​

Issue #14

Rhetorical Analysis: Thomas Shelby

Dear readers,

Today I'm here with a rhetorical analysis of one of the better speeches in pop culture in recent times - Thomas Shelby's speech in parliament in the beginning of Season 5.

Peaky Blinders' writing has been first rate since the show's inception, and there's a lot that we, the rhetoricians, have to learn from it.

In this analysis you will be able to see (and hopefully recognize) some of the concepts we've talked about already, and further internalize them.

First, here's the youtube link, which I highly recommend you watch.

Here's the full speech:

---

---

Keeping in line with the previous email on the big picture of rhetoric, we'll do a structured analysis, in decreasing order of importance. First, the content: character, emotions, logic. Second: the structure of arguments. Third: The polishing.

1/3. CONTENT ANALYSIS

Character (Ethos)

Tommy establishes his authority through multiple channels - He opens with proper parliamentary protocol ("Thank you Mr. Speaker"), demonstrating institutional respect whilst simultaneously preparing to challenge the establishment. His reference to "the member for Epping" shows he's not merely a provincial troublemaker but someone who understands the political landscape intimately.

Most importantly, he positions himself as authentic representative of the working class - "we are for the shoe shiners and can carriers in south Birmingham" - creating credibility through genuine constituency connection. His economic literacy, demonstrated through knowledge of international finance (Monte Carlo, London, New York), ensures he cannot be dismissed as uninformed.
​
Through these means he gains the respect of the members of parliament, while simultaneously positioning himself as the champion of the working class.

Emotions (Pathos)

The emotional architecture here is quite sophisticated. Tommy taps into class solidarity through carefully chosen imagery - "working man", "shoe shiners", "can carriers" - language that resonates with working-class pride and identity.

The visual contrast between "silk gloves and beaver hats" and humble workers creates emotional distance between classes, whilst the phrase "all across great Britain" expands the emotional connection from local to national scale. The underlying current of moral outrage - workers paying for rich people's gambling losses - provides the emotional fuel that drives the entire speech.

Logic (Logos)

The logical structure employs a rather elegant enthymeme (incomplete syllogism):

• Major Premise (implied): Those who create financial problems should pay for them
• Minor Premise (stated): Wealthy financiers created this crash through reckless gambling
• Conclusion (stated): Therefore, wealthy financiers should pay, not workers

The beauty of this enthymeme is that the major premise is so obviously true it needn't be stated - of course people should pay for their own mistakes. Tommy also employs analogy logic: if gamblers lose at Monte Carlo, they pay their own losses; the same principle should apply to financial markets.

2/3. ARGUMENT STRUCTURE

Tommy follows the classical refutation pattern with considerable skill:

1. Opponent's Position: "Trade union members be more flexible"
2. Translation/Exposure: "What he's really asking, is that the working man carry the can"
3. Counter-Evidence: The casino gambling metaphor
4. Rebuttal: Why this is fundamentally unfair
5. Alternative Solution: Personal responsibility for those who created the problem

This is layered with a comparative structure that runs parallel: Monte Carlo gamblers versus London/New York financiers, contrasting their reckless behavior with the expected outcome that workers should pay, then resolving by applying the same standards to both groups.

3/3. THE POLISHING (Figures of Speech)

Metaphor

The extended casino metaphor is the speech's backbone - financial markets as gambling establishments. This isn't merely decorative; it fundamentally reframes how we think about finance from "sophisticated investing" to "reckless gambling."

Descriptive Imagery

"Gamblers in silk gloves and beaver hats" creates vivid characterization of the wealthy class through clothing details - not metonymy, mind you, but rather precise descriptive imagery that emphasizes their remove from ordinary folk.

Hyperbole

"Monte Carlo is a small and timid affair" - exaggerates scale to emphasize the recklessness of London/New York markets.

Parallelism

The climactic parallelism in "learn to shine their own shoes, carry their own can, and pay their own bills" is particularly well-crafted:

• Structural repetition: verb + "their own" + noun
• Semantic escalation: physical tasks → responsibility → financial consequence
• Rhythmic building: each phrase increases in length and significance

This creates a memorable, almost chant-like quality that drives home the message of personal responsibility.

---

What makes this speech particularly instructive for us

Thomas succeeds because he operates within formal constraints whilst fundamentally challenging assumptions. He respects parliamentary procedure while completely reshaping the conversation. This is precisely what effective persuasion requires - honoring the format while controlling the content.

The techniques demonstrated here -

1. strategic reframing,
2. the translation strategy,
3. authority through specificity,
4. advocacy positioning, and
5. controlled escalation

are directly applicable to professional contexts. Whether you're in boardrooms, negotiations, or presentations, these patterns of persuasion remain remarkably consistent.

This was all for today's email. If you found it useful, share it with someone who has trouble piecing their arguments together. They might benefit from such analyses.

Until next time,
The Rhetorician