Often times Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” are studied simultaneously. The reason for this is both works explore unjust laws. Martin Luther King Jr.’s focus is on unjust laws in civil rights, while Henry David Thoreau’s focus is on unjust laws regarding slavery in the Mexican-American War. Although the works focus on two different time periods, King and Thoreau’s attitude towards laws that did not conform to moral justice resembled. Martin Luther King addresses just and unjust laws in his letter. King’s intended audience was the clergyman, who called his present activities “unwise and untimely” (378). King states he normally has no time to time for such correspondence, but he responds to the clergymen because he feels those men are genuinely good men. King begins by addressing the claim that he is an “outsider” (378). He states that he is the president of the Southern Christian …show more content…
Thoreau believed the government that governed the least was the best type of government. He does not call for no government just a better government (306). Thoreau acknowledges that when the power is in the hands of the people a majority is formed. The majority rule because physically they are the strongest. Thoreau compares soldiers to machines because they are fighting against their wills and consciences. Thoreau points out that one is not obligated to spend his life removing evil from the world, but one is obligated to distance oneself from the evil law. He argues that the practice of aggressive war and support of slavery in the United States mirrors that of an unjust government. Thoreau expresses his experiences as an example for not supporting unjust laws. He refused to pay taxes that supported the Mexican-American War, and consequently he spent the night in
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote his famous “A Letter from the Birmingham Jail” on April 16, 1963 while he was imprisoned in the Birmingham Jail for being involved in nonviolent protests against segregation. The letter is directed at eight white clergymen from Alabama who were very cynical and critical towards African Americans in one of their statements. Throughout the letter, King maintains an understanding yet persistent tone by arguing the points of the clergymen and providing answers to any counterarguments they may have. In the letter, King outlines the goals of his movement and says that he will fight racial inequality wherever it may be. Dr. King uses the appeal three main rhetorical devices – ethos, logos, and pathos – in order to firmly, yet politely, argue the clergymen on the injustices spoken of in their statement.
The two essays, "Civil Disobedience," by Henry David Thoreau, and "Letter From a Birmingham Jail," by Martin Luther King, Jr., effectively illustrate the authors' opinions of justice. Each author has his main point; Thoreau, in dealing with justice as it relates to government, asks for "not at once no government, but at once a better government. King contends that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Both essays offer a complete argument for justice, but, given the conditions, King's essay remains more effective, in that its persuasive techniques have more practical application. Both essays extensively implement both emotional and ethical appeal to give their respective ideas validity.
Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau each write exemplary persuasive essays that depict social injustice and discuss civil disobedience, which is the refusal to comply with the law in order to prove a point. In his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King speaks to a specific audience: the African Americans, and discusses why he feels they should bring an end to segregation. Thoreau on the other hand, in “Civil Disobedience,” speaks to a broader, non-addressed audience as he largely expresses his feelings towards what he feels is an unjust government. Both essays however, focus on the mutual topics of morality and justice and use these topics to inform and motivate their audience to, at times, defy the government in order to establish the necessary justice.
In Martin Luther King’s letter from Birmingham Jail, pathos, ethos, and logos are vividly expressed throughout it. All three rhetorical devices are vital to the meaning of the letter; the most influential being pathos. MLK takes advantage of the human body’s strong response to emotion. It is illustrated in his appeal to empathy, exercised mainly through gruesome depictions; his call for action to his peers, as shown when he expresses his disappointment in them as they preserve order over justice; and his strategic use of pathos as a supporting effort for both ethos and logos arguments.
In 1848, David Thoreau addressed and lectured civil disobedience to the Concord Lyceum in response to his jail time related to his protest of slavery and the Mexican War. In his lecture, Thoreau expresses in the beginning “That government is best which governs least,” which sets the topic for the rest of the lecture, and is arguably the overall theme of his speech. He chastises American institutions and policies, attempting to expand his views to others. In addition, he advances his views to his audience by way of urgency, analyzing the misdeeds of the government while stressing the time-critical importance of civil disobedience. Thoreau addresses civil disobedience to apprise the people of the need for a civil protest to the unjust laws created against the slaves and the Mexican-American war.
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attentions than the others are neglected; ergo, some individuals aim to change that. The principles of civil disobedience, which are advocated in both “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. to the society, is present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose.
Dr. Martin Luther King addressed many topics in, “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. He answered all the issues that were aimed towards him in a very skillful and well thought out manner. These issues came from, “A Call For Unity”, which was a letter published by eight local clergymen expressing their feelings about what Dr. King was doing. One concern in particular that King did an outstanding job of confronting was that of the clergymen’s anxiety about him breaking the law. King addresses the question of, “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” by clarifying that there are just and unjust laws. He also goes on to explain the difference between the two, the effect of unjust laws on the people that they are aimed towards, as
In “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau claims that men should act from their conscience. Thoreau believed it was the duty of a person to disobey the law if his conscience says that the law is unjust. He believed this even if the law was made by a democratic process. Thoreau wrote that a law is not just, only because the majority votes for it. He wrote, “Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?” (Thoreau, P. 4). Thoreau wanted a government in the United States that would make the just laws based on conscience, because the people of the country would not let the elected representatives be unfair. Thoreau did not think people can disobey any law when they want to. He believed that people should obey just laws; however, Thoreau thought that not all laws were right, and he wrote that a man must obey what is right, not what is the law: “It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right” (Thoreau, P. 4).
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was the leader of a peaceful movement to end segregation in the United States this mission led him in 1963 to Birmingham, Alabama where officials and leaders in the community actively fought against desegregation. While performing sit-ins, marches and other nonviolent protests, King was imprisoned by authorities for violating the strict segregation laws. While imprisoned King wrote a letter entitled “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, in which he expresses his disappointment in the clergy, officials, and people of Birmingham. This letter employed pathos to argue that the leaders and ‘heroes’ in Birmingham during the struggle were at fault or went against their beliefs.
This letter covers the ways in which peaceful protest and standing up against injustice can lead to positive results. Both pieces conveyed a similar message of standing up for what is right. The strongest rhetorical methods which Thoreau uses are allusions, logos, ethos and rhetorical questions. However, King’s use of Thoreau’s piece was written prior to the civil war, and was in response to the Mexican-American war and slavery in some territories. It was intended for US citizens; more specifically, those who are unhappy with the way the United States government is ran.
Letter from a Birmingham Jail Is an individual morally justified in breaking a law? The answer to this question is yes,. There are several reasons that have made me believe that it is morally justifiable in breaking the law; however, the most convincing comes from Dr. Martin Luther King in his letter from the Birmingham Jail. " We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal." (Classic Arguments 668 -.
In his essay, “Resistance to Civil Government,” often times dubbed, “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) argues against abiding by one’s State, in protest to the unjust laws within its government. Among many things, Thoreau was an American author, poet, and philosopher. He was a firm believer in the idea of civil disobedience, the act of refusing to obey certain laws of a government that are felt to be unjust. He opposed the laws regarding slavery, and did not support the Mexican-American war, believing it to be a tactic by the Southerners to spread slavery to the Southwest. To show his lack of support for the American government, he refused to pay his taxes.
Using warfare and politics as examples, Thoreau further claims that the government trains dog-like soldiers and politicians focused on upholding the law when they should be upholding the morals of humanity. Indeed, enslaving one-sixth of Mexico’s population – and accepting the government as one which governs slaves – should be enough to establish a civil duty for Americans to rebel against such atrocities. Continuing with the error of expediency, Thoreau directs the argument, which states expediency should not overpower justice, toward the American audience. More closely, that doing the convenient thing even though it may be considered immoral or harmful to others is a habit which should be broken in the houses of American individuals. A paramount example of such expediency is as follows: “If I have unjustly wrested a plank from a drowning man, I must restore it to him though I drown myself.” According to Thoreau, a plethora of activists reside in the United States, however, a select few take the initiative to make a positive difference in the abolitionist
...n to construct a rapprochement with the WASP community as well. Actually, he reminds the WASP community of its anterior fights against both the British oppression and the Nazi regime. Thus, he intends to illustrate with analogies that the fight for African Americans' civil rights is not so far from the WASP community prior demands. Consequently, he obliterates the false dichotomy that runs rampant in the WASP community, namely the requirements for civil rights are not as justifiable and moral as the independence of the thirteen colonies or the suppression of the Nazi anti-Semitism. An important element of this Letter from Birmingham Jail is that Martin Luther King, Jr. concludes his missive with an appeal to peace and unity. With those words, if the readers have just forgotten the entire discourse, the readers keep in minds his motivation for appeasement and concord.
Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) was a philosopher and writer who is well known for his criticism of the American government during the time. During Thoreau’s life, there were two major issues being debated in the United States: slavery and the Mexican-American War. Both issues greatly influenced his essay, as he actually practiced civil disobedience in his own life by refusing to pay taxes in protest of the Mexican War. He states that the government should be based on conscience and that citizens should refuse to follow the law and have the duty not to participate and stay as a member of an unjust institution like the government. I argue that the notion of individualism and skepticism toward government is essential to the basis of many important reform movements in the modern society.