentation,' or I even (negotiation. !|
3 1^15 12 5

N«go-tia-biron| -ha* I its| purpose land! ira-s-! i-ts | play,i but I only | under!
5 112 1111 122

certain] conditions.il Without I those I contS-rti-orrs-i negotiations!
2 3 2 13 5

areiaiffruitlesslitask.il But! ¥^|do i-mrbl want' to 1 go I into! all I
1 1^2 1 11 11 T 1^21

267

pw pw

these! matters .11 ^-|wafl-t I asl f ar| a-s | possiblei-fai confine i myselfj
12 1 "I — 111 3 1 TT 2

— _ V^

within 1 the ilfour*,! cornersi of I thel -crrndi-tTonBll that ! you,! Prime
2 1 - 1 ^s 2 1 1 3^ 11

Minister,! readi tnD-lthi-s- Conference! at! rirts Ifopenindi meeting. ||
4 — r~ 1 1 3 11-^3^2

GANDHI/#4

Second IQO-word Segment

PS
— — pw

No. i| ItslmissionI isj today, tol convert | Englishmen.il 1 1 dpi

1 1 2 1 2 ' 1 2 3 1 ^

noti want I t-oH break! the i bond! between! England' and ' India,! but1-t

1 -—L 1 ~T 112 2 1 3 11

I , pw
^-watrtrlfcei transform! that! iso-nd.!' f ! warrt I trol -traTrs:^ ornr I tha±l
-1 — I — 1 2 111 "~r 1 ■■ "T2 L

slavery I intolfcompletell freedomi for iimyll country .1 1 Call! it j
3 2 - ^ P^ 2 1 '-i^ 2 -n— 1

pw pw

---■ ' -'.keJl -i-iwilllTTotl

'.oorftBi-e+^e|l independence! or (whatever lyoul lik
~ 2 4 13 11

quarrel labout Ithatl word,l larrd-l eveni thoughlmy- |countrymenl may |

2 — 21112 11 3 ^

pw — _ , , pw ,

dispute Iwithl me I for Ihaving | taken I someiiother!l wtTrd-,lll-l shall | bel
— f 1 11 2 ^ —2 1-2--1 11 1

able I t-o-ibear idowni th-at |oppositionii so | longl as lt-h«- Icontent 'of!
2 1 -T- 1 1 ^"^ 3 1 l"" 1 1 2 1

,-f^ pw PW;^ _ _

t4*el woirdii t^'jatj-yt3ti-l ma5^isuggest|—tro-imeji bears! -the Hsameli meaning. li
1 1 l-b- 1 1 -T^ — T^ 1 9 — I — 1 - 1 ^ 2

GANDHI/#4

Third IQO-word Segment

pw pw ,pw , ^ pw

The loperatives,! meni andl women,! hugged \me.li They I treated 1 iwej
1 4 112 T 1 1 2 1

, pw_, pw

as I one I of Itheiri! own.i | I (shall ineverl f orget ( that.
11111 1 ~[ 2 7— 1

pw pw I

€-lam (carrying \withlmis-ithousands 1 upon! thetratk-ftd-s l-o-fi
1 1 Y ^ 1 1 2 "^2 2 1

pw pw ,pw , , 1

English i friendships.! i -X ido i not (know i them 1 but fi-l read i^^ha^: *

2 2 1 ir_.i_jiT:z"-^i^_J-_J_1I=— i-PS_

af f ectioni in il'th^i-rjieyes 1 a-s-i early i-ifi! the imorningi^i walk i
3_ ' 1~11 1 2 ^ 11 2 i_zi:zL-

through (your!] streets.; i Alllthisi hospitality , I a-JrtI t^Mrsl
1—11 11 5 11

268

kindness] willi never i be i effaced! f r,omifi^\ memory J I noi matter I
2 I 2 1 2 J =^ 3 — J- — J 2

whatl^efalls.'i'^k^unhapp'^l land, li ^1 thank 1 i^ou if orlif^u^l
1 PS 2 -1 ■- 3 - 1 1 r 1 1-1

forbearance.
3

GANDHI/#5/T0 THE A. I . S . A. /1944

First IQQ-word Segment

Today, V £\ willi tryj toj explainrmyli thoughts|-tei youi mora
2 1 T 1 1 ^ ^1^ 1 11 1

pw ^_ ^1

clearly land I present I them[ tei -yoii-i in [ a' different! f rami from:
2 ^ 1 ^ — 2 1 1 1 1 1^ 3 ^_ 1 1

what; -1 1 have I said l during I the ilTas^lli'^wdi days.l \ [Ourjl work |hadl-a\

1 1 1 —1— 2 1 ^ r*-r f ^1^ 1 ' 1 1

pw pw pw

(verylljhumbldl beginning. 1 1 Wheni-Pi started I khadil-t^ hadl withi me^|
_ ^u«_ 2*3 11 ~~^ 2 r 1 1 1 '

pw I

apart I f-ronrl Maganlalbhai 1 and [ others iwhol had [elected I te I live |

2 1 4 12 11 3 1 T —

pw pw pw . I pw

and I diel WT-thl-nrg, I Vithaldasbhaij anTMa-l f ew I sisters.l ' Vithaldasj

ll'll 4 1112 3

I, pw

was,l at Ithatl time,| fi^jrtin^i for I ttiH-l labourers,!' but | he|. gave i
1111 2 11 3 'ill

_pw_ pw . pw

up:lhisllshopi a-rtd-l joined I mg i ini this Ijunremunerative] vrork.i i we i
1-111 1 111 6 -'I 1

hadi them noti tire ifTaintes^i ideal I as |-to iwirert i tire- 1 future i trad: iin I

1 111-2 31111 2 11

pw
store, fcrr i us .i i
111

GANDHI/#5

Second 100-word Segment

Iti may 1 declarei mei a ifool if ori,(myjl{talli talkl about! the I

1 ] : 'JZF^.. ] ] I L_rL__J_ 12 1

charkha.i I The it ask I ofl making \-bhe Itrrirarkira-, '[[which |-£-crr 1

2 1 ll"2' 1 2 Vl 1

centuries 1 had I been I a- [symbol [-oi\ poverty, | helplessness,!

3 111213 3

injustice land (forced 1 labour, I the i -symbol I now| o-f-i^ight^'inon-

3 ll~'2 12112

violen~ai strength, | crt\ the jliewji.^ociaT!! order i a-nd |of \^he[irrem\[
4 1 ll'-l-2 2 1111

269

on|fS'il3| shoulders. i| we' have I to | ciianael
1 ^PS 2 111 I

history. II And ( 1 1 waiLL.' t"©! _dQ. I i tl through! j^ou. I'

W, hopej^u" I follow llwhatl^iam i^a^ijig.ll Butliflinl spiteltrf!
1 — t^ ^ 1 7 — 111^ 111^1 1

xt!^CTn|*Tlnotl lieiiav:sllt"tra-t 'ttrs'lch-aT'JcnsnTaglTnTe! powerilfcJi
1^1 1 1 ''^^^^^^ L-PS_^^ L i 1 2 L_ps__

achieve ! swara j Jl T^willl ask |^ru-| to! leave] Sie.ll Herel ^^ I arej att
2~ 2 1 ~L Tpg 1 1 I 1 11 11

th-e I crossroads . !i ^-f I tottI continue i with! ttc"! withouti faithiryoni
1 ' 2 1-^1 ~Vs~^ 11 2 11

wid-tfbel deceiving I nfe-laTrd! doing |a |fgrea"^| wrong! toltrlTel
—1— ' 1 - -3 11 2 ^ 1—1-^ l^'l 1

country.
2

GANDHI/#5

Third 100-word Segment

nw PW ,

1 I do! not! knowfiif I ■t-ihave|.auQ^££d^ I in i covey mg/iniv] (ideal

toliy^u].!! Pf |^|h-av^ I beeni able |-fol carry /convictioni/ pleasel dQ I
Ip^l^ 111 ' 1 ' -7—' 1 2 3 "^ 1 1

one I thing. 1 1 Those I of I ^u ffwho ( want I tpolremainl withi mill giyefifel
1 psl 1 11^1' ~I~ 1 PS 2 1 tl 1 1

T3W-

i:n iwritingllthat 1 fxrcr Irecrard Ithel charkhaj f romi today [as ft±re I
12 11 ~2 1 2 PS 1 2 11

emblemi o^ inonviolence .n mu lira-7-e liroi make L'yiSurii decisionl
2 ' 1 ' 4 "1 1 1 ~~L'~ ^ l-ps 3

fee^ey-. 1 1 ^-# lyt^idei iro-t lor 1 cannot ir-eg^rd i-trhe ' -cira-rkiTa- 1 as | irhe
2 ' 1 1 't: 1 1 2 ^ 1 ■ 2 11

effltHbefflltfrf I rtomrdroierrere i and I yet Irema-rrri wtrttr 1 ifre ^ I them ytSu-iwilli
2 1 PS 4 IT.' 2 11111

thereby! pij-t [yourself I in ' anlfawkward"!! plight la-nd-| also! dragi We|
21 2 ll'^2-'l 1 2 ~T~^ 1

down I with [-yeti .

270
KING/#1/T0 MONTGOMERY BOYCOTTERS/1955
First 100-word Segment

JMyllfriendsl ^ e I are I certainlyi ;very| Ihappy | to! see leachl of

, PS

you lout I this (evening. 1 1 We la-re [here I t^is ^ ev^fti-^^g I f or|rseriouslj

business. II We I a-ife |hei?elin lalfgeneraT] Isense | because if irstl-a-Hdi
2 1 ' 1 1 1 1 - 3 -' 1 2 ' 1 1

f oremost 1 v^e- Va-r-e [(AmericaTJ I citizens,! landl^e^ a^-e 1 determined I tej
_ 2 1 1 ^"^ 4 -^ps 3 1 1 ' 1 3 ' 1

he3f« lbeea-tje« lofHf^^lllove Ifojf [democracy, i beea-th&e Jef ( o^L;'aeep-
l 2 l*— 1-^1 1 4 2 1—1-^—

[thicl^ laction i is I th-e iigreatestli, form !-€>#- igovernment, on iearth. j I

^ t- 2 1 ' 1 '— 2 -■ 1 1 pe 3 1 1

-pw —

But I we [a^-e-i her-e-iift l-a- ilspecif icl| sense, i b-eea^aei-o-f- tt+te-'bus
ll'l 1 11—^3 -^ 1 2 11 1

situation! irn IMontgomery. I i
4 14

KING/#1

Second 100-word Segment

,-.,,, friendsl'^want lit I to | be I knownllthat | wFTe] going ifee
4l^ 1 1 ' — ± — 1 1 ]pg 1 1 1 '^-S ' 1

work |with|[grin^i andl|Tirffli determination j 4h>i gain_j justice j on, the
1 1 — t^ 1 1 — 5 pg 1 1 2 p- 1 1

buses |in| this) city, n Afi-d-jv^e | are jnot ) wrong ,jj ^ j a-£--e-:rtet i-w-PGfi-gi|
2 11 pg 2 111 pg 1 111 1 1

in I what i Ife- f ai--e- /doing . / 1 If 1 v^e 1 a-£^e iw^^Hg, 1 Itheni thel Supreme
l' 1 ll2^"l 1 1 l^pgl 1

Court lof I trkis-1 nation I is /w-Beftg.M l-i.-\^4 \ -a*^ i w-r-oftg , 1 1 t-ke 1

3 1 12 1 l"llll Ipg

Constitution\ o^ l%^=>e-l United States 1 ts- 1 vwr-oftg . n -IlT6^Tii--e^\
4_ 1 _ts j 1 psl 1 1 1

wfofig-, llGod Almighty jis(w*^Hg.|| if jv^fa-r-e-l w-r-oft^,|iJesus ^

Nazareth! was | merely | a f Utopian I dreamer] a-ri4l never jcame ldown!4:-oi
6 'l2psl 4 2'l 2 -— i— 1 1

earth. II I-#l w^ia-E^e iwi^ng ,i 1 ju-st-iree \ i-s-l a I lie .U
1 111 l^-^2 111

271
KING/#1

Third 100-word Segment

pv _-

Welarel qoinal tol iiork.! together J I iRiqhtii here! inl
1 1 - 2 - 11 3 "-r^i 1

Montgomery I when I the I history | books I are|-written liniirhe; future,

% ^ 1 l' 3 1 1 2 1^ 1 2

pw
somebody i will Ihavej to | say il" There I livedi a [race! of | people, | of,

_Z pw ZL pw

!black||p-eoprie,l[IleecYJl locks 1 andj!bi.«trk1| complexion, | crf-j peOTiieji

pw ^ pw — '.

who ihad -threlfmoralll courage I to! stand! up I for ntheirij rights, j i Aird

I 1 1 — 2 ^S 2 1 ' r~ 'I'll' 1 1_

pw ^12

thereby 1 they linjectedl a-[nev^| meanina | into| tire-|Veins[ of I

ki-&t-ory laft<3^of-|civilization. I I And.jwe're gpnnaj doithat,i\ God I
3 ^ 1 ' 1 PS 5 ' ' 1 1 ^2 ' 1 1 _ 1

— pw — . . I ' 'pw

grant !tha^ llw« | w^il| dc litjibefore lit' si toollate.il Asjwe!

^ T- IPS 1 — [ — ~r 1 2 1 PS 1 1 1 1

pw pw

proceed IwithPourilprogramllletl usi think Irrf i these [things. !|
^- 2 1 '— r" 2 T' 1 1 111

KING/#2/T0 JUDGE LOE/1958
First 100-word Segment

pw pw pw " . , II , • ^1

Your^iHonor,! you I have li noil doubt] rendered !a I decision llwhichi
j;^l_^PS _2_ 1 ' 1 ^ l-* 1_ 2 13 1

yeti! believe! tol be I just land I right. II Yet, I II musti reiterate I

■^1 — 2 — 111 11 1 1 nr^ 4

pw pw I

thatt-i lam linnocent.l I iHwas I simply' attempting! to! enter i thel
111 3 11 2 T^ 121

^ pw

court! hearing iof la-TibelovedjI friend, ii and lat|in-d!point I wa-srr I
1 2113 1 11 '~L-^ 1 11

loitering.il i I h-arv^lbeen | tire I victim | of jpolice ! brutality Ifpr |
3 11 11 2 1 2 4 1

pw I I

ne ireason.l | i-|wa-a ! snatched |f rom |tire- [steps I of ithe j courthouse,!

1 ' 2 ' 1 1 — r 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 2

pyL. I

£ushed_ I through |th« [street jwhile |[myj| arms | werej twisted,! choked

bitterness |±fl!i^l|heart [toward Ithe ifarrestingji officers.!!
3 1 "-l -^ 1 2 13 -'3

272

KING/#2

Second 100-word Segment

fMyjl action | i s 1 mnti vated^i by | theljTmpellin^l voice! of I conscience]
^l214 11 3 11 2

and I a Idesirel tpl Lollou] t ruth 1 -a^d | 4,iie.l will] e^ | God'llwherever |

pw I, PW I

they 1 Lead. 11 Although I I 1 cannot! payl 4:-i%e |f ine^^l -I- iHiit I willingly 1
I-' 1 2 1 2 ^T PS 1 1 11 3

acceot It-he 1 alternative!! which I you I provi de^lj a-fid-1 thatl iliaa=t± l-do,
2" -1 4 112 1 1111

without! malice .11

pw irP^ ,— —

-r jalsoi make I thisi decisioni becausel -of- Im-YJI'deepjl concerni
1 2 ^r 1 3 2 1 t: — 1 ^ 2

D.W_ pw

for I thel injusticesi-aTrd\ indignitiesi Ifcha-tfinyi peo_plel coxl=
11-^4 ' 1 4 1 ^r f

tinue I tip 1 experience. 11 Today jinl many ^parts'! ef \ the I South, | t^tel
-^ ' 1 — ^ 4 21 21 1 1 1 1

brutality M nf licted luponl Negroesl has; henomp IJAmerica ' s]\
shame. II

KING/#2

Third 100-word Segment

pw r^W

I I also liiLaJia.lt hi si decision because lof Lrnvj level for 1

1 2 ^[ 1 3 2 1 -—r 1 1

America land I the l|"sublimi' principles ^of 1 liberty 1 aiw3l equalityi
4 11—2^3'^ 1 3 1 4

pw 1 1 pw

upon 1 which Isne lis I fnnndpd J ^i have I cnmei to|.aee-| that |IAffte3?±-e>a-|
'^2111 2 11 1111 4

is I in I danger! -o-f- 1 losing me'dl soul I aft^\ can | so I easily I dri f 1 1 into I
11 2 1 T — 1-^ 1 1 11 3 1 2

rtragi"3| Anarchy/ aftd li'cripplinai Fascism. || Something ljmis±| happeni
— ^-31'- 2 3 2 1 2

fee lawaken l th^ ifdozingl |conscience| -of | Amei^ireal bef orel!iti-irS-|(tooi!
1 ' 3— 'l'-2^ 2 1 4 2 11^

late. 11 -T-he !time| has I eeineHlwhenl perhaps I only|4^e iiwilling ! aa^ !
1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 "~r~ 12 2 1^21

fnonviolentii acts fei | suffering! by |t4^e! innocent I eaitl-axnuaell t4>-i-&|
•-4 -'ll 3 11 3 1 2 1

nation! t-o-! wipe iout I the | scourge I €>f | brutality |aHd-! violence |
2 ' 1 -T- ■ 1 l' 11 4 1 3

273

inflicted lupeH iNegroesllwho'l-seek I ea-l-y- Itel waJJ4-\with 'idignity

3 2 2 112111 3

pw pw

bef cn^e■ iGod | andl man .11

2 111

KING/#3/I HAVE A DREAM/1963

First 100-word Segment

pw pw-

I '

I |am-|happyl to I J£uji 1 with \you I today I in llwhat Iv/iLl 1.32_ldown

in [history 1 as I the I'g'reatestildemonstration if or I freedom I d^i-'itfee
1311 — 2-* 4 1 2 11

hi-s-to-i?y lof il^urii nation Jl

3 1 — l-* 2

[Fivdi score! years I ago, 1 a li"greati| American in^n i whose 1
^ 1 PS 1 1 2 1 1 "" "^ ^ 1

I'symbolicll shadow |we| stand I feednay-ri) signed | ti^el Emancipation
^ 3 - 2 l'— T ' 2 V-x"^" 1

Proclamation. 1 1 This Ifmomentousl I decree! came la-sl a- [fg-r-aa-ill beacon]
9 ' 1 - 3 -" 2 —L 1 1 - 1 - 2

light I e-f I hope 1 h&\ millions I e€ I Negro I slaves llwho |had Ibeen]
11 ll' 2 12 1 11 1

— — — — ?^ —I

iToyousil daybreak I t-e lend! 4:4^ lllongjl nightl -o^l|theirll captivity^]
^ 2 -" 2 1 — T- I'-r' 1 1^1^ 4

free; I
1

KING/#3

Second 100-word Segment
p^

wei cannot) bel satisfiedilas I longl^sl the iNegrol inl
1 —2- 1 3 111121

Mississippi i-Ga-HHot-i vote [land la i N^g-*^ li^ t New Yorki believes Ifnel

4 — 2 — r — 1 1 T-ps 1 2 PS 2 1

pTf — ; :

has [nothing if or I which I to ivot-e-.i| No ! 1 1 ^to-,! we- 1 are I not !.aa.tx.sr-
_l 2 1 PS 1 1 ~T~ 1 1 1 1 1 TPS_

fi-sd-,11 -and- 1 w«1 wi 1 II ^ot l-ba.) s-at-i-sfied-l until !!" justice! rolls I downl
1 1 ~i: — 1 1 3 2 2 ~~I 1

like iwaters la^id I righteousnessi liJt&i a i|mightyll stream. "!!
1 2 1 3 11— 2 -"l

274

i^laml »oi I unmindful I thatjl some! of i you I have I cornel here I outi

til 3 1 111 1 1 1 PS 1

pw —

5W~:-

freshi f rom^inarrowil jail) cells.ll Seme- 1 ei [ -f&H I he-ve ! -e^Mne-l f-ifem!
1 1 — 2 -^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

KING/#3

Third 100-word Segment
PS

let I freedom] ring [from [everyi hiJLl | and imol^ill I c^f

Mississippi.il -Ff-eMR-ifev-er-^i mountainside, j hs± ] ^-r^ee^offl 1 H-jT>g- .
4 1 '— 3 — ^ 3 PS ^ j ^

And I when I this! hsLpn^ns.,! '^fti^i w^teftl ^|aJ_l^ | §¥-e^em\ t^^o|£a^>^,i
wh-©ivl\l'^i-l:&kiit Itifi^iSfOHi-fever-gl village i-a^dlg^a^^ihaijlet ;

f.f«ml[ever^|state | a^id-|(iV-e^l city jl^w^ Iwj-I-V! be i aJ^le j-t-^ !.app^d! up!

that IdayK-w-heflf all|-€>^l[GSS ' sjl chif^ren, I jblacWl mj^^;a|Ki-l[wh^te]l

mSa, I Jews I a-Hd IGentiles, | Protestantst-ae^fCatholics , ' w^itl^e'

spiritual:'! "F^^e jat llast-H ^^i^el-a^: lla-e^. |1 Tiiank IGqdi

PS_J iPS^ L__ L ^ ^ ^^

Almighty, [VilS' lare ]f4:-ss |a4: i-]ra«4:-. " ||

275

KING/#4/N0BEL ACCEPTANCE SPEECH/1964

First IQO-word Segment
pw

I I accept! thel Nobel Prize! fori Peace] atl at moment |when!!22
1 2*^' 1 3 '11112 1

injustice.)) i\ a£fi£pi-| this j awardi on Ibehalf I e€|-a- ||civi3l rights!
J ^ " 1 ' 2 I ' 2 1 2 'l'l^2^ 1

movement! whichllisl mnving Iwithi determinationl-o-ndj -a-ljma jesticl]
2 11 ^2 1 5 ' 1 1 *- 3 -'

and l-a-l rule] ef I justice.! | -tlamf mindful! that llphlyjl yesterday ) i-fv

11112 11 2 1^2 3 1

-^ -^ -^ -^ "^ pw pw

Birmingham,! Alabama,! rou"ri| children, I crying [out !f or I brother-

hood, I were! answered | wi4:-h- |f ire Ihoses , If^narlingij dogs I aftd-((eve3
3 1 2 11 2'-2-'ll-'2r

death.
1

KING/#4

Second 100-word Segment

pw pw

I I refuse Itoi accent (the 1 idea! thatljmanl is |[mere]| f lots

12 1 2^ 1 ' 3 1 11*— 1 2

and ! jetsam ! in !t-h« 'river lof llife 'nnahl e!-be ! j nf 1 uence-[t4>el
12112 11 3 1 3 1

-^ pw pw

runfoldingij events I which l.qnrrnund |him.l! -P- 1 i°.f±f-u^e i 4:-o l-a£Hiep±L I't-h^ I
^-3^2 1 2 112121

pw _ ^

vi-ew-it-haH^lmankind |-ir9!fi-o=iEragicallv!) bound^t-o- lfeh€l(i"tarles|jl
11 2 1 ^1^*- 4 ^1 1 1 "- 2 -*

midnightl-ei I racism I an^ Iwan !-t-hdfe I4;4te lErightjIdaybreak |-o£-l peace !
2 1 3 1 1 1 1 -^1 -^ p,2 1 1

a-fid I brotherhood lean | never I become |-a- 1 reality .1 I I l-r-^g-ta-s^l feel
1 3 -12 2 ^^1 4 12 1

a-eoeBt it-fee iicynicaTJ! notioni |t4>a-t liou^i nations] must! spxrali down!
2 l'^32 if 2^1 2 1

a-jBilitaristicll stairway) into ! feh-e I helll-o-£li^hermonuclea3|

destruction.!! -I Ibelieve itk^4: ifunarmedll truth '-a-nd {unconditional]!
3 1 2 1 *" 2 ^ 1 1 5

love iw-i-tt ihave It-be- if i nail | wordi i^^lreality .)! Thisl-i-s Iwhy I right
1 1- 1 1 ^ 2 -^ 1 ' 1 4 ' I'll 1

276

[temporarilYJIdefeatedl icj stronger | thani evi 1 1 triumphant. 1 j— I- I

fefiiiaiie. 1 t-fea4: 1 even 1 amid I today ' s| mortar | bursts i aftd-|whiningl
2122 2 ^ 2 1 1 2

bullets, 1 1 there 1 i-e- Istilll hope If orl-a- brighter], tomorrow.! I
2 llllll-z 3

KING/#4

Third lOQ-word Segment

Yet Iwheni years I have | rn] 1 pd Ipa^t lan^llw^nl t^e\^l|zin^\

light I of i truth I isl£aciLaed lonf thislfmarvelousll age ' in iwhicHi wel
PS_1_ 11 1 2 11"- 3^1 111

iiYeHhrneni a^^vd-l women' wi 1 1 I know I aftd-lchildreni^atii^lbe I taugJlt||
11 1 2 1 1_ Ji i_PS 11 1

that I w^lbavjel a l[f ine'il land,| ^ifbette^i people, |-a [[mor'^lfnobldl
1 1 1 12 1 1^2^ 2 1—1-^^2

civilization llbecause I theselfhumbl^l ehi-idcefi lo-f-l God I werei
5 2 12 2111

willing I to I snf f pr If or I righteousness |sake.| I
2 12 1 3 1

I ithink I A] f red Nobel] would |i:i^w.||what |-I-lm£aii^| whe«-l^ la^ll

ttlcTt: |i lacceptl fehi-s lawardl ifii-thel spiritl-of I -a-i curator! -ere- |some|
112 1 2112 113 11

fpreciousll heirloom I whi€>h | he |jiaiiis.l-i-ft I trust |€-p-£' (Tti !ftrue]|
'-t-2"^2 111111 '—I-' >— 1 -'

owners-hall /those I to] whom Ibeautyi-ts |t-i:-u-th j-ai^ !t^nj-th itre-a-ut^I!
2 111 12 ^'11 1 1 2

— ajid |i4i!rwhosell eyes I t4:te- 1 bea-ttty I a^>d- 1 fe^-trirh I e>€ l[genuinellbrother-
11-1 ^I'l 2-^1 11^3 -J

hood I i-6 iffio£-€l !(|5-]?e€-i-o-tt^! thanI diamonds |or i silver i&r ; gold.l!
3 i't.*— 2 1 2 12 li

KING/#5/T0 MEMPHIS RALLY/1968
First 100-word Segment

As I I I listened jto
1 1 "2 1

Thank |VOU j^ery]lkindly |[my]if riends
Ralph Abernathylin ](Filj|[eloquen5 |-*n4 !(generou"^i introduction

277

«md-I then Ithougixtl about \ m\^^el f ,f|' ^r I wondered I wno H I?^ I wa s I talking!
1 1 1^2 2 1 2psl ll'2

tsbcrttt.li It ' SI always I good itxri havel|ydur1l|closest]|f riend I a-ad I

_2 _J^ ^_2___\1_ I L_li__ l^ ^ ^

associate! ttrlaayl somethingi g-oodl abouti f^o.l i Andl-Raiph
4 1 I^ 2 12 11

iESa.E;na-t-h-y 1 is (the lfEes^lf-pie«d- KthatI ?^| have IIttI th-e-lworld.ll

5 1 1 '- 1-^ 1 1 1 1 1_ 1 1 PS

ofial storm 1 warning. 1 1 "^o^lxey^^ll t^atHy^etl are I tietermj ne.di txil

I 1 1 2 12 111 3_ 1

ao-loni anyhow.l i S.c^gua.fcb^-rKj-1 4-sl happening l-jm I Memphis J srmrmrhiTigl

II 3 PS 2 1 ^J 12 2

i-sl-happe«.ina-li-Bl[Ourll world.ll

KING/#5

Second 100-word Segment

-pw

Afterl youl ls^3i£. I thel United States,! Soviet RussiaTTGreat
2 111 4 5

Britain,! West Germany , I France, || and 1 1 I could I asms |*-he I others ,1

3 41111112

+-h« I American! Negro I collectively I is I richer! than! most! nations!
14 2 4 1 2 1 1 2 pg

of I tire Iworld.ll Wei havej an Ifannualil income] -of i morel t±ran ipEhirty
11 1 1 1 1^-3-^ 211 1"-

billionjldollarsi a| year,||which | rsi -nTCTrel-ttranl all^ trf- |th-e|

4 211 1111111

exports! -of l-ttre I Hnl-tHd -S-tnire-s,! am±-|m-ore-|thaTi!-the![nationa^l

2 1 1 1 PS 1 l_ 1 1 3

budgetlrrflCanada.il Did Iwn 1 kUDM 1 that? 1! That ' s i al power I'rightll
21 3 l>sll 1 1 12-1

pw : —.—, — , I

there,li if | we i -know! how i tol jiojaJ-l it . U

1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 PS 1 __

i^e! don' t Ih-avel t-ol arguel with ! an^'ljody J l~#^^ Tdorr'-t | travsTpto |
1 1 1 1 2_ps 1 4 1 1 11

curse.|aTrd-|g:g_(aroundl5£iLilig ^bad |wi-th|[ou^l words .il l?¥n"5oTp=ti
1" PS 1 1 2 2 1 1 ""1 1 PS 1 1

need lanyl bricks! ai«i-| bottles 1 l^el tioft-^tT^iipai^yl Molotovl
r~ 2 1 12 11 12 3

cocktails . II
2

278
KING/#5
Third 100-word Segment

Likel anybody,! ll wouldl iifee.1 tol liv:e_lal[Tonjl lif e.ll

I ^^ I I 111

Longevity ihasljTt^l place j| But! I 'ml not| congernedl aboutl thati

pw ^w pw pw

now, II 3E-| justi wanti -bo-l do IJGod '^1 will.H And I He' s\ allowed I me I ke\

pw , ,1 p

gp| upl t-ol-trhel mountainil And! I ' vel iD^iiedl over .11 Aivdi I-
the ipromiseaji land. 1 1 ^liiiia.yl H-€>fe-|gj£il there lwith| you. I I &t

wsat-l ^«ti-| te 1 Jinawl tonightil fe^«^lwe,l asl.a-lpeople,l wiiil^£i.l feel
the |(£EOHvi-&«5l iaftd,! I AndJ £^ia I happyl tonight .1 1 -J-'-ml iwtl worriedl

pw pw pW^

dfeoutlanything.il ^'^H-lnetl Laaring I any| man Jl Minel eyesl have I
PS

seeni tk-e| gloryl of l4ri*e|j2i2mXligl-o-f I *-h«-l Lord.H

Speech Segments Coded for Content Analysis Measures

GANDHI/#l/BOMBAY/18 9 6

First lOQ-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

I stand before you, today, as representing the

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
signatories to this document , I Iwho pose as representatives of

the 1,000,000 British Indians at present residing in South

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a .
AfricaH-fa country which has sprung into sudden prominence

owing to the vast gold fields of Johannesburg and the late

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. 5a(3); n.a.; AS-

Jameson Raid. II This is my sole qualification.il I am a person
34(3) K6a(3) ; n.a. ; n.a.

of few words. [| The cause, however, [^or which I am to plead

x^ n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a .

before you this evening] is so great! Ithat I venture to think

279

5a(3); AO-C3(5); AS-B4(3)
thati\you will overlook the faults of the speaker or rather,

the reader of this paper. [i

GANDHI/#1

Second lOQ-word Segment

lb(2); AO-C2(5); n.a.

With the qreatestC3ef erejic^to these view, we submitted

5a (3); A0-Dl(3); AS-B4(3)

to Mr. Chamberlain in a memorial,! I for we did not succeed

before the Natal Parliament, that for the purposes of the

, n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
Bill,|ithat is, legally speaking, India did and does possess

elective representative institutions founded on the

,1 n.a.; n.a,; n.a.
parliamentary franchise.il Such is the opinion expressed by

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
the London Times, llsuch is the opinion of the newspapers in

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a . , i n . a . ;

Natal, and such is also the opinion of the membersliwho

A0-D2 (4) ; n.a. ,1 6a(:

voted for the Bill, and also of an able jurist in Natal, li We

n.a.; AS-Blc(3) . ,,,,..

are very anxious to know the opinion of the legal luminaries

here.

GANDHI/#1

Third lOQ-word Segment

6b (2); AO-Bl(l) ; n.a. . ^ ■ ^ m ..

All this should serve as a warning and an impetus.;; We

3a (3); A0-Bl(2) ; AS-B5(3) . ^ . ^ ~~~T7 ■ M 5a(3) ; n.aT;

are hemmed in on all sides in South Africa. ,1 We are yet

AS-B4{3) ||3a(3); AO-C3(5); AS-B4(3) ^ ^ ^__-- — -^

infants, jl We have a right to appeal to you f orcr^^rotectiori^

n.a.; AO-C3(5); AS-g4(3) iin.a,. ; A0-C3 (5) ; n.a. ., .,.^

We place our position before you,lland now the responsibility

will rest to a very great extent on your shoulders, il if the

280
6a (3); A)-B2(2); AS-B5(3)

yoke of oppression is not removed from our necks.] Being

6a(3); A0-B(2) ; AS^^c(3) ,, n.a..; AQ-C3(5); n.a.

under it we can only cry out in anguish. [| It is for you, our

. ,1 n.a.; n.a.; AS-B3a(41

elder and<£xes2>brethren, to remove it.l| I am sure we snail

n.a.; A0-C(3) ; AS-B2{5)

not have cried out in vain. 11

GANDHl/#2/T0 THE UNTOUCHABLES/1921

First 100-word Segment

4a(3) ; AO-Bl(l) ; n.a. , ,

I regard untouchability as the greatest blot on

6a (3) ; n.a. ; AS-Blc(3) ^^ ^ ^ ~ , .,,
Hinduism. || This idea was not brought home to me by my bitter

, , JV-S- '■ n.a, ;
experiences during the South African struggle.|| It is not

n.a. ,,n.a.;n.a.;n.a. . ,, ^ ^

due to the factHthat I was once an agnostic,!! It is equally

Dl(3) ; n.a. ; n.a. n.a. ; n.a. ; n.a.

wrong to think, (| as some people do, [| that I have taken my

views from my study of Christian religious literature.il

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a . , . i , n . a . ; AO-B 1 ( 1) ,- . n , a .

These views date as far back as the time!! when I was neither

;;en"amoure^of , nor was acquainted with, the Bible or the

followers of the Bible. ll

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. n.a.; n,a,; n^a. , ^ ^ ,

I was hardly yet twelve!|wnen this idea had dawned on

GANDHI/#2

Second 100-word Segment

4a (3); AO-6l(l) ; n.a. . -, ,_ ^i. Ji

We are guilty of having suppressed our brethren ;j| we

5b(2); AO-Bl(l); n.a.' . , ,~ 7\ Shil^Y AO-BlQ) ;^n.a. ,
make them crawl on their bellies ;|l we have made them rub

11 5k)(2); AOOBl(l): n.a, ,

their noses on the ground ;(| with eyes red with rage, we push

281

n.a. ; AO-B2{2) ; n.a.
them out of railway compartments4^what more than this has

4b (2) ; AO-Bl(l) ; n.a.

British Rule done?!! What charge, that we bring against Dyer

4b { 2 ) ; A0-B2 ( iTV nTaT
and 0'Dwyer,||may not others and even our own people, lay at

5b (2); AO-B2(2); n.a.

our doors? We ought tojrptrrqg:^ ourselves of this pollution. ||
4a'{2) ; n.l. ; n.a. 6b (2); AO-Bl (1) ; n.a.

It is idle to talk of Swaraj||so long as we do not protect

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
the weak and the helpless, || or so long as it is possible for

5b(2) ; AO-Bl(l) ; n.a.

a single Swarajist to injure the feelings of any individual.|l

GANDHI/#2

Third 100-word Segment

6a(30; n.a.; AS-A(l) 3b(2); A)-D1(3); n.a.

I cannot understandj] why you should yourselves

countenance the distinction between Dheds and BhangisJI
n.a.; n.a.; n.a. , n.a.; AO-D2(4); n.a.

There is no difference between them.|! Even in normal times

their occupation is asC^onorabjlB^ as that of lawyers of

Government servants. !|

n.a.; AO-D2(4); n^

5b (2) ; A0-D1(3) ; n.a.

The Hindus arecgotT sinfuP by nature ;|| they are sunk m

3b ( 2 ) ; n.a.; n.a.
ignorance.il Untouchability must be extinct in this very

6b ( 2 ) ; n . a . ; n . a . ,

year. 11 Two of the strongest desiresll that keep me m flesh

and bonellare the (emancipation of the untouchables) and the

- ^~~rTi n • s • ] n.a. ; n.a,

"protection of the cow". 11 When these two desires are

- — Ti'. a . ; n.a.; n.a. n.a,; n.a.; n.a. _______^ i

fulfilled,!! there is Swaraj,liand therein lies my cQwn Mokshgrsi

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. ^ ^ _

May God give youCstren^tg^to work out your crgalvatioj^

282
GANDHI/#3/APPEAL TO AMERICA/1931

First IQQ-word Segment

5b ( 2 ) ; n . a . ; n . a .

In my opinion, the Indian struggle bears in its con-
sequences not only upon India but upon the whole world. I i It

n.a.;n.a.;n.a. ^ n.a.;n.a.;n.a.

contains one-fifth of the human race.lj It represents one of

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a .
the most ancient civilizations .|j It has traditions handed

2d (1) ; n.a. ; n.a.
down from tens of thousands of years, (| some of which, to the

6b (2) ; A0-D1(3) ;

astonishment of the world, remain intact. (| No doubt the

n.a.

ravages of time have affected the purity of that

6b(2); A0-D1(3); n.a.

civilization||as they have that of many other cultures and
many institutions .| I

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

If India is to<5;evive the glor^of her ancient past,|
n.a.; n.a.; AS-B5(3) 3b72T7~AU-U2 ( 471 n.a.

she can only do so||when she attains her<c£rieH^:i||

GANDHI/#3

Second 100-word Segment

5a(3) ; n.a. ; AS-Blb(2)

It is a matter of still deeper humiliation to me||that

5b (2); A0-D1(3); AS-n.a.

we Hindus regard several millions of our own kith and kin as

3b(2) ; A0-D1(3) ; n.a.

too degraded even for our touch. l! I refer to the so-called

"untouchables" .] I

5a (2) ; A0-D1(3) ; n.a.
These are no small weaknesses in a nation struggling to

n.a.; n.a.; n.aT 2b(2); AO-C2(5) ; n.a.

be free.ll And hence you will findllthat in this struggle

through self-purification we have assigned a foremost place

to the removal of the curse of untouchability and the

283

attainmentCoT un5?g$> amongst all the different classes and
cominunities of India representing the different creeds. 1|

GANDHI /# 3

Third IQO-word Segment

6b (2) ; A0-D1(3) ; n.a.
And from that day forward India has become progressively

poor,

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a . n . a . ; n . a . ;

No matter what may be said to the contrary, l| it is a

n.a. n.a.; AO-D2(4); n.a.

historical f actJ| that before the advent of the East India

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
Company, these villagers were not idle, || and he who wants may

n.a.; AO-D2(4); n.a. n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

see todayjlthat these villagers are not idleJI It, therefore,

;lb(2); A0-D1(3) ;

requires no great effort or learning to knowllthat these

n.a. 6b(2); A0-Dl(3) ; n.a.

villagers must starve|| if they cannot work for six months in

the year. II

lb(20; A0-D1(3) ; n.a.

May I not, then, on behalf of these semi-starved

millions, appeal to the conscience of the world to come to

the rescue of a people dying to regain its liberty? ||

GANDHI/#4/T0 THE PLENARY SESSION/1931

First 100-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; AS-B4(3) n.a.; n.a.;^-B5(3) n.a.; n.a.;
I do not thinkil that anythingl[that I can say this

evening"'! can possibly influence the decision of the Cabinet.!

n.a.; n.a.; AS-B5(3) n.a.; n.a.;

Probably the decision has been already taken-!| Matters of

n.a. __^ , ^^ ,

thecrrber£y> of practically a whole continent can hardly be

284

decided by mere argumentation, or even negotiation.jj

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

Negotiation has its purpose and has its play, but only under

. n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
certain conditions .|| Without those conditions negotiations

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
are a fruitless task. II But I do not want to go into all

n.a.; n.a.; AS-B5(3)
these matters. II I want as far as possible to confine myself

n.a.; n.a.; AS-B5(3)
within the four corners of the conditions!! that you. Prime

Minister, read to this Conference at its opening meeting. |j

GANDHI/#4

Second 100-word Segment

n.a. n.a. ; n.a. ; n.a. 3C(1);

No. II Its mission is today to convert Englishmen.|l I do

AO-Bl(l) ; n.a.

not want to break the bond between England and India,|lbut I

n.a.;n.a.;n.a. ., n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

do want to transform that bond.|| I want to transform that

n.a.; n.a.;
Call it

slavery into completecJYeeBoirp- f or my country. j|

n.a. ^ n.a.; n.a,; n.a. n.a.; AO-Bl(l) ;

complete c:fndependenc^||or whatever you like.|| I willcjTiot

4a(3); AO-B2(2); AS-B3b(4)

quarreX^about that word, ||and even though my countrymen may

4a(3);

dispute with me for having taken some other word,|II shall be

ACVB2(2); AS-B3b(4) n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

able to bear down that opposition!! so long as the content of

^n . a . ; n.a.; n.a. \

the wordffthat you may suggest to mejj

bears the same meaning.

GANDHI/#4

Third 100-word Segment

n.a.; AO-C3(5); n.a. n.a.; AO-C3(5);

The operatives, men and women, CSugs£3>me. |! They treated me

n.a. n.a.;n.a.;n.a.

as one of their own.i| I shall never forget that.jl

285

n.a.; AO-C3(5); AS-B3a(4)

I am carrying with me thousands upon thousands of

n.a,; n.a.; AS-B4(3) n.a.; A0-C3 (5) ;

English <J^Tendshrg^. II I do not know them;|but I read that

n a n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

c:;;;;;arTectTorr> in their eyesljas early in the morning I walk

n.a.; AO-C3X5X^_AS-B3a (4)
through your streets. || All thisCSospitalit^ all this

6b (2);
<;^ndnes^§]>^ill never be effaced from my memoryji no matter

A)-D1(3); AS-B1C(3) n.a.; AO-C3(5) ; n.a.

what befalls my unhappy land.lj I<jChanE.>you for your

orbearancf

GANDHI/#5/T0 THE A. I . S . A. /1944

First 100-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
Today, I will try to explain my thoughts to you more

clearly and present them to you in a different fram from

,.n.a.; n.a.; n.a. ,1 n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

whatjil have said during the last two days.li Our work had a

. n.a.; n.a.; n.a. nn.a.; n.a.; n.a.
very humble beginning. j| When I started khadi|l I had with me,

/lb{2); AO-C3(5); AS-Bla(3)
apart from Maganlalbhai and othersr[who had elected to live

V. ^ 2b (2)

and die with me^j Vithaldasbhai and a few sisters . j 1 Vithaldas

AO-C2T5T; n.a. / ^. ^ . , ^, , ^ I, ^^ l^^ Z ^^"^^ ^^^ '
was, at that time, fighting tor the labourers, ||but he gave

AS-B4(3) ' , . . , ,, F\-^-''

up nis shop and joined me in this unremunerative work.li We

n a • AS-B4{3) ir"^-^-' n.a.; AS-B4(3)

had then not the faintest idea||as to what the future had in

store for us.'!

286

GANDHI/#5

Second 100-word Segment

5a(3) ; n.a. : AS-lb(2)
It may declare me a fool for my tall talk about the

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. ^b(2); n.a.;

charkha.|| Tne task of making the charkha, [which for

centuries had been a symbol of poverty, helplessness,
injustice and forced labour, the symbol now of<mighty non-

violent strength) of the new social order and of the new

\ n.a.; n.a.; AS-B5(3)

economyj] has fallen on our shoulders.] | We have to change

, n.a. ; AO-C3(5) ; n.a. .

history.! 1 And I want to do it through you.ll

n a . ;_n .a.; n.a. n.a.; n.a.; n.a.; n.a.; n.a. n.a. n.a.; n.a.;
ICllopSf^you follow whati [I am saying. [! But if in spite of

na. n.a.;n.a.;n.a.

it you do not believejithat the charkha has the power to

,,3b(2): AO-Bl(l); AS-Bl(3) ,. n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
achieve swaraj,jll will ask you to leave me. ;! Here you are at

|, n.a.; n.a.; A0-Dl(3) 6a(3);

the crossroads. 11 If you continue with me without faithjlyou

Will be deceiving me and doing a great wrong to the

country,

GANDHI/#5

Third 100-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; AS-B4(3) n.a.; n.a.; AS-B4(3)

I do not knowjlif I have succeeded in coveying my idea

_n a • n.a.; AS-B4(3) n.a.; n.a.;

to you. [[If 1' have' been able to carry conviction|!please do

AS-B5(.3) um^-^-' =^-#-; A^4(3); AO-C3(5); n.a. ^ ^ .

one tning. H Those of you|[who want to remain with me; i give me

. . n.a.; A0-D2 (4) ; n. a. , ,, ^
m writing I that you regard the charkha from today as the

n . a . ; n . a . ; n.a.

emblem of cg^^^ol^^^^Jl ^o'^ have to make your decision

today .| I Ir y6u ad 'not' or cannot regard the charkha as the

^ 6a(3); A0-D1(3);

emblem of (jTonviolenc&r: and yet remain with me,)|then you will

287

AS-B5(3)

thereby put yourself in an awkward plight and also drag me
down with you.ll

KING/#1/T0 MONTGOMERY BOYCOTTERS/1955

First 100-word Segment

n.a^L.MtiCZSr'^' AS-B3(5)

MyCXrXeEdS^ we are certainly veryCES^pJ^to see each of

n.a.; n.a.,- n.a.
you out this evening. | ( We are here this evening for serious

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
business.| | We are here in a general sense because first and

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
foremostljwe are American citizens ,|| and we are determined to

n.a.;
apply our citizenship to the fullness of its means. l| We are

AO-D2(4); AS-B3a(4) ^___

here because of our love for democracy, because of ourcggep-
n.a.; n.a.; n.a

geateg^belief llthat democracy transformed from thin paper to

thick action is the greatest form of government on earth,

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a .
But we are here in a specific sense, because of the bus

situation in Montgomery .||

KING/#1

Second 100-word Segment

n.a^_i_^QzC2(.5) 1 n.a. 6a(3); AO-C2(5); n.a.

Mv<:::frienJg>I want it to be known)|that we're going to

work with grim and firm determination to gainc:3uJTrcg>on the

'. 4d(l); A0-D(4); AS-B3b(4) 4d(l); A0-D(4);

buses in this city. 1 1 And we are not wrong, l|we are not wrong

AS-B3b(4) n.a.; n.a.; n.a. 4a{3); A0-Dl(3) ; AS-Blc(3)
in whatljwe are doing.] I If we are wrong, || then the Supreme

4b (2); A0-D1(3); n.a. ,, 4r("3T7 AO-Dl ( 3 ) ; AS-Blc{3)

Court of this nation is wrong. || If we are wrong, II the

4b(2); A0-D1(3); n.a. . ,, 4a(3); A0-Dl(3);

Constitution of the United States is wrong. || If we are

288

AS-Blc{3) 4b(2); A0-D1(3); n.a. 4a(3); A0-D1{3); AS-B6(3)
wrong,||God Almighty is wrong. || If we are wrong, || Jesus of

4b (2) ; AO-Dl ( 3 ) ; ' n . a.
Nazareth was merely a Utopian dreamer and never came down to

,, 4a(3); A0-Dl(3); AS-Blc(3) n.a.;n.a.; n.a.
earth. II If we are wrong, j| justice is a lie. m

KING/#1

Third 100-word Segment

n.a.; A0-C1(5) ; AS-B3ijX4i-

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

We are going to<work togethe^|| Right here in

Montgomery when the history books are written in the futurell

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. ,, n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

somebody will have to sayl| "There lived a race of people, of

n.a.; AO-
black people, fleecy locks and black complexion,! I of people

D2(4); AS-B3a(4J__^ -_ ,,

who had the<fiforal courage> to stand up for their rights. il And

n.a.; A0-C1(5) ; AS-B3a(4)

thereby they injected a new meaning into the veins of

n.a.; A0-C1(5) ; AS-B3a(4) n.a.
history and of civilization. II And we're gonna do that.jj God

n.a.; AS-B5(3) 6a(3); n.a.; AS-B4(3) n.a.;n.a.;

trranrlSthat we will do it before it's too late. As we

n.a. n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a .

proceed with our programjllet us think of these things,

KING/#2/T0 JUDGE LOE/1958

First 100-word Segment

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a . n.a:

Your Honor, you have no doubt rendered a decision||which

AO-D2(4); n.a. ^^ --__^ , n.a.; n.a.; AS-B5(3)

you believe to beOust and right^ I Yet, I must reiterate!!

4d(l); n.a.; AS-B3a(4),, n.a.; AO-C2(5); AS-B5(3)
that I am innocent. 1 1 I was simply attempting to enter the

11 4d(l) ; n.a.; n.a.

court hearing of aC^elove3>f riend,| I and at no point was I

,, 2a(3); AO-B2(2); AS-Bla(3)

loitering.il I have been the victim of police brutality for

„ 2a(3); AO-B2(2); AS-Bla{3)

no reason.il I was snatched from the steps of the courthouse.

289

2a(3); AO-B2(2); AS-Bla(3)

pushed through thefjs^treet while my arms were twisted7[| choked

6d(l); AO-C2(5); AS-B3b(4) ____________Jl___^

and even kicked. !| In spite of this, I hold<;^oanimositY^oi^

C^^^BTtternes^ i n my heart toward the arresting officers,

KING/#2

Second IQO-word Segment

n.a. ; n.a. ; AS-B5(3)

My action is motivated by the impelling voice of conscience

n.a.; n.a.; '
and a desire to f ollowcj^rn^trrrand the will of Godl[wherever
AS-B5(3) n.a.; n.a.; AS-B5(3) ^ n.a.; n^a_^; AO-c:J_(b)

they lead.|| Although I cannot pay the fine,||l wilKwillingly

acCeptr-the alternativeljwhich you provide,| | and that I will do

<^i^out malTc'€

5b (2); AO-B2(2): AS-Blb(2)

I also make this decision because of my deep concern

. . . . . ,,5a(3); AO-B2(21; AS-Blb(2T

for the injustices and indignities||that my people con-

,, 2b(2) ; AO-B2(2) ; n.a.
tinue to experience .| I Today in many parts of the South, the

brutality inflicted upon Negroes has become America's

shame -II

KING/#2

Third 100-word Segment

n.a.; AO-C2(5); A3-B3a(2)

I also make this decision because of my'CXQ3ie->f or

America and the sublime principles of liberty and equalit}

n.a-; n.a.; n.a. n.a.; n.a.; n.a. |4b(2}; A0-D1(3);

upon which she is founded.M I have come to see||that America

AS-B.lb(2) ^T-, 1^ ■ ^ ^ ■ ^^ ■ ^

IS in danger of losing her soul and can so easily drift into

. " \ '. ,. . , 4b(2) ;, A0-D1(3) ; AS-Blb(2)

tragic Anarchy and crippling Fascism.] | Something must happen

290

6c (1) ; n.a. ; n.a.
to awaken the dozing conscience of Americal Ibef ore it is too

n.a.; .n.a.; n.T 2b (2)T A0-B2 (2) ; AS-Bla(3) ______

late. 1 1 The time has come when perhaps only the .jgrllingT^nd

nonvioTent~~~acts of suffering by the-CjHnQGenjrcan arouse this

nation to wipe out the scourge of brutality and violence

n.a.; AO-D2(4); AS-B3a(4)

inflicted upon Negroesliwho seek only to walk with dignity
before God and man. 1 1

KING/#3/I HAVE A DREAM/1963

First 100-word Segment

n.a.; AO-C2(5); AS-B3a(4) ; n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

I amclTa^pj>to join with you today jdn what will go down

in history as the greatest demonstration f orCjre^donr in the

history of our nation.||

n.a.; A0-C1(5) ; n.a. -^n.a.; n.a.;

Five score years ago, a great American, |(Tn whose

symbolic shadow we stand today^ signed the Emancipation

,1 n.a.; n.a.; AS-D2 C4)
Proclamation.il This momentous decree came as a great beacon

6b (2) ; n.a. ;
light ofciinSS>to millions of Negro slaves|lwho had been

AS-D1(3) , 3b (2); AO-D2(4)

seared in the flames of withering injustice.il It came as a

T^us daybrealc-.to end the long night of their captivity,

~5b(2JTAO-Dl(3) ; n.a.

But one-hundred years later, the Negro still is not

free ;

291
KING/#3
Second lOQ-word Segment

6a (3); A0-D1(3); AS-B{5) 6b (2); A0-D1(3); n.a.

we cannot be satisfied! ias long as tne Negro in

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
Mississippi cannot votei| and a Negro in New York believesjihe

6b(2); A0-D1(3); n.a. n.a., 6a(3); A0-D1(3); AS-Blb(2)

has nothing for which to voteJI No! || No, we are not satis-

n.a.; n.a . j n.a.
fied, and we will not be satisfied un t i Ulceus tice>r oils down

like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. "|l

6a (3); n.a.; n.a. 6b (2); n.a.; n.a,

I am not unmindful thatjl some of you have come here out

4b(2) ; n.a. ; n.a.
of great trials and tribulations . 1 1 Some of you have come

. n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
fresh from narrow jail cells. (| Some of you have come from

~. aT; ~AS^('2T'; AO-Dl ( 3 )

areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the

storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police

6bT2) ; A0-D1(3) ; nTa^
brutality. II You have been the veterans of creative

suffering. II

KING/#3

Third 100-word Segment

n . a.; A0-C1(5 ) ; n , a .
le-tdTreedd^ring from every hill and molehill of

n.a. ; A0-C1{5) ; n.a.

Mississippi . 1 1 "From every mountainside, letCFre^donD'^ring. "

n.a. ; n.a. ; n.a. n.a.; A0-Cl(5) ; n.a.^

And when this happens ,| ]and when we allo\vCTreedom>to ring, 11

n.a. ; A0-C1(5) ; n.a.

when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet,

n.a.; n.a.; n.a,
from every state and every city,||we will be able to speed up

,. n.a. ; AO-Cl (5) ; n.a.
that day whenilall of God's children, black men and white

men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be
able tO'-CjoTn hanHs^.and-csin^Sr^in the words of the old Negro

292

n.a.; A0-D2 (4) ; AS-B3a(4) n . a . ; AC

i>at last- ^zTTSS^'^t last.ji

spiritual:|| j^fr^g>at last. "-c33%gr"at "l"as'b.'|^:::fflran^God

B3a(4); n.a.; AO-Bl(l) ; n.a. n.a.; AO-D2{4); AS-B3a{4)
Almighty , I |we are free at last.!"

KING/#4/N0BEL ACCEPTANCE SPEECH/1964

First 100-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.;

I accept the Nobel Prize f o g^Fe a c e>a t a moment[|when 22

5b(2); AO-C2(5); n.a.
million Negroes of the United States of America are engaged

in creative battle to end the long night of racial

n.a.; AO-C2(5); n.a.
injustice. II I accept this award on behalf of a civil rights

n.a. ; A0-D2 (4) ; n.a.
movementj [which is moving with determination and a majestic

scorn for risk and danger to establish a reign o f r^reedg^~^

__ . M n.a.; n.a.; n.a. lb (2); A0-D1(3); n.a.

and a rule of cd!51tlcg>|| I am mindful that only yesterday m

Birmingham, Alabama, our children, crying out for cgrotherH
hoojT^ were answered with fire hoses, snarling dogs and even
death. II

KING/#4

Second 100-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; AS-C(l) 6b(2); A0-D1(3) ; AS-B5(3)

I refuse to accept the idea|lthat man is mere flotsam

and jetsam in the river of life unable to influence the

3b ( 2 K- n.a.; n.a.
unfolding eventsi [which surround him

n.a. ; n.a. ;^ AS-C(l) ^ ,,

I refuse to accept the

6b (2) ; AO-plp); n.a.
view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless

midnight of racism and war||that' the.-'^righ'tr daybreak of p«
and^^Srotherhoqd^can never become a reality. || i refuse 'to

293

AS-B4(3) la (3); A0-Dl(3); AS-B4(3)

accept the cynical notion jithat our nations must spiral down

a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear

~ n . a . ; n . a7; n.a. n.a.; A0-C2 (5) ; AS-B3a(4l
destruction. (I I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional

I n.a.; n.a.; n.a. n.a.
love will have the final word in reality. || This is whyflright

n.a.; n.a.

temporarily defeated is stronger than evil triumphant , ![ I

n.a.; nTa"! ; n.a." 6dTlT; n.a.; AS-B2 ( 5 )

believe that||even amid today's mortar bursts and whining

bullets, there is still hope for a brighter tomorrow. ,1

KING/#4

Third 100-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. n.a.;n.a.;n.a.

Yet when years have rolled pastl|and when the blazing

n.a.; n.a.;
light of truth is focused on this marvelous age in||which we

n,a. ,. n.a.; AO-D2(4); n.a. n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

live-fi-men and women will knowlland children will be taughtj]

n.a.; AO-D2(4); AS-B3a(4)

that we have a finer land, a better people, a more noble

6b(2) ; A0-C1(5) ; n.a.
civilization becausel|these humble children of God were

willing to suffer for righteousness sake.li

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. n.a.; A0-D2 (4) ; n.a. n.a.; n.a.; n.a. n.a.;
I think liAlf red Nobel would knowjjwhat I meanjlwhen I say!',

n.a.; n.a. n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
that I accept this award in the spirit of a curator of some

. n.a.; AO-C2(5); AS-B3a(4)
precious heirloomjlwhich he holds in trust for its true

owners--all those to whom beauty is truth and truth beautyll

n.a.; A0-C1(5) ; AS-B3a(4)

--and in whose eyes the beauty and truth of genuineCftrother-
hqo^is more precious than diamonds or silver or gold. ||

294

KING/#5/T0 MEMPHIS RALLY/1968

First IQO-word Segment

n.a.; AO-C2(5) ; n . a . n.a.; AO-C3(5); AS-

cCrhanjC^you v e r ycRi ndiY>niy friends. M As I listened to

B3b(4)

Ralph Abernathy in hisCelo£uen$> andc:geheroug~- introduction

n.a.; n.a.; AS-A(l) n.a.; n.a.;
and then thought about myself ,1/ 1 wondered who(|he was talking

n.a. ,, n.a.; AO-C3(5); AS-B3a(4)

about. Ii It's always good to have your closestrTfTend:^ and

n.a.; AO-C3(5)
associate to say something good about you.|[ And Ralph

n.a. ^_ n.a,;n.a.;n.a.

Abernathy is thecgest frien^|that I have in the world. i|

2b ( 2)^n-C3(SI; AS-B3a ( 4 )

I 'm<:;gelightjd^o see each of you here tonight in spite

n.a.; n.a.; n.a. n.a.; A0-Dl(4); n.a.
of a storm warning. || You reveal thatljyou are determined to

n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a . ; n . a . ;

go on anyhow. II Something is happening in Memphis, l| something

p. a. ,

is happening in our world. ||

KING/#5

Second 100-word Segment

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
After you leave the United States, Soviet Russia, Great

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
Britain, West Germany, France, || and I could name the others, II

n.a.; AO-D2(4); n.a.

the American Negro col lee tivelyCX^sJrichej^ than most nations

, , n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
of the world. |i We have an annual income of more than thirty

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
billion dollars a year,|lwhich is more than all of the

exports of the United States, and more than the national

n.a.; n.a.; n.a, n.a.; n.a.; n , a .

budget of Canada. || Did you know that?|| That's a power right

, n.a.; n.a.; AS-B4(3) .

there, Ilif we know how to pool itJ'

6d(l); AO-Bl(l); AS-B5(3) , 6d(l); A0-Dl(3);

We don't have to argue with anybody.! We don't have to

AS-B5(3)

6d(l)

curse and go aroundcac^ting bad^with our words. (| We don't

295

6d(l); AO-D2(4); AS-B3b(4)

we don ' t need any Molotov

KING/#5

Third 100-word Segment

la(3) ; n.a. ; AS-blc(3)

Like anybody, I would like

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
Longevity has its place,

n.a.; A0-C2 (5) ; AS-B3b{4)
now, I! I just want to do God's will

olive a long lif^'
But ci'm not concerne

about that

And He's allowed me to

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.

And I've looked over.

go up to the mountain

^ -~~^il 1^(3); n.a.; n.a.

the<::;;g£omised land^il I may not get there with you

n.a

n.a.; n.a.; n.a.
And I ' ve seen

n.a. ;
But I

...a., AS-B3a(4) . n.a.; AO-D2(4); AS-B3a(4)

want you to know tonightllthat we, as a people, will get tc

n.a.; n.a.; AS-B3a(4)
And I ' m-dTa

the promised land

AS-B3a(4) 6d(l); AO-B2(2

about anything. I! I 'm <jIot f eaf^

AS-B3a{4)

seen thecSTorJl^f the coming of the Lord,

rtonight-l

AS-B3a(4) ,.
any man.li

6d(l) ; n.a.;

I 'm not worried

n.a.; n.a.;
Mine eyes have

APPENDIX D
GANDHI'S AND KING'S SCORES ON WORD COUNT MEASURES

Gandhi ' s Scores on Word Count Measures

Speech Segment Words/ Syllables/ TTR AVQ FHIS
Clause Words

No. 1

First

.73

Bombay

Second

.60

.58

107

(1896)

Third

.70

.67

No. 2

First

.75

.62

Untouch-

ables

Second

.72

.54

(1921)

Third

.72

.67

No. 3 First 10.10 1.55 .71 .78 18.00
Appeal Second 12.86 1.60 .76 1.83 36.80
(1931) Third 8.67 1.45 .71 .27 13.09

No. 4

First

.71

.42

Plenary

Second

.70

.29

(1931)

Third

.76

.64

No. 5

First

.75

A.I.S.A.

Second

.65

.50

(1944)

Three

.61

.16

296

297

King's Scores on Word Count Measures

Speech

Segment

Words/
Clause

Syllables/
Word

TTR

AVQ

FHIS

No. 1

Boycott

(1955)

First

Second

Third

12.25
6.78
7.83

1.52
1.34
1.37

.60
.60
.76

4.67
0.80
0.53

64.33

116.66

71.20

No. 2

Loe

(1958)

First

Second

Third

10.56

9.22

12.00

1.41
1.63
1.61

.73
.75
.72

0.62
0.40
0.56

56.72
47.29
23.56

No. 3
Dream
(1963)

First

Second

Third

11.75

8.07

11.00

1.29
1.42
1.34

.72
.64
.52

1.33
0.31
0.59

23.32
57.81
53.61

No. 4
Nobel
(1964)

First
Second

Third

14.67
9.77
8.27

1.66
1.65
1.34

.76
.67
.66

1.42
0.94
1.08

16.52
22.90
45.23

No. 5
Memphis
(1968)

First

Second

Third

7.75
8.83
7.07

1.49
1.47
1.25

.66
.65
.66

0.75
0.40
0.28

78.24
58.65
86.08

APPENDIX E
GANDHI'S AND KING'S SCORES ON CONTENT ANALYSIS MEASURES

Gandhi's Scores for Content Analysis Measures

Speech Segment DRQ AX I-Score Il-Score

No. 1

Bombay

(1896)

First

Second

Third

1.00
1.00
0.67

3.16
2.92
4.37

0.56
1.50
2.09

0.67
0.75
3.18

No. 2
Untouch-
ables
(1921)

First

Second
Third

0.83

0.93
0.42

2.55

4.50
3.72

0.20

1.00
0.00

0.30

0.09
0.90

No. 3

Appeal

(1931)

First

Second

Third

0.60
0.88
0.88

3.07
3.57
3.18

1.00
2.00
1.92

0.30
0.28
0.00

No. 4

Plenary

(1931)

First

Second

Third

0.83
0.57
0.13

0.69
2.78
1.77

0.00
0.58
3.30

0.90
0.36
1.40

No. 5

A.I.S.A.

(1944)

First

Second

Third

1.00
0.82
0.50

2.30
2.86
2.63

1.50
0.85
1.20

1.20
0.62
1.50

298

299

King's Scores on Content Analysis Measures

Speech Segment DRQ AX I-Score Il-Score

No. 1

Boycott

(1955)

First

Second

Third

0.4

0.71

0.57

2.26
5.00
1.80

1.29
2.73
1.90

1.14
1.53
2.60

No. 2
Judge
(1958)

First

Second

Third

0.60
0-62
0.62

3.56
3.11
2.37

2.20
1.78
2.13

2.30
2.56
1.88

No. 3
Dream
(1963)

First

Second

Third

0.60
0.84
0.00

2.51
4.39
0.22

3.43
1.50
3.36

0.57
0.79
1.09

No. 4
Nobel
(1964)

First

Second

Third

0.64
0.57
0.14

2.09
3.08
1.28

2.83
1.36
1.93

0.00
1.93
0.86

No. 5

Memphis

(1968)

First

Second

Third

0.20
0.00
0.09

1.48
1.94
2.99

2.42
1.67
1.14

1.08
1.75
2.43

REFERENCES

Beatty, M. J., Behnke, R. R. , & Banks, B. J. (1979).

Elements of dialogic communication in Gandhi's second
round table conference address. Southern States
Journal of Communication, 44 , 386-398.

Bennett, L. (1976). What manner of man. Chicago: Johnson
Publishing Co. , Inc.

Boder, D. P. (1940). The adjective-verb quotient; A con-
tribution to the psychology of language. Psychological
Record, 3, 309-344.

Bormann, E. G. (1972). Fantasy and rhetorical vision: The
rhetorical criticism of social reality. Quarterly
Journal of Speech, 58, 396-407.

Bowen, H. W. (1963a). Does non-violence persuade?
Communication Quarterly, 31, 10-11.

Bowen, H. W. (1963b). The future of non-violence.
Communication Quarterly, 31, 3-4.

Bowen, H. W. (1967). A realistic view of non-violent
assumptions. Communication Quarterly, 15 , 9-10.

Brock, B. L. , & Scott, R. L. (Eds.). (1982). Methods of

rhetorical criticism (2nd ed.). Detroit: Wayne State
University Press.

Bruyn, S. T. , & Rayman, P. M. (Eds.). (19 79). Nonviolent
action and social change. New York: Irvington
Publishers.

Bulletin of Public Affairs Information Service. (1958-68).
Wilson, R. S. (Ed.). New York: Public Affairs
Information Service, Inc.

Carlson, J. (1981). The politics of powerlessness . New
Brunswick, N J : Transaction Books.

300

301

Carlson, K. A. (1969). The Kenya wildlife conservation

campaign: A descriptive persuasion (Doctoral disserta-
tion, Northwestern University, 1969). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 3_0(10), 4584 -A.

Civil Rights Commission (1957-1965). (1968). East Lansing,
MI: State University Press.

Day, E. H. (1973). A rhetorical and content analysis of
Florida's gubernatorial inaugural addresses, 1845 to
1971 (Doctoral dissertation. The Florida State Univer-
sity, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International,
34(7), 6782-A.

DeVito, J. A. (1984). The elements of public speaking (2nd
ed.). New York: Harper & Row.

Diwankar, R. R. (1949). Satyagraha in action. Calcutta:
Signet Press.

Dollard, J., & Mowrer, 0. H. (1947). A method of measuring
tension in written documents. Journal of Abnormal
Social Psychology, 42 , 3-32.

Durant, W, (1930). The case for India. New York: Simon &
Schuster.

Dye, T. R. (1971). The politics of equality.
Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Co. Inc.

East India Report of the Committee appointed by the govern-
ment of India to investigate the disturbances in the
Punjab. (1920). London: His Majesty's Stationery
Office.

Ehninger, D. , Monroe, A. H. , & Gronbeck, B. E. (1978).
Principles and types of speech communication ( 8th
ed. ) . Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman & Co.

Enholm, D. K. (1975). Critical moments in the German

resistance movement: A dramatistic analysis (Doctoral
dissertation. University of Kansas, 1975). Disserta-
tion Abstracts International, 3_7(1), 3 2 -A.

Evans, A. L. (1980). A stylistic content analysis of
speeches of black college students (Doctoral
dissertation. The Florida State University, 1980).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 4_1(3), 848-A.

Fischer, L. (1950). The life of Mahatma Gandhi. New
York: Harper & Row.

302

Flesch, R, F. (1960). The art of readable writing. New
York: Harper & Row.

Gandhi, M. K. (1894). An appeal to every Briton in South
Africa.

Gandhi, M. K. (1969). An autobiography: Or the story of
my experiments with truth (M. Desai, Trans.) (2nd
ed. ) . Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.

Gandhi, M. K. (1982). The words of Mahatma Gandhi. New
York: Newmarket Press.

Gleser, G. C., Gottschalk, L. A. , & Springer, K. J.
(1961). An anxiety scale applicable to verbal
samples. Archives of General Psychiatry, 5, 593-605.

Gopal, R. (1967). How India struggled for freedom.
Bombay: The Book Centre Pvt., Ltd.

Gordon, M. M. (1964). Assimilation in American life: The
role of race, religion, and national origins. New
York: Oxford University Press.

Gottschalk, L. A., Gleser, G. C, and Springer, K. J.

(1963). Three hostility scales applicable to verbal
samples. Archives of General Psychiatry, _9, 254-279.

Gottschalk, L. A., Winget, C. N., & Gleser, G. C. (1969).
Manual of instructions for using the Gottschalk-Gleser
Content Analysis Scales. Berkeley: University of
California Press.

Greenshaw, W. (1976). Watch out for George Wallace.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Griffin, L. M, (1952). The rhetoric of historical

movements. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 38 ,
184-188.

Griffin, L. M. (1980). On studying movements. The Central
States Speech Journal, 31, 225-232.

Gunning, R. (1968). The technique of clear writing. New
York: McGraw-Hill.

Hayakawa, S. I. (1963). Symbol, status, and personlity (1st
ed.). New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.

Hochmuth-Nichols, M. (1952). A dramatistic view of the

origins of language. The Quarterly Journal of Speech,
38(3), 251-269.

303

Index of the London Times. (1906-1950). London: Times
Pub. Co.

Index of the New York Times. (1958-1968). New York: Fleet
Academic Editions.

Jack, H. A. (ed.). (1956). The Gandhi reader.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Johnson, W. (1946). People in quandaries. New York:
Harper & Bros.

Johnson, W. (1972). Living with change: The semantics of
coping. New York: Harper & Row.

Journal of Conflict Resolution. (1957). Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan.

Journal of Peace Research. (1964). Groningen, Norway:
International Peace Research Association.

Keele, L. A. (1972). A Burkeian analysis of the rhetorical
strategies of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Doctoral
dissertation. University of Oregon, 1972).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 33^(10) 5869-A.

Keesings Research Report. (1970). Race relations in the
U.S.A. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Kerlinger, F. N. (1964). Foundations of behavioral
research. New York: Rhinehart & Winston, Inc.

King, M. L. , Jr. (1958). Stride toward freedom. New
York: Harper & Bros.

King, M. L. , Jr. (1963). Why we can't wait. New York:
Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.

King, M. L., Jr. (1964). Strength to love. New York:
Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.

King, M. L. , Jr. (1967). Where do we go from here? New
York: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc.

King, M. L. , Jr. (1983). The words of Martin Luther King,
Jr. New York: Newmarket Press.

Korzybski, A. (1958). General semantics (4th ed). Lake-
ville, CT: The International Non-Aristotelian Library
Publishing Co.

304

Lord, W. (1965).
Harper & Row.

The past that would not die. New York:

Lower, F. J. (1974). A rhetorical and content analytic

study of the speeches of Julian Bond (Doctoral disser-
tation. The Florida State University, 1974). Disserta-
tion Abstracts International, 35(7), 4727-A.

Lucas, S. (1980). Coming to terms with movement studies.
The Central States Speech Journal, 31, 255-266.

MacDougall, A. B. (1973). A comparative study of the rela-
tionships among values, value-systems and intercultural
communication (Doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young
University, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 34_(07), 4462-A.

Markel, N. (1986, February). Personal communication.

Marx, G. T. (1971). Racial conflict. Boston: Little,
Brown.

Merriam, A. H. (1975). Symbolic action in India: Gandhi's
nonverbal persuasion. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 61,
290-306.

Mowrer, 0. H.
New York

(1953). Psychotherapy theory and reserach.
The Ronald Press Co.

Navajivan Trust. (1979)
Gandhi (Vols. 2 & 7!

The collected works of Mahatma

New Delhi

The Publications

Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting,
Government of India.

Nishida, T. (1979). Comparing Japanese-American person-to-
person communication: A third culture approach
(Doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota,
1979). Dissertation Abstracts International, 40(12),
6069-A.

Oates, S. B. (1982). Let the trumpet sound: The life of
Martin Luther King, Jr. New York: Harper & Row.

Oliver, R. T. (1962;
Springfield, IL;

Culture and communication.
Thomas.

Payne, J. C. , II. (1973). A content analysis of speeches
and written documents of six black spokesmen:
Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, Marcus
Garvey, W. E. B. DuBois, Martin Luther King, Jr., and
Malcolm X (Doctoral dissertation, The Florida State

305

University, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts
International, M{4), 1887-A.

The Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature. (1955-1969).
New York.

Sharp, G. (1959a). The meanings of non-violence: A
typology (revised). The Journal of Conflict
Resolution, 2(2), 41-63.

Sharp, G. (1959b). Research project on totalitarianism and
non-violent resistance! Journal of Conflict
Resolution, 3{2) , 153.

Sharp, G. (1980). Social power and political freedom.
Boston: P. Sargent Publishers.

Shepherd, G. W. , Jr. (1968). Who killed Martin Luther
King's dream?: An Afro-American tragedy. Africa
Today, 15(2) , 2.

Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric statistics for the
behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company, Inc.

Simons, H. W. (1967). Patterns of persuasion in the Civil
Rights struggle. Communication Quarterly, 15 , 25-27.

Smith, D. H. (1967). Social protest and the oratory of
human rights. Communication Quarterly, 15 , 2-8.

Smith, W. R. (1938). Nationalism and reform in India. New
Haven: Yale University Press.

Smitherman, G. (1973). White English in blackface, or who
do I be? The Black Scholar, 4_, 32-39.

Steinkraus, W. E. (1973). Martin Luther King's person-
alism and non-violence. Journal of the History of
Ideas, 34, 97-111.

Stone, C. (1968). Black political power in America.
Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co.

Thursby, G. (1983). From handouts in course Philosophies
of India. Gainesville: University of Florida.

UNESCO. (1974). Handbook of international trade and
development. New York: United Nations.

UNESCO Report on World Communication. (1956 & 1964). New
York: UNESCO Publications Center.

306

Vander, H. J., III. (1968). The political and economic
progress of the American Negro. Dubuque, 10:
Wm. C. Brown Book Co.

Weber, M. (1946). Essays in sociology. New York: Oxford
University Press.

World Almanac. (1960). Henry Doering ed. New York: World
Almanac Publications.

Zimmer, H. (1951). Philosophies of India. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Mittie Nimocks was born in 1957 into a family of
educators. She began school in the racially segregated
public school system of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, was among
the first group of students bussed across town to the
"black" junior high and high schools, and finally graduated
from Hattiesburg High School in 1975 in that school's first
completely integrated class. Growing up next door to the
University of Southern Mississippi, Mittie earned a B.S. in
speech communication there in 1979. Her M.A. in speech
communication was granted by the University of Illinois in
1982. She expects to receive her Ph.D. in speech from the
University of Florida in 1986.

307

I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Norman N, Markel, Chairman
Professor of Speech

A/./y^, 9/;>,

y/>/PfUl^

Donald E. Williams, Cochairman
Professor of Speech

^^ t^

Joseph S. Vandiver
Professor of Sociology

Anthony J. Cl^rk

Associate Professor of Speech

Gene R. Thursby*^

Associate Professor of Religion

This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
the Department of Speech Communication in the College of
Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate School and was
accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

May 1986

Dean, Graduate School

|j||IVERSITY OF FLORIDA

3 1262 08666 348 0

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Indian independence movement under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and the U.S.A. civil rights movement under the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: a comparison of two social movements to assess the utility of nonviolence as a rhetorical strategy"

See other formats