Throughout history, tragedy is something that has united people, one way or another.  Whether it was together in anger or together in peace.  These parallel but opposite reactions can be seen within two very famous and important speeches that were delivered in the United States.  Those speeches are the declaration of war on Japan delivered by Franklin D. Roosevelt and the announcement of Martin Luther King Jr's death  given by Robert F. Kennedy.  Roosevelt is delivering his speech to congress, in hopes that they will decide it is proper action to declare war on Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor.  Kennedy is giving his speech in an African American ghetto, where he attempts to keep peace while delivering the news that an iconic civil rights leader has been murdered.  Both RFK and Roosevelt use similar techniques, but those tools are used to achieve opposing goals; one for peace and one for revenge and war.

The beginning of these speeches differ greatly because each speech has a very different intent.  Roosevelt went into great detail and made sure to say, "Ships have been torpedoed on the high seas...very many American lives have been lost." Roosevelt knew that the details were important in order for the listeners to properly empathize with everyone affected by the attacks.  Empathy is a very powerful emotion especially when mixed with the patriotism that is so powerful in America. Patriotism, empathy, and a thirst for justice are the ingredients needed to cultivate the urge for revenge in any crowd of American citizens.  Knowing how to use the audiences emotions is very important when attempting to persuade a group to come to any hard decision.  Roosevelt knew these two elements would rile the congress and increase the chances of declaring war.  On the other hand, RFK went into no detail at all in reference to what actually happened to King.  

Instead of going into detail, RFK is very vague and just says that MLK was "shot and killed". Like Roosevelt, RFK knows that empathy is a strong emotion especially when it is someone who was fighting for your rights.  Martin Luther King Jr. was a massive symbol of hope for anyone who wanted equal rights and equal treatment between fellow humans, but especially for African-Americans.  Kennedy knows many people hearing the news for the first time will feel overwhelming hopelessness and that revenge and anger will come naturally to the them.  In order to diffuse the situation he, himself, empathizes with the crowd by saying, "you can be filled with a desire for revenge.  We can move in that direction...in greater polarization"  The way he words it not only describes the emotion they can choose to be filled with, revenge, but also the outcome of that emotion.  Kennedy knows and conveys to the crowd that if they choose to seek revenge, it will only end in greater polarization of whites and blacks. It may give them temporary satisfaction and a feeling of justice, but the real justice they seek is quality among blacks and whites.  And Kennedy accurately and convincingly conveys that the only way to achieve this is to act peacefully despite this tragedy and try to grow from it. 

RFK quotes a poem that is of huge significance. The poem he quotes is written by Aeschylus. The poem says, in short, that through pain and despair comes wisdom.  This gives the people another way to interpret their anger. Using a poem was a very effective tool because it takes RFK out of the picture and makes the crowd trust what he was saying originally because a third party is agreeing with him. FDR does not specifically use a poem, but he does use a technique that resembles one.   FDR uses four lines in a row that start with "Last night Japanese forces attacked..." followed by a location that was under fire, this repetition is poetic. But it serves a completely different purpose than RFK's use of poetry.  For FDR, he wanted to emphasize the damage and destruction caused by the Japanese.  If he were to just say "Last night Japanese forces attacked..." once and listen all four places at once, the list would feel a lot shorter, some would be lost in mix and in turn it would not be as effective as  listing each one individually.

Another similarity between the two speeches is, both speakers use their position of power to make claims about large groups of people, that seem credible.  FDR proclaims that "The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications the very life and safety of our nation."  FDR has no real basis for saying such a claim, there is no actual evidence of the peoples opinion.  But, FDR is a credible and popular political figure so such claims said by him are taken seriously.  This claim, that the American people have decided war is necessary, puts a tremendous pressure on congress to do the same.  It is, after all, their job to translate the will of the people into law.  

RFK is not innocent of making assumptions either.  In closing, he proclaims, "...the vast majority of white people and the vast majority of black people in this country want to live together, want to improve the quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our land."  What he does here is put something that is hard to prove next to things that are nearly impossible to argue with.  Though a lot of people would argue that the majority of blacks and whites wanted to live together, he puts that claim next to "justice" and "improving the quality of life"  both of which everyone wants.  Putting a problematic statement next to a couple well supported ideas gives it the illusion of credibility especially when coming from someone that already has a political following.  In doing this, it changes the problem from Black vs. White to a problem of bigotry vs. wisdom.  Breaking down the racial barrier that is so well established puts the crowd further at ease.

For FDR, he needed to hype up the tragedy, get people angry about it, and have them feel the urge to seek revenge.  His purpose was to literally start a war.  His ability to write effectively and evoke powerful emotions within congress allowed him to persuade congress into doing what he wanted them to do, declare war on Japan. Kennedy had a completely different problem to solve. RFK had the difficult task of trying to make a crowd, who had just learned their civil rights leader was murdered, turn their thirst for revenge and anger into peace and understanding.  His ability to see how revenge would negatively affect everyone  and ability to interpret that to the crowd was unmatched and extremely affective in calming the audience.  This goes to show that using different literary tools and choosing your words carefully, you can completely change how listeners interpret and react to a tragedy.  In order to become a powerful and successful politician or leader, you must learn how to manipulate facts and situations in order to push an agenda or control large groups of people.  These two speeches given by two great politicians is proof of the importance of this ability. 

