Analysis Of Nelson Mandela's 'Letter From Birmingham Jail'

Martin Luther King Jr. delivered a speech titled “Letter from Birmingham Jail” addressed it to the clergymen he worked with. He delivered his speech while serving his jail term in Birmingham, claiming that the reason he was in jail is not that he had done any wrong, but because there was an injustice. The injustice is mobilizing people to protest for the rights of the blacks and revolt against discrimination. Nelson Mandela also wrote a speech that made him be jailed for standing his position. In court, he deliberately refused to defend himself and instead scripted a speech that showed his readiness to fight for racial equality even if it meant to die for it. Mandela's speech is titled “I am Prepared to Die”, and it gives the reasons why he won't back down his campaigns. Although both authors talk

about racial discrimination, King’s argument is more efficient and persuasive since it employs extensive use of rhetorical analysis of contexts. King’s speech engages readers more than Mandela’s and this creates a difference in the tones of the two speeches.
The two speeches show the relationship between the fight for human rights and racial discrimination in two different contexts. Logos is achieved in the two speeches by the argument and use of rhetorical statements based on logic. For instance, “injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere and whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly” (King). King made these sentiments while trying to explain the reason for demonstrations. He was answering his critiques by explaining that the blacks had tolerated injustices for long periods and negotiations had almost or failed to resolve their plight. They, therefore, had decided to use direct actions, to claim fair treatment from the whites. He recognizes “oppressors are never willing to give freedom freely, and therefore it is upon the oppressed to demand it” (King). He always looked forward to a society where fairness and justice would dominate, a culture where the son of a peasant would sit and share a table with a son of an emperor, a society where a black complexion would walk and intermingle with the white freely. He dreamt of a United States where the white will not be preferred for an employment position due to color, or given priority for a service at the expense of a black.
On the other hand, Mandela’s speech questions logic in different ways and rhetorical devices are employed to achieve this. He argues that when he goes to court, the judge, prosecutor and the policeman whom he meets with are all white. This implies that there is no way justice can be administered without a balance between the blacks and white people in the South African setting. Both Mandela and King had realized that the blacks were receiving all sorts of ill-treatment in public social places and courts of law. They were also treated as if they were fewer citizens when it came to allocation of state's resources. Mandela, just like King advocates for the obedience to just laws, laws that uphold human dignity. “Any law that deprives human beings of their dignity he refers to as unjust laws and says that they should not be obeyed” (King). King responds to the critique that condemns their direct action terming it as criminal, by comparing it with condemning Socrates for his philosophical thoughts that brought today's education freedom. He argues that it makes no sense to criticize actions that lead to people's freedom.

Both incorporate rhetorical strategies to develop appeal to pathos. In the speech, King expresses his disappointment with the moderate white people for not supporting the direct action. He expresses a lot of passion in the fight against white supremacy and racial discrimination. Although the white moderate agrees with the search for freedom and against oppression for the black American, he disagrees with the idea of confronting the issue and advocates for patience and allocation of more time, because eventually equality will be achieved. For Junior, that would mean that the black has accepted his plight and that fairness and justice will never be arrived at, human dignity will never be achieved.
King condemns the Africa-Americans who counter his actions because they have adjusted and accepted their condition of oppression. He urges them to gain back their self-respect and fight for what is right instead of accepting their plight; that they are less human than the white Americans. On the same note, he condemns the black Americans who did not participate in the fight against oppression because they had adopted the white American's thinking through civilization and civic education, thus they were insensitive to the problems of the negro. He says that the solution to their problem is adopting the non-violent ways of fighting oppression and embrace love for everyone including the whites. He believes that racial justice can be achieved through self-realization and manifesting the hidden pain and emotions, the suppressed frustrations and discontent that the whites have placed on them. The way out is letting the whole world know that they are aware of the racial discrimination that exists and that they are ready to act so that fairness can be achieved.
The use of rhetorical strategies to achieve pathos in Mandela’s speech is presented when he says that “…I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination…”(O’Malley) Nelson Mandela was pained when the South African natives were being oppressed. First, they were not allowed to take part in the voting process which means that they were restricted in the practice of their democratic rights. The country was European dominated by only the whites taking part in the voting process. The result was, only white presidents were going to rule South Africa because there is no way the whites would vote for a black leader. Nelson Mandela felt that it was unfair for the African to continue being ruled by the white, facing discrimination and oppression under their governance. He, therefore, dedicated his life to fighting for equality and against racial discrimination. This speech that was delivered before his trial convinced the South African government that Nelson was not going to back down, and therefore he was jailed for the next 27 years, charged with sabotage and treachery.
Mandela used rhetoric to convince the masses to protest against racial inequality. He uses logical reasoning (logos) to explain his actions and to justify the public that there was nothing wrong with what he was doing. He was able to convince them to join hands with him to fight against inequality. Mandela was also able to incorporate ethos to justify his morals. Although the white government had termed him as a rebel, he refuted the oppression of the white man by convincing his followers that what as unethical was the oppression that the white man subjected them to, and not his liberation campaigns. In his speech, Mandela put himself as one of the people, a technique that made the black South Africans feel that they were part of the plight and that by joining the movement they were going to fight for their rights and not Nelson's rights.
Both texts explore the use of ethos in expressing different messages concerning the liberty speeches. The appeal to emotions is presented in different ways and this is achieved by different rhetorical features. Mandela insists on the need for people to embrace education. He says that “Education is the most powerful weapon that people should use to change the world”
He refuted that the non-violent ways were taking too long to be noticed and they felt that the government would never implement equality.

Taking responsibility as being one the founders of a military wing, he explained to the court that, "I did not form the armed wing in a spirit of recklessness, nor because I love violence. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation that arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation, and oppression of the South Africans by the whites". He proved to the court that non-violent means were on workable because they had tried to apply them but fruitlessly, and that is how they had resolved to use the violent means. Despite his lawyers' efforts to make him withdraw his last statement in the speech, Mandela went ahead and announced before the judges. He was ready to stay to see justice and equality applied to both blacks and whites, but if that didn't happen, he said: "it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."(O’Malley) Mandela also talks about money and success. He says that money won’t create success but the freedom to make the money is what can bring success. This is an ethical

teaching.
On the other hand, King uses ethos in different ways. Before his speech, he introduces himself as the president of the SCLC. “My dear fellow clergymen, while confined here in Birmingham jail…”(King) Introduction is a good representation of ethics since people should consider introducing themselves so that listeners can know them better. King also believes that the moral standards of the US community is important and calls on people to respect these moral standards. He believes that all people should be respected regardless of color and they should be given equal opportunities in different issues especially in political matters. King says most people do not have the courage to raise their voices to be heard and others are fear the repercussions of speaking. He says that it is bold with a determined soul and a stout heart who will achieve the dream of every American Negro, which is freedom and fairness for them and their future generations. He says that he looks forward to the day the whites will treat them as their brothers and when the whites will be preaching love and integration for all people when the whites will realize that they are all equal and that they are all God's creatures.
In conclusion, both Mandela and King agree that the black is oppressed and faced with humiliation in the hands of the white. They both have faced inequality in their daily lives. They have witnessed the blacks being treated as less human by the whites. At first, both King and Mandela advocate for non-violent action to acquire justice, Luther goes on and encourages direct action while Mandela goes for violent approaches.