In 'Declare Your Independence' by Joel Salatin, Salatin attempts to bring his
reader's attention to the topic of food production and the role that they play in the
production and consumption of this food. Salatin's argument in this article is that the way
factories produce is unacceptable and as a society we need to go against what the big
corporations are doing and start to control what goes in our bodies. Salatin elaborates on
his argument by using facts about big corporations, facts about current society, and a
multitude of options that can be used to take control of our nutritional lives. In order to
effectively analyze Salatin's argument it will be necessary to examine he use of logos,
pathos, and ethos and how these three writing techniques help him to support his
argument.

In this article Salatin argues that it's time for people to stop eating factory made
products and control their nutrition by producing their own food and begin to slowly
make the current system of factory made foods obsolete. Salatin begins his argument by
telling the readers why he developed such a strong passion for this subject in the first
place. Salatin tells of how he driven by the way big food producing corporations are
falsely making people believe that there is more food to choose from now and that these
food items are healthier for you, when in reality today's food is actually less healthy due
to added in preservatives, corn syrup, and things of that nature. Salatin then addresses the
fact that many people believe that the thought of returning to the old way of producing
food seems impossible and that it could affect overall safety. He elaborates on this by
taking an example from his own life in which people toured his farm and asked how
could it be possible to stabilize human life without the assistance of big factory
corporations. Salatin refutes any doubts that these people might have by using factual
reasoning and mentioning that the last time there was a dairy scare was several decades
ago, prior to the refrigeration use and that people have no problem shooting a deer in the
woods, dragging it in the dirt, and then eating the meat (Salatin 189). Including the
example of hunting deer allowed Salatin to express to his readers that there is no set
standard that describes whether food is safe or not, it all depends on who is the inspector
of the item.

After addressing the topic of safety, Salatin moves into the main idea of the
argument describing how society can take control of the food production and
consumption industry. He begins by acknowledging some of the most talked about
freedoms that Americans have the right to exercise, and how what foods we consume as a
society don't get much attention. Salatin then exhibits his passion for this subject by
saying that 'food has been enslaved by so-called inspectors that deem the most local,
indigenous, heritage-based, and traditional foods unsafe and make them illegal' (189). By
including this strong comparison Salatin is able to express his passion on this subject to
his readers which could make them start to evaluate the current situation and develop
feelings similar to his own. After further elaborating on this point, Salatin then turns his
attention from the government and large food producing corporations, to society and how
the people can change the food industry. He does this by plainly listing the different
techniques that can be taken. Even after making the list, Salatin further simplifies it by
stating that the best thing he and others can do is to refuse to give in to the current food
making system and by doing this simple task, it will inevitably force a large overall
change. To close the article, Salatin lists the four main strategies that he believes will be
the most important for fueling this change: 'Learn to cook again, buy local, buy what's in
season, and plant a garden' (193-195). Salatin goes into great detail with these four
strategies, thoroughly elaborating on each of them to effectively help support his
argument. Overall, Salatin's use of strong emotion, passion, and facts in this article are all
apart of bigger writing techniques called logos, pathos, and ethos which effectively
display the author's argument while simultaneously appealing to the audience and
convincing them to see things from the author's point of view and can be used to analyze
the argumentative technique of a writer.

Logos, more commonly known as a way of appealing to logic, is a way of
reasoning in which the author uses various methods of appealing to their audience. Two
of the main forms of logical reasoning in logos are deduction and induction, which help
the author reach the greater conclusion and express this conclusion to his readers. In this
article, Salatin makes use of inductive reasoning, which 'leads away from particulars and
into a general conclusion (Crowley, Hawhee 124). In Salatin's article he exhibits
inductive reasoning by making statements and then elaborating on these statements by
giving examples. One instance of this would be when Salatin refutes any thoughts of food
corporations being necessary for food safety. He does this by using the example of how
people have no problem going 'out into the woods on a 70-degree fall day; gun-shoot a
deer with possible variant Creutzfeld-Jacob's disease (like mad cow for deer); drag the
carcass a mile through squirrel dung, sticks, and rocks; then drive parade-like through
town in the blazing afternoon sun with the carcass prominently displayed on the hood of
the Blazer' (Salatin 189). By using this example he was able to bring his readers to the
conclusion that the safety of food is merely determined by who the judge is and that them
producing their own food won't lower the safety.

Another aspect of logos that Salatin effectively displays in this article pertains to
four logical methods of reasoning: dialectic, scientific demonstration, rhetoric, and false
reasoning. In this article Salatin utilizes rhetorical reasoning in which he states facts that
are believed to be true and are accepted by most of society, and then after stating these
thoughts, he uses facts to refute the widely accepted premises. An example of this would
be at the beginning of the article when Salatin refers to the idea that many people believe
that we now have a wider variety of foods to choose from in stores. He then refutes this
belief by addressing the fact that most of this food shouldn't be eaten due to the lack of
nutritional value and 'the food additives, preservatives, colorings, emulsifiers, corn
syrups, and unpronounceable ingredients listed on the colorful packages bespeak a
centralized control mindset that actually reduces the options available to fill Americans'
dinner plates' (188). By including this example at this point in the article Salatin is able
to immediately grab his reader's attention and make them more interested in his topic. A
second aspect that Salatin displays through his use of rhetorical reasoning is the
separation of classes. Throughout his use of rhetorical reasoning, Salatin refers to the
creators of the problem as the government and big corporations and he refers to his
audience in the sense that they are equals with him. He exhibits this through his frequent
use of the word 'we', especially when he goes into detail discussing how the people of
society can go about changing the food production industry. Through his separation of
classes he is able to further get people on his side by making the government look like the
enemy and making himself look like a regular person who is affected by the current food
situation just as much as the rest of society. Through his use if examples and logical
reasoning, Salatin was able to effectively use logos to help establish his point, but it is
still necessary that we consider his use of pathos and ethos.

Ethos, is an ethical proof that is more commonly known as the incorporation of
someone's character into writing. When discussing ethos it is important to remember that
within this proof there are two subcategories: situated and invented ethos. Situated ethos,
to simply put it is the author's use of what the audience thinks they know about him
based off of his reputation and character. For this article, Salatin's situated ethos is
derived from the fact that he is a third generation farmer who currently has his own farm.
This is one of his main points for supporting his argument in which frequent mention of
his own farm allows him to show his audience that everything he is saying can be trusted
because he has his own experiences in his everyday life to support his statements.

Invented ethos, the creation of a reputation that an author likes, is also used by
Salatin this article. Salatin's main technique for inventing ethos would be his strategy of
sympathizing with his readers. He exhibits by using words like 'we' when he talks about
the steps that can be taken to improve the food production industry. An example of this
would be when Salatin discusses the idea of society going against the food industry by
saying 'if things are going to change, it is up to you and me to make the change' (191).
By sympathizing with his readers in this way, Salatin is able to establish his invented
ethos of being a regular guy who cares about the well being of others. Situated and
invented ethos combined allows Salatin to effectively display to his readers that he is a
trustworthy person that they should listen to and agree with.

The final step to effectively analyzing Salatin's argumentative technique is to
analyze his use of pathos. Pathos, more commonly known as an authors appeal to his
reader's emotions, is used by Salatin to further prove his argument and refute any false
premises. Two of the main concerns that Salatin talks about in the article are his reader's
expectations for freedom and safety. When talking about freedom, Salatin addresses the
fact that Americans as a whole are extremely serious about freedom, but somehow the
freedom to choose what we eat hasn't gained much attention and isn't taken as seriously.
An example of Satalin supporting this thought is how he addresses the fact that the
United States has become dependant on big corporations and believes 'that without
industrial food, the world would starve' (188). By including this fact Salatin is able to
show his readers that they have given up a basic freedom without realizing. Also Salatin
talking about the topic of freedom is a display of him getting the readers to care even
more about the subject. By talking about freedom at the beginning of the article he is able
to grab his readers early and make them care about the topic. A second concern that he
addresses is the fear that there will be a lack of safety. Salatin talks about this fear by first
refuting the widely accepted thought that food needs to be inspected in a factory for it to
be safe. He then goes on to show his readers that food safety is purely subjective
reminding them of how often people participate in the act of hunting and what it actually
involves. By talking about people's concerns about safety and refuting the false premises,
Salatin is able to prove his point that it is possible to live without big corporations
producing or inspecting our food.

The second half of this article could be seen as Salatin's way of appealing to his
reader's emotions by filling them with passion and eagerness in them when he plainly
writes out how people of society can go about taking back their freedom of food choice.
The most effective way in which Salatin does this is when he lays out the four opt out
strategies and goes into deep detail with each strategy. By separating each strategy, he is
able to show his readers that it is not impossible to overthrow the big food corporations
and that is actually fairly simple. This technique can also be seen as Salatin's way of
getting the readers to see things from his point of view and how he wants the readers to
feel since he includes topics that would fill them with the same passion that he had when
he wrote this article, Through his thorough display of logos, pathos, and ethos, Salatin
was able to effectively get his point across to his audience and he was able to convince
me to agree with his argument and believe that it is possible to have a healthy life without
the help of big food corporations.
