At one point he makes a very effective and impressive use of logos when he appeals to logic with statements like: "The content of the doctrine is: "Yes, in the past we did some wrong things because of innocence or inadvertence. But now that's all over, so let's not waste any more time on this boring, stale stuff." The doctrine is dishonest and cowardly, but it does have advantages: It protects us from the danger of understanding what is happening before our eyes." (18)
Whether it does anything else or not, it will definitely make the reader sit up and take notice of what is happening around us. Chonsky is not imposing his views but his political knowledge is considered far superior than the rest of us and thus people will always give him a chance and at least think about what he has said.
The argument doesn't only rest of ethos and logos. There is good though small use of pathos in the article as author appeals to the emotions of people. "Throughout history, even the harshest and most shameful measures are regularly accompanied by professions of noble intent -- and
After making it clear that change of course doctrine is nothing but a sham, he moves on to explain that all small nations especially the Arab world has been a toy for the west. "The British created Iraq for their own interests. When they ran that part of the world, they discussed how to set up what they called Arab facades -- weak, pliable governments, parliamentary if possible, so long as the British effectively ruled."
In this piece, however we notice that author's main device has been logos and ethos. Pathos is used to the minimum because Chomsky is considered an objective observer and thus pathos would have been a little out of league. Besides when theorists talk, they choose not to talk about how millions of people have died in Iraq war and how people in Iraq are suffering. They would instead talk about facade of democratic process carried on by powerful governments and the wrong strategies used by them.
Thus Noam Chomsky's article is a brilliant example of rhetoric. This article makes it clear that you do not need to use all the devices to make an argument strong. Instead few of two or three is enough to present a powerful argument.
Works Cited
Chomsky, Noam. "Selective Memory and a Dishonest Doctrine." Inventing Arguments. By Mauk, John and John Metz. Canada: Rosenberg, 2006. 18-19
