Micah Davis Page 1 of 3

Pro. Sarah Prickett

Comp II
1-31-18

Rhetorical Analysis of a Written Argument:

Poland’s Holocaust Blame Bill

The Holocaust is a hard thing to talk about, mass genocide in general is a hard topic to

research, write about and teach, but it must be done. To quote philosopher George Santayana,

“Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.” Poland’s Parliament thinks

differently, currently there is a bill being considered that will fine or jail anyone who implies or

states Poland and it’s citizens were responsible, or complicit in Nazi crimes during WWII. This

bill came to my attention via a New York Times article titled “Poland’s Holocaust Blame Bill”

written by the editorial board. The article is short, one sided, and aggressive towards the Polish.

The New York Times is an American newspaper based in New York, with a worldwide

readership. The paper tends to cover hard hitting American politics but also writes on

international politics, such as Poland’s recent holocaust bill. The bill in short claims to prohibit

and jail/ fine any one who implies or states that Poland and the polish people were complicit in

Nazi crimes during WWII. Already this bill is off to a bad start due to it taking away freedom of

speech in favor of washing out history.

The New York Times article agrees that the bill is being used to suppress historical facts

and research in order to maintain appearance. But the New York Times article goes further

accusing the “Poles” (an term that is seen as offensive in Poland) suggesting that Poland as a

nation was active in holocaust. Poland was no more active in the holocaust than any other

country occupied in WWII. This is not to say that there weren’t Polish people who were not
Micah Davis Page 2 of 3
Pro. Sarah Prickett
Comp II
1-31-18
complicit in Nazi criminal activity, many catholic churches during this era helped in the

persecution and hunt for Jews, but these groups do not account for all of Poland. Many who did

reveal where Jews were hiding were faced with death if they didn’t reveal them, and even then

they could be killed for it. This gruesome history is something that should be spoken on, Poland

as a nation should accept what did happen during WWII and learn from it, not cover it up for the

sake of ego. This statement is what the article was trying to say but instead focused on blaming

Poland for it’s short comings.

The article uses pathos as it’s main weapon to criticize the Polish Parliament. As it should

the article talks about the genocide of Jews at Auschwitz, but it also uses this as a way to appeal

to your emotional state, so the reader is disgusted by the bill and by Poland’s actions during the

WWII. Logos is applied briefly at the end stating what the bill means from Poland’s freedom of

speech and even show how the washing of history has affected other countries like ourself which

falls back to using pathos. The overall tone of the article is one of anger, while the genera is

persuasive writing. The use of pathos is affective in making the reader feel impassioned in the

article whether it be in agreeing or disagreeing, again appealing to pathos. Egos is barely used in

this article other than the New York Times wrote it so therefore they have the authority to

comment on political stunts. Due to the New York Times being a world wide news source it’s

authority is highly ranked, thus it’s use of egos is very influential. By keeping the article short

the reader is able to maintain focus on it’s message and the writer is able to push logos and

pathos more affectively.

Micah Davis Page 3 of 3
Pro. Sarah Prickett
Comp II
1-31-18
In conclusion the New York Times is affective in this arcticle of making the reader

impassioned about the topic through its use of pathos and logos, harsh verbal cues and poor use

of revised history.