Analyzing or moreover critiquing statements written by icons such Martin Luther King is an apolitically sensitive undertaking. Almost any conclusion could be even offensive for some people. Anyway is a necessary task. To understand this fact, we only have to realize that since Luther King has been one of the most important player for some of the humanity´s most important political advances ever, he has become into a symbol and his words have become almost into mantras. This is exactly the reason why we have to submit his opinions to a constant revision. I am pretty sure that if he were still alive, he would want us to discuss his ideas in order to get better results and not to allow his work to become in something unlinked with the present …show more content…
Again, Mr. King uses religion as a guide to explain why violence could never be used to get the end of the segregation. At that moment and as a strategy, he was probably right. The forces between the parts were to uneven. Besides, Mr. King knew that the federal government barely has capacity of action since they were stuck in a horrible and unpopular war in Vietnam, and riots and demonstrations were happening everyday in the universities across the country. However, if we look at his decisions from today’s point of view and attending to the fact that minorities are still suffering the injustice of economical segregation and the police force abuse, among others injustices, we can say that he didn 't go to far. Then may be we can rethink if appealing to violence to avoid those problems could be considered just as self-defense. For example: when communities are being devastated by poverty, drugs, and criminality, and the authorities don’t do anything to protect them just because they are black, Latin, or American Natives, don’t they have the right to fight back? Moreover, when they have to watch everyday in television the awful crimes that some authorities commit against minorities with no punishment in most of the cases. Don’t they have the right do defend their own life? It is a fact that violence is not desirable, but we have to remind that the end of slavery in the United States cost a civil war, that the
It is no secret that Martin Luther King Jr. did great things. We have learned in school that he was a leader in the movement to desegregate the South. He has served as a role model for people across the globe. But even though Martin did change the world for the better, it was not without hardships. We gathered new information on Dr. King in the essay, “Heeding the Call” by Diana Childress. From his childhood to his last days, Martin faced massive opposition. Still, all of these challenges brought Martin the wisdom and idealism he used throughout his life.
If he had not made clear that he was a trustworthy, knowledgeable, and honest man, he would not have made his point clear. King’s statement “Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever,” (Martin Luther King 24) is a strong reminder of history. If people do not realize their emotions in a nonviolent way, they will seek violence until they are heard. That statement is one of the strongest concerns to show why direct action was important, as well as, convincing the reader to consider their immoral practices. King goes above any beyond in sharing his beliefs because if he had not, the audience would not have been persuaded. Furthermore, the information and evidence he demonstrated was necessary at that
King gets his point across, that segregation is unfair and morally not right, and that man has a responsibility to act against unjust laws, by using many different strategies throughout the letter. He uses logos, pathos, and ethos to do so. While using these devices he shows emotion, gives logic to his reasoning’s and gives credibility as well. First and foremost, King calmly responded to the statement from the clergymen that his non-violent direct action was “unwise and untimely”. King logically does so by describing the situation where the negro leaders tried many times to negotiate with the city fathers to remove racial barriers, but the promises never held true.
...church. With each claim the clergymen provided, King refuted their claim with evidence and more by describing what should be done with segregation laws. King’s tone in this piece was appropriate because he did not come off as someone who wanted to spread hate and prove the clergymen wrong. He genuinely wanted to change their views and show them the flaws of society regarding policemen and even the church. His tone was not threatening or spiteful, he made sure to address that he was trying to come off as respectful and concerned.
Martin Luther King, Jr., born on January 15, 1929, was well known for his nonviolent movement to bring justice and to an end to the segregation of the people in the United States back in the 1950s. With King being the leader of a peaceful protest, it failed to bring equally to the colored people. Martin Luther King, Jr. was labeled as an “outsider” who was “hatred and violence” and that his actions were “unwise and untimely” from the Public Statement by Eight Alabama Clergymen (clergymen). In response, on the day of April 16, 1963, he wrote the Letter from Birmingham Jail to declare and defense his movement was not “unwise and untimely” at all. To analyze his points, King used the powerful literary devices of pathos- use of an emotional appeal.ethos-
In Kings letter, he explains the physical disrespect that was experienced, “When you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, brutalize, and even kill your black brothers and sister with impunity”. King goes into great detail with his words to put a clear picture into the readers mind. He wants the picture to create an image so strong that the thought will spark emotions, creating guilt. Guilt because the police of our nation that are supposed to provide safety, are doing the exact opposite, instead causing harm to citizen’s. Morally at this time, segregation was seen as the correct way for society.
Dr. King effectively expresses why his critics are wrong in a passionate tone. He is extremely zealous about the rights that African-Americans have been neglected to have and should have, as well as everyone else. Mr King was criticized for his “untimely” actions in Birmingham. “This wait has almost always meant ‘never.’” (King 264) Martin Luther King isn’t just a bystander witnessing the injustice; he is a victim and one of the few who is willing to fight for justice well deserved.
King clears up any idea that he’s just someone who has broken the law for no reason. He does this by saying; “I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” (Para 15) This statement tells us that Dr. King is simply adhering to his moral responsibility by doing as he’s supposed to. He knows that following a one-sided makes no sense, and it would be submitting to evil. He even goes on to quote St. Augustine, declaring that, “an unjust law is no law at all.” (Para 15) Therefore, the segregation laws that were implemented in Birmingham at the time were by St. Augustine’s logic, no law at
Dr. King notices that the clergymen are anxious over the black man’s “willingness to break laws” (King pg.218). He understands their anxiety over that issue. King then refers to the “Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools," praising it for its civil rights initiative (King pg.218). By mentioning the Supreme Court decision, he is reminding the reader that even a credible source such as the Supreme Court supports racial equality. Since most citizens are law abiding, the addition of the Supreme Court decision might convince the reader adopt the belief of racial equality. King then streamlines into a rhetorical question and answers the question. King writes, “One may well ask: ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying other laws” (King 218). This question is King admitting that his intention seems paradoxical since he urges people to follow “the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation," while he is apparently willing to break laws (King pg.218). He insists that it is not a paradox, but rather an acknowledgement of the distinction between “just and unjust” laws (King pg.218). He insists that everyone has a “legal” and “moral responsibility” to follow just laws, but one equally “has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws” (King pg.218). In order to further provide evidence for his claims, King alludes to St.
To me, this argument is logical and valid. King acknowledges this by describing policy makers crafting the living conditions of the Negroes. King states, “The slums are the handiwork of a vicious system of the white society; Negroes live in them, but they do not make them, any more than a prisoner makes a prison,” (King, 8). King refers to the slums as the housing projects of the Negroes and states the policy makers flagrantly violate building codes and regulations. This would show the white man not enforcing the laws and breaking laws intentionally when dealing with Negroes. As Negroes stood up for what they believed to be true, the white man became increasingly defiant. To me, it seems as if the white men were afraid to allow Negroes rights that they themselves possessed and perhaps even took for granted. My inference here is that white men were not prepared and were frightened to allow a class of people that they found less than human be present and existent in their everyday society. I believe fear was one of the major adversaries on both sides. The white man was afraid of change and this fear birthed hate and discrimination to a race that they were unsure of. They were more involved in their own self-interests than in a whole race of people. The only thing that they thought was right was to keep Negroes and whites separated through segregation, which fumed the emotions of the Negroes and ultimately established their conclusions to violence and riots. The white man perpetuated policy making that effected the Negroes in a negative way which I believe caused harm to race
“Hence, segregation is not only politically, economically, and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and sinful.”… Martin Luther King, Jr., one of the greatest speakers in all of history wrote these words in his letter from Birmingham Jail (King 48). His great use of rhetoric affected largely the freeing of an entire race. During his work in the Civil Rights Movement, he visited a small town called Birmingham in Alabama, and wrote one of his most rhetorically compelling letters there. In this letter, he used historical evidence, scriptural references, descriptive vocabulary, and great organization of points to respond to grievances raised against his movement: that he should wait, that he was breaking laws, that his peace brought on violence, and that his activities were extreme.
Essay, Philosophy 115, St. Louis. University of California, Berkeley, 1995. Rottenburg, Anne. A. & Co. "Dr. Martin Luther King, Letter From a Birmingham
The injustice of segregation laws is leading to a violent impact throughout the African American community, as they strive to have equal rights. In the essay, “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Martin Luther King Jr. describes the many struggles the African American community is going through. Dr. King effectively uses rhetorical appeals to persuade the clergymen that segregation laws are unjust and must end. Dr. King exemplifies his credibility as an advocate for the ending of segregation laws. He gives an example of how society should realize that there is no need for violence by comparing both Socrates’ and his techniques.
the segregationists, resulting in the injury and deaths of many of King’s followers. With these points in mind, King came to the conclusion that the best strategy in gaining the rights of African American was the use of non-violent protest. He believed that violence only “intensifies evil,';
Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. had faith in his beliefs of equality, and that all people, regardless of race should be free and governed under the same laws. In the later part of the 1960's, Birmingham, Alabama, the home of King, was considered to be the most racially divided city in the South. "Birmingham is so segregated, we're within a cab ride of being in Johannesburg, South Africa", 1 when King said this he was only speaking half jokingly. In Birmingham the unwritten rule towards blacks was that "if the Klan doesn't stop you, the police will."2 When King decided that the time had come to end the racial hatred, or at least end the violence, he chose to fight in a non-traditional way. Rather than giving the white people the pleasure of participating in violent confrontations, King believed if they fought without violence for their rights, they would have a faster success rate. King also saw Birmingham as the major problem in America.