Letter From Birmingham Jail

165

Critical Analysis of “Letter from Birmingham Jail” Essay

September 29, 2020 by Essay Writer

Introduction

The article is about the injustice meted out on the African Americans in the US before the passing of the Civil Rights law that initiated sweeping civil reforms in the US, guaranteeing equal rights for African American citizens. Written as a letter by Martin Luther King Jr., the text criticises the lack of progress in the elimination of oppressive segregation laws in the American South.

The author further criticizes white Christian leaders in the American South, accusing them of not being vocal enough in condemning the evil inherent in segregation laws. The author accuses these leaders of supporting the status quo by refusing to support the cause of the Americans in their attempt to have these laws changed or repealed.

The letter is addressed specifically to the Southern Christian and Jewish leaders, who had asked the author to stop his non-violent campaigns in Birmingham, for the sake of overall peace in the city. The author, in response, wrote this letter to explain why his campaigns were necessary, and garner their support for similar future campaigns in an attempt to rid the American South of the repressive segregation laws.

Author’s Two Main Concerns

The author addresses two overriding issues in his attempt to convince these Southern religious leaders (and other concerned readers) why the segregation laws were unjust, and why inaction would never result in a change. The author states that, segregation laws were unjust because they deprived African Americans a sense of self; moreover, African Americans had an obligation to fight these unjust laws.

According to the author, the segregation laws made African Americans acquire a sense of inferiority. The author lists the evils that are visited on African Americans because of these laws. African Americans were routinely lynched by mobs, killed by police, referred to in derogatory terms such as “boy”, and denied entry to various social places due to their race (Par. 15).

Such events weighed heavily on the consciences of African Americans, leading them to have a belief that they were inherently inferior to their white counterparts. The second issue that the author addresses is the belief that the fight for change and the repeal of these unjust laws cannot be postponed or delayed.

Since the Southern religious leaders had requested the author to exercise patience in his demand for reforms, the author is adamant that his non-violent push for equal rights for African Americans could not wait for an ideal or opportune time to proceed – justice delayed too him was justice denied (Par. 14).

Critical Response and Analysis

These two concerns by the author are justified. The argument that the segregation laws were inherently unjust, contributed to high poverty rates amongst African Americans, and made African Americans to feel inferior to their white counterparts is plausible. Segregation laws were ratified by most constitutions in Southern States; therefore, such laws, however unjust, acquired a sense of legitimacy amongst the citizens of these states.

Subsequently, most educational, religious, public and private institutions would, out of obedience to state constitutions, pursue policies that entrenched segregation. Due to this almost omniscient presence of segregation laws and policies, the average African American would, in his daily practice, encounter some form of discrimination.

African American children would also easily encounter and perceive discriminative acts against them. Therefore, due to the high prevalence of such discriminative laws, African Americans easily and inevitably acquired a belief that they belonged to an inferior race.

Secondly, the author is justified in being impatient with the pace of reform in the country. The author informs the Southern religious leaders, who had urged him to be patient in his demand for reforms, that had they been the ones to experience the effects of the unjust segregation laws, they would not urge for caution and patience.

According to the author, “freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed” (Luther, 1963, Par. 14). African Americans were right in being impatient with the slow and almost nonexistent pace of reforms in the country, and in the Southern States in particular. The emancipation proclamation by President Abraham Lincoln, which effectively ended slavery in the US, was signed in 1864.

This proclamation was supposed to grant African Americans equal citizenship rights, and was intended to free them from all forms of discrimination previously directed at them. The author writes his text/letter almost 100 years later and yet African Americans are still in some form of bondage wrought by segregation laws.

Clearly, the African American benefited little from leaving the struggle for equality in the hands of his oppressor. African Americans were thus right in engaging in non-violent protest and other forms of civil action to push the concerned leaders to repeal these discriminative laws.

Textual Analysis

The author uses many relevant analogies, quotes, observations and examples to state his purpose and give credence to his argument. The author states his most graphic example of the discriminative, vile and heinous acts experienced by African Americans in paragraph 15.

The author describes the atrocities committed by white mobs and the police on African Americans. He chronicles the acts, beginning with African American mothers and fathers being lynched, African American youth being cursed, kicked and killed by the police, and proceeds to list other such crimes, ending the list with instances of African Americans being referred derogatively as “boy” regardless of age, and African American women not being properly addressed as “Mrs.”

The crux of the author’s argument on why his followers could not afford to be patient in their demand for reform rests on the examples of heinous acts meted on African Americans stated here. The order of these crimes on African Americans as placed by the author almost obscures the deadly crimes such as lynching and extra-judicial deaths.

By ending his numerous examples with comparatively minor acts of African Americans being referred to as “boy”, or the women not being given the title “Mrs.”, the author makes the serious crimes of lynching and extra-judicial killings appear less so.

The progression should have started with these minor acts and ended with the unforgivable, wicked and heinous crimes of lynching, extra-judicial killings and beatings, to make them more prominent, as they would be if they were to appear at the end of the list. Such an arrangement would foreground these serious crimes, and subsequently stir indignation in any reader. It would also explain why waiting for reforms to take place at a slow pace advocated by the Southern religious leaders was not an option – lives were at stake.

Conclusion

The author has convincingly stated his purpose; that of highlighting the unjustness of the segregation law, and the need for a pro-active approach bring about the repeal of these laws. His example on crimes against committed against African Americans, served to highlight the less serious crimes at the expense of crimes such as lynching and murder.

Reference

Luther, M. (1963). Letter from Birmingham Jail. The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute. Web.

Read more

517

King’s ‘The letter from Birmingham Jail’ Essay

September 29, 2020 by Essay Writer

‘The letter from Birmingham Jail’ was written by king junior during his incarceration in the jail of Birmingham. This showed that despite the fact that he was lonely in the prison, his resolve to fight for the freedom of the black people was still strong. He says that he was in Birmingham because there was injustice.

By saying this, he means that regardless of the discrimination and racial prejudices that prevailed, he was prepared to fight for the freedom of the blacks. His letter was a response to another letter written by the clergy complaining about the demonstrations that were agitating for the freedom of the blacks.

King’s letter has the capacity to evoke patriotic feelings among the readers. He agrees that there are many states in the US but the cohesiveness of the nation as a single unit is vital. The constraint in the letter is that racism does not play any part in a nation that is united and one that focuses on progression.

Racial prejudices and discrimination have the impact of damaging the structure and foundation associated with the greatness of the US. He says that the oppressors do not give freedom voluntarily unless the oppressed fight for it. With reference to history, people in authority find it difficult to give up their positions and in most cases, they are corrupted by the power they yield. This leads to dictatorship that limits the freedom of people greatly.

King’s main issue in his letter is racial discrimination and the injustices that the black people are exposed to. He is concerned about the interrelatedness of all communities because according to him, injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. As a result, he is fighting for the emancipation of the black population and other colored people in the United States.

He claims that since the clergy is not willing to listen to them and give them their rights, they have to show the importance of the matter by holding non-violent demonstrations. He says that there are just and unjust laws and tries to distinguish between the two. He does this in a bid to ensure that there are no laws that perpetuate racial discrimination.

With regard to the letter from the clergy, the main issue is the demonstrations being held by the oppressed who support King. They claim that the activities being spearheaded by king are untimely and unwise. In their letter, they strongly argue against the demonstrations taking place.

They say that the habit of holding demonstrations is not the right way to address the issues the blacks want to be addressed. According to them, the action taken by king and his associates is untimely. This is basically because they have not given the new administration of the city enough time to act. Instead, they have resorted to extreme actions. Although the demonstrations are non-violent, the clergy is of the view that they will eventually precipitate violence hence they should be stopped.

The claim by the clergy that the demonstrations will trigger violence although they are peaceful is a fallacy. According to them, the end result of the demonstrations will be violence. King uses rebuttal to convince them that non-violent demonstrations cannot lead to violence. He tells them that this is not a logical assertion and uses analogies. For instance, he says that it is similar to condemning a person who has been robbed because the fact that he had money caused the robbery.

In King’s letter, the support comes from the associates and the oppressed people who feel that they should not continue to live in oppression. After so many years of suffering, the black people have come out in support of king by saying that they must be granted their freedom.

The oppressor does not give freedom willingly unless it is demanded by the oppressed. The warrant in the letter is that the teachings of Christ manifest themselves slowly. King uses biblical allusions as a form of backing in his letter. He refers to biblical characters that were determined to leave their home villages in order to liberate their people. He likens himself to them and says that he will leave his hometown to ensure that all people are free.

The letter from the clergy has its support in the argument that the actions of King and his associates are wrong and should not take place. They support their argument by saying that the actions are untimely and unwise because the new administration should have been given some time to take action.

There warrants and backing is based on the law. They use the law to shield themselves and prevent the demonstrations from taking place. According to them, the law prohibits such demonstrations hence they are able to take action against demonstrators on its basis.

One unethical quality that is evident in the letter by the clergy is that it tries to silence the demonstrators not because there is a good reason to do it, but simply because there is racial discrimination. The act of preventing them from demonstrating is aimed at ensuring that they never get their rights. It is unethical for human beings to deny their fellow human beings their rights.

The second unethical issue in the letter written by the clergy is that it is morally wrong for the church to be an instrument of oppression. On the contrary, churches are expected to be on the forefront in fighting for the rights of all people and ensuring that justice prevails everywhere. Their act of trying to oppress people is therefore unethical.

In kings’ letter, one of the unethical issues is his constant blame on the church. He argues that he was raised in the church and he is still a minister of the gospel. It is unethical that he has identified many flaws in the church yet he has been part of the church and has never taken any action to correct the ills that are prevalent in the same church.

The second unethical issue that is evident in the letter is that King compares himself with biblical characters. Although he is very determined to fight for his cause, he might not be able to do what the biblical characters did or march their achievements.

It is factual that there is injustice which emanates from racial discrimination and that is why King is in jail. Since the clergy does not want to listen to the issues of the blacks and give them their rights, the only option is to fight for their freedom. King’s letter is effective because it highlights the concerns of the black people and points out where the clergy has gone wrong.

It is more effective than the one written by the clergy in that it gives facts and highlights the things that the clergy should have considered before raising there issues. While King’s letter is elaborate, the one written by the clergy is sketchy and does not give convincing reasons for its arguments.

Read more

312

Fighting Inequality with the Past: A Look into “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” and Related Historical Documents

July 18, 2019 by Essay Writer

In his letter to the clergymen, Dr. Martin Luther King utilizes many of the intellectual concepts that President Thomas Jefferson employed in the writing of the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America. While highlighting Jefferson’s more idealistic approach, Dr. King continuously references his own religious background in order to establish an emotional and fundamental connection with the clergymen. Although Jefferson took a much less up-front approach when incorporating religion into his compositions and doctrines than Dr. King, King’s ideas of unity and reason through God closely resemble those of President Abraham Lincoln, and more specifically in Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address. By harmonizing the approach of the two Presidents, Dr. King composes a rather compelling letter from his jail cell.

Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence asserts that “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” [1] As the dawn of an independent United States approached, those living in the colonies were treated with little respect from their British rulers. This led Jefferson to construct a document in which the rights and safety of the people of the new nation rested firmly in the highest echelon of priority. While Jefferson asserts that all men are created equal, for King’s purposes, the Jefferson’s idea of constituents challenging the government is more central. All men are created equally, but recognizing and understanding the differences in order to achieve equality was King’s goal. After the clergymen reprimanded Dr. King and his followers for conducting “unwise and untimely” protests, he replied “that the new administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one before it acts.” [2] Dr. King felt that the old and new administrations in Birmingham turned their backs on their promises to desegregate some of the institutions in the city. When no results came to fruition, Dr. King, much like Jefferson, took action and fought for the safety and happiness of his people.

Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address highlights that “the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether” [3]. This reference alludes to the Lincoln’s idea that God brought woe unto the United States in the form of the Civil War as a punishment for slavery. In the Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Dr. King argues that unjust laws must be disobeyed. He also quotes Saint Augustine by stating “an unjust law is no law at all”. While it may be aloof to directly compare Lincoln’s idea of God to Dr. King himself, the similarities are apparent. Dr. King brought protests to Birmingham as a response to the discourse over racial equality, while God brought about the war as a response to slavery in the States. Each of these events, worldly and otherworldly, emphasize Lincoln’s ideas of religion as a road to equality. In King’s eyes, devotion to God was the key to unity between the races. Lincoln viewed God’s actions as consequences for man’s atrocities, while King viewed God’s actions as rewards for loyalty.

Although many ideological similarities exist between King’s letter and the addresses of the two Presidents, the foundations of them are inherently different. While Jefferson and King composed their publications in order to address some type of inequality, the purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to separate the colonists from the British Empire. In contrast, King’s letter was an attempt to help the clergymen understand why King and his followers are protesting in order to subsequently unite the white church and the black church. Furthermore, Lincoln felt that the Civil War was an inevitable response of God (“’Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come.’” [3]), while King felt that trusting in God and living a life of religious introspection would be the key to unlocking the door to unity and equality.

While Dr. King may not have directly quoted or referenced the way Jefferson or Lincoln thought, the similarities between his and their words and actions are evident. King and Jefferson view the rights of man as inalienable and inherent. King and Lincoln view that through God, justice will inevitably be achieved through trust in Him. As racial inequality still presents itself as a hot topic today, it is important to look back on historical texts such as King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail and relate our current issues to the issues our country has experienced in the past.

References

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence

[2]: https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln%27s_second_inaugural_address

Read more

2080

Rhetorical Analysis of “Letter From a Birmingham Jail”

May 13, 2019 by Essay Writer

At the peak of the Civil War Movement in America on April 12th, 1963, eight Alabama clergymen made a public statement announcing that Dr. Martin Luther King’s protests in the streets should end because they promote “hatred and violence” (par. 5). The clergymen condemn using nonviolent disobedience to obtain civil rights for the black people in Birmingham and believe that if whites and blacks come together to discuss this issue, there will be a better outcome for everyone. They also believed that Dr. King was just an “outsider” who wanted to stir up trouble in Birmingham (par. 3). During the time that the clergymen released their statement, Dr. Martin Luther King was in a Birmingham jail; arrested for protesting. While in his cell, Dr. King wrote “Letter From a Birmingham Jail” to inform the clergymen that he had a right to be in Birmingham and there are moral, just, and deserving reasons behind his actions. He uses rhetorical devices to persuade not only them, but the rest of the American people through the use of ethos (credibility), pathos (emotions), and logos (reason). By using these various devices, Dr. King is able to effectively convey his letter to his audience and gain the support needed for the Civil War Movement.

During the 1960s in America, Dr. King served as the president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). The SCLC, which operates in every southern state with its headquarters residing in Atlanta, Georgia, was formed to help push the abolishment of segregation and to end the oppression of blacks using nonviolent tactics. There are 85 affiliated organizations across the south and one of them is the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights (ACMHR). Dr. King along with the rest of the SCLC decided to come to Birmingham and assist ACMHR once a group member asked them to help engage in a nonviolent direct action program if necessary. Birmingham especially needed a call to action during this time since there was a strong prevalence of the KKK and brutality from the police officers and other law officials. Dr. King referred to Birmingham as “America’s worst city for racism” and made it his goal to bring justice and peace to all of its people, not only for the state but for the rest of the country.

In order to strengthen his argument and increase his credibility, Dr. King uses various forms of rhetorical devices in his letter. He uses parallelism when he says, “But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; …when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: “Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?” (383). The repeated use of “when you” emphasizes the countless ways blacks have been mistreated. The use of parallelism really etches into the audience’s mind the seemingly never-ending hardships blacks face and the repetition makes it seem like a regular routine they endure. Dr. King also includes metaphors in his letter such as when he says he sees “twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society.” (383). This metaphor paints a visual picture in the audience’s mind of the oppression they go through that seems to have no door to escape. They are forced to look at the privileges and freedoms that the white people in their community have, and there is no way for them to achieve it. Also, by saying they are confined in an airtight cage, it dehumanizes the blacks and subjects them to animals without any rights. Since Dr. King used multiple rhetorical devices in his letter, the audience views his argument as more credible since he has personal experience with seeing the injustice blacks endure. By his use of parallelism and metaphors, the audience has a better understanding of Dr. King’s argument and therefore can sympathize with him and support his ultimate goal.

Dr. King is also able to grasp the reader’s attention and allow them to sympathize with what black people have endured throughout America with the use of pathos. By vividly describing the violence, injustice, and brutality Dr. King has witnessed or experienced, the audience is able to better understand the issue at hand and therefore will more likely side with his standpoints and actions as opposed to the clergymen. In response to the clergymen’s opinion that the Birmingham police are keeping order and preventing violence, Dr. King says, “I doubt that you would have so warmly commended the policemen if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes.” it clearly broadcasts the image in the reader’s mind (391). Using the words “sinking their teeth”, “unarmed”, and “nonviolent” causes the audience to truly see the inhumane brutality behind the police’s actions towards people who are peacefully protesting. The people are able to see that while the police claim they are providing protection for the community, they are actually only doing harm. Dr. King also tells his audience that discrimination and segregation affects everyone when he says, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly” (380). This shows that everyone, regardless of race, is affected by the injustice occurring in the 1960s. If a group of people is oppressed, the rest of the population cannot progress or succeed. Knowing this, the audience will be more inclined to contribute to the social change. Dr. King puts the effect of segregation and racism on society as a whole into perspective and the readers are now able to see this barrier that keeps society from advancing too. From his use of pathos, the reader is able to better agree with the point being made and better able to sympathize with Dr. King and the millions of other people that experience this injustice. If Dr. King hadn’t chosen phrases and sentences that appeal to the reader’s emotions, he wouldn’t have received such strong support and understanding behind his actions and everyone else’s during the Civil Rights Movement. The audience was therefore more inclined to sympathize with the blacks and the treatment they have received than the clergymen and the government officials.

To effectively have the clergymen and the rest of the American people believe and side with his arguments, Dr. King must have sufficient facts and reason. In order to do this, he uses logos when he says, “There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in this nation. These are the hard, brutal, and unbelievable facts.” (381). By providing his audience with unarguable facts that provide evidence of the excessive violence in Birmingham, Dr. King not only improves his credibility and trust, but enhances his overall argument.

Dr. Martin Luther King was an extremely prominent and influential member of the Civil Rights Movement during the 1960s. He was able to effectively show the American people the injustices the black community faced, why nonviolent protests were crucial to the movement, and what needed to be changed to bring equality and peace to America. Without his use of rhetorical devices, his audience would not be able to truly grasp the argument he was conveying, thus the Civil Rights Movement wouldn’t be as successful and monumental as it ended up being. Using ethos, pathos, and logos made his letter more credible, logical, and better to understand and sympathize with. If Dr. King had not written such a strong and effective letter from the use of rhetorical devices, the strength of the Civil Rights Movement uproar and momentum that it is remembered today would be diminished.

Read more

468

A Question of Appeal: Rhetorical Analysis of Malcolm X and MLK

March 24, 2019 by Essay Writer

As outspoken leaders of the Civil Rights Movement, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. urged black Americans to pursue equality with uncompromising dignity; however, each held a distinct opinion about the proper methods and the purpose of such action. In his impassioned speech, “The Ballot or the Bullet,” X directly addresses the listener, advocating for the “reciprocation” of violence in the name of equality and self-respect. Decrying the American government, he makes clear his emphatic stance against the brutality of the white establishment. Conversely, in King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” he exalts the instances of civil disobedience carried out by nonviolent protestors, maintaining that when preexisting tension is brought to light, the resulting outcry will lead to widespread change. King’s letter employs a persistent appeal to mainstream Christian, American values, a strict adherence to nonviolence, and a readiness to work within established systems. This consideration of deep-seated social mores widens the accessibility of his arguments and thus makes his rhetorical stance more effective than X’s more revolutionary ideology.

X’s speech seeks to empathize with politically disillusioned African Americans and offer the black nationalist perspective as a solution to their discontent. “All of us have suffered here, in this country” he proclaims, citing “political oppression…, economic exploitation…, and social degradation at the hands of the white man.” Then, alluding to the upcoming election cycle, he further decries the “white political crooks [who] will be right back in your and my community,” whose “treachery” and “false promises” have frustrated black citizens, creating a cynical minority population which “just doesn’t intend to turn the other cheek any longer.” This is the outset of X’s speech, and he phrases it deliberately, creating an us-vs-them narrative and being sure to align himself with the “us”—the audience, members of “your and my community.” He lets the listener know that he shares his disdain of the racist national establishment:

“No, I’m not an American. I’m one of the 22 million black people who are the victims of Americanism…So, I’m not standing here speaking to you as an American, or a patriot, or a flag-saluter, or a flag-waver—no, not I. I’m speaking as a victim of this American system…I don’t see any American dream; I see an American nightmare.”

X absolutely denounces any respect for the idealized vision of America, and he channels this contempt into an urge to take a stand. “These 22 million victims are waking up…” he says, “We want freedom now, but we’re not going to get it saying ‘We Shall Overcome.’ We’ve got to fight until we overcome.” The fight referenced here is, to X, quite literally a battle for freedom.

X’s speech is punctuated with repetition of the phrase, “the ballot or the bullet,” reinforcing the idea that when denied basic human rights, a person is entitled, if not obligated, to physically defend himself and reciprocate the violence of others. When kept voiceless and unrepresented in government, he must protect his freedoms in other ways. “If it’s necessary to form a black nationalist army, we’ll form a black nationalist army. It’ll be the ballot or the bullet. It’ll be liberty or it’ll be death.” He is arguing that the systems already in place are not conducive to the attainment of freedom for black people. If real, tangible change is to occur, it must be through force because America’s “so-called democracy” certainly will not allow it.

Seeking the support of his audience, X paints this pointedly radical, dissident stance as mainstream:

“The political philosophy of black nationalism is being taught in the Christian church…in the NAACP…in CORE meetings…in SNCC meetings…in Muslim meetings…where nothing but atheists and agnostics come together. It’s being taught everywhere.”

He not only aligns his views with what is most popular, but also extends his persuasive effort beyond what is traditionally American, contrasting his viewpoint with the markedly biblical rationale of Martin Luther King.

Dr. King cannot be called a conservative thinker; he sees the injustices in America and implores his audience to take action. In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” he proclaims, “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” He recognizes the plight of black Americans and empathizes with their desire to make a change. “When you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments,” he remarks, “then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.” Clearly, he does not try to downplay the significance of the crime of segregation or the moral imperative of protests. However, he acknowledges that the solution to this institutional problem must itself take place within the systems of power that control American policy.

King has faith that the American people are capable of exacting change when confronted with the blatant truth of systematic oppression, and that swaying the “national opinion” can be a dramatic accomplishment. Distancing his movement from any intentional acts of violence, he explains, “Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with.” His goal is not immediate retribution but a chance to constructively interact with the American institutions that perpetuate racial discrimination. “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue,” he writes, implying that positive change will come if the issue is brought to the attention of the American public. This optimism is a result of a firmly-held belief in the progressive strength of American democratic values, which he encourages his audience to embrace, stating, “Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity.” Success will not come through a violent upheaval, but through a coordinated movement within America’s existing channels for change. A reform of the system must occur within the means of the system, King argues, making his stance seem more pragmatic than that of Malcolm X.

Beyond acknowledging the staying power of governmental structures, King uses the widespread influence of American traditions to his rhetorical advantage, constantly aligning his viewpoints with important historical figures and ideals. His justification for civil disobedience leans heavily on elements of Christianity and cites St. Augustine’s statement that “an unjust law is no law at all.” Connecting this religious perspective to the more secular and patriotic, he states:

“Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience…It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks…To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.”

These stories assure the reader that King’s movement is on the right side of history. By placing civil rights activists alongside philosophers and revolutionaries, he builds enthusiasm and borrows credibility. Finally, to conclude his letter, he asserts:

“One day the South will know that when these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judeo-Christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.”

This impactful summation brings together the powerful ideas King uses to support his viewpoint. His love for America as a nation is evidenced by the mention of its most sacred core values, founding principles, and spiritual heritage, and this pro-American perspective makes it easier for those who are not quite so cynical about the nation’s future to receive King’s argument.

Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, with justice and righteousness in mind, called upon Americans to transform their racially divided nation. Each knew the burden faced by black Americans in the era of illegal segregation and made clear their intentions to overcome these hardships. King’s perspective, no more apologetic or tolerant of racism, aligned with the more pervasive social establishments of the time and was thus more capable of attracting a wider base of support, and the American Civil Rights Movement is now very strongly associated with his philosophy of nonviolent protest.

Read more