Essay with Analysis of ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’

The tone of the first paragraph is both certain and direct. Dr. King does not express any hesitation in this paragraph; he displays a sense of urgency and importance through his choice of diction. Dr. King was firm about his decision to write the letter and that criticism would not stop him from doing so. This can be seen through the firm and decisive word choice.

It can be argued that the first paragraph creates a sense of irony. Dr. King states “If I sought to answer all the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would have little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, I would have no time for constructive work” in this paragraph. This is ironic as the letter was written while he was in jail, where he did not have secretaries. In addition, the letter’s intention was to address the criticisms and negative comments directed at him, and he expressed how he was unable to address such comments.

Dr. King’s usage of biblical allusions provides an appeal to both ethos and pathos. To many, religion is very emotional and personal, which appeals to pathos. The biblical allusions do not just appeal to pathos on the surface. For example, he claimed that “was not Jesus an extremist for love… was not Amos an extremist for justice…was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel…” (King 1352). Through this statement, he mentions several emotions that demonstrate a passion for religion in a similar way to the passion of protestors who were a part of the civil rights movement.

He uses theologians and other scholars and their contributions in the letter. He refers to St.Thomas Aquinas who said that “an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.” He also agrees with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.” The mention of St. Thomas Aquinas appeals to ethos as it proves that Dr. King is knowledgeable about religious figures, making him a reliable source of religious facts. Not only that, but the saint himself can be considered an authoritative figure which also appeals to ethos.

Dr. King was a known preacher, and this automatically provides some credibility. One way Dr. King established credibility was by stating that he was President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. He continued to express the significance of his role, claiming that there are 85 smaller organizations that are affiliated with the Leadership organization. Dr. King also spoke about some aspects of the Jewish faith; by addressing both, he appealed to a large religious audience. He also appeals to ethos by illustrating his own experiences which gives him credibility to talk about the issues at hand.

In addition to the Birmingham clergymen, King addresses the white moderate. They are “more devoted to order than to justice and constantly say ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action’ ” (King 1350). According to King, they played a large role in the restriction of freedoms for African Americans. He also mentioned that he was disappointed with the white church and its leadership because instead of its leaders being allies to the important cause, they ended up being some of the strongest opponents by remaining quiet.

The usage of the word “when” introduces a new instance of discrimination and segregation. These examples place the reader in his shoes, each clause illustrating another one of his experiences. As the audience follows along, it feels like statements are never-ending. This is extremely powerful as African Americans at the time felt the same way. Dr. King was successful in providing countless examples that demonstrated what it was like to be living in fear, to see the horrors faced by friends and family, and the acknowledge that they might be next.

The order of the statements is extremely significant in getting Dr. King’s message across. At the beginning of the sentence, statements are broad. As the sentence progresses, it gets more and more personal, intense, and emotional. By the end of the sentence, an individual is stripped of their identity, becoming just another nobody. If the statements were in a different order, the message would not be nearly as powerful. Dr. King presented it in a way that shows the large-scale effects and then zooms in on the effects faced by the individual. This places emphasis on the fact that each and every person is fighting their battle in a different way. Had the order of the clauses been different, Dr. King would be displaying the issues faced by the entire group, weakening his argument and the message as a whole.

There are several recurring themes throughout the letter, including a tug between light and dark. The imagery in King’s writing demonstrates the dark and light in terms of the evil of segregation and the goal of freedom. He says that “they built the homes of their masters while suffering gross injustice and shameful humiliation – and yet out of a bottomless vitality they continued to thrive and develop.” (King 1355). King closes his letter with another example by stating “Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away …. and the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation” (King 1357). The use of figurative language throughout the letter keeps the audience engaged and enhances the message.

The imagery of the word garment at the beginning of the letter refers to how everyone is tied together as if woven like fabric. King says “We are all caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny” (King 1346). He further explains this to mean that what affects one person or community, affects others indirectly. This supports the idea that the civil rights movement affected not just the suffering African Americans, but also the entire nation.

King’s arguments in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” center around the themes of religion and patriotism. He speaks of freedom, oppression, the right to vote, segregation, and integration of blacks in American society. He claimed: “The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro” (King 1352). This example is one of the many in which King linked the importance of civil rights to the progress of the country. King placed slightly more emphasis on patriotism than religion, most likely because it applied to the entire nation, not just those with Christian or other religious affiliations.

Although they are both expressed at length, King focuses on the theme of patriotism to appeal to a large audience. In making his arguments, he weaves the message of just and unjust, suffering, patience, and understanding, which are all religious bases. He does this in order to express to the white majority that what the African-American community seeks to accomplish is to have the same rights and to be treated like everyone else. King stated: “Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with America’s destiny.” (King 1355). In saying this, he urged for change that would not just impact a specific group within the United States, but rather the entire nation.

Dr. King writes as a member of several communities. He refers to himself as the President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Most importantly he spoke of himself as a black man and part of the community which has been discriminated against and segregated, despite all the contributions made by this community to the growth of the United States. King was a smart and cultured man, as well as a man of God as he was a preacher like his father and grandfather. His experience was reflected in his intelligence, as seen when he explained the steps to a successful nonviolent protest (King 1346).

Dr. King also wrote as a member of the religious community. He included numerous references to religious figures and events which appeals to ethos by showing that he was knowledgeable about the Christian faith. For example, he claimed, “It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake” (King 1350). In stating this, King shows his extensive religious knowledge and ties it back to his message by mentioning moral law. He provides evidence like this to show that he not only is a part of the religious community but has authority due to his position as a preacher.

King addresses multiple counterarguments before he addresses his own argument. By refuting claims made against him before introducing his own argument, his message was more likely to resonate with the audience. A prior letter from the eight clergymen criticized King’s presence in Birmingham and his strategy of a nonviolent campaign; King refuted this with the argument that they would continue to fight to accomplish their goal, to the extent where being an extremist would be beneficial. King stated that “perhaps the South, the nation, and the world are in dire need of creative extremists” (King 1353). King believed that an individual must wholeheartedly believe in their cause to create change, and this is demonstrated through the idea of being an extremist.

He was in Birmingham because there was injustice there. He had been invited to help the community and hoped that the religious leadership would “see the justice of our cause and, with deep moral concern, would serve as the channel through which our just grievances could reach the power structure” (King 1354). This claim supported his argument that extreme change was necessary due to the fact that even small change was unsuccessful.

Letter From Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr: Advocating Equality

In the United States, as a country of immigration, the issue of racial discrimination has always existed in society. Martin Luther King as an important leader of the African-American Civil Rights Movement, wrote the letter to respond to Alabama clergymen why he led the movement. In this letter, he used rhetorical elements to demonstrate his thesis, that the government and most white people treat Black people unfairly, so he wanted demonstrations to get more rights and fairness for black people. “Rhetorical analysis is a form of criticism or close reading that employs the principles of rhetoric to examine the interactions between a text, an author, and an audience” (Nordquist). The most important elements of rhetorical analysis are subject, thesis, purpose, audience, person, ethos, and authoritative testimony. Those all make King’s argument more persuasive.

First, King gave people a clear subject and thesis that he was in jail because of injustice treatment to Black people. The subject is the topic of an essay. He wrote the letter to respond to the Alabama clergymen explained why he was in Birmingham jail. “I think I should indicate why I am here in Birmingham” (King 1). The thesis is the main point of an essay. There was very serious inequality between the whites and the blacks in Birmingham. “I am in Birmingham because injustice is here” (King 1). The businessman does not fulfill the promise, the apartheid law is unfair. For example, the amusement park only accepts white kids, it doesn’t let the Black kids play inside. Even though, there had a law that made apartheid is legal and just. Those are ridiculous for justice.

Second, King’s purpose is obviously to be seen in his letter. The purpose is the author’s rhetorical intention, what he/she is attempting to accomplish. “I want to try to answer your statements in what I hope will be” (King 1). From the second paragraph, King started discussing why he was in jail, and in the following paragraphs, he talked about the injustice laws and the reason for the demonstration. He stated that he fought for justice and the rights of equality. He is attempting to answer the public statement and persuade clergymen to agree with his point.

Third,King’s purpose is trying to persuade his audience. The audience is the specific, identifiable ‘reader’ an author directs his/her argument towards. King’s audience is his fellow clergymen. At the begging of the letter, King used a polite way to call his audience. “My Dear following clergymen (King 1)” That delights his audience. Then he stated the argument. That taught his audience lessons. At last, he used many facts to move his audience. He achieved his purpose that persuaded his audience to agree with his idea.

Fourth, Persona is the author’s self-representation in an essay. King’s persona is angry, but he didn’t appear it, he made himself easily to be accepted. In this whole letter, he used manner and calm tone to address his argument. He used the word “Dear”, and called the anxious to “Legitimate concern”. He clearly illustrated his argument to opposing the clergymen’s points of view. We can sense King is very angry with the attitude of clergymen towards the injustice in Birmingham.

Fifth, King used strong ethos appeals in this letter. Ethos is an ethical appeal or the author’s credibility. He demonstrated the reason for injustice between the whites and the blacks. Then he established common grounds that there did exist injustice with clergymen. Such as calling the black people Negro, and motels did not accept the black people. Besides, for fairness, King considered justice is to exist. For example, the court ruled the school should be desegregated. But the school didn’t obey it. It means there is still injustice.

The last but not least, King used authoritative testimony to support his argument. Authoritative testimony is expert testimony other than the author’s used to validate and support his/her claims. King referred to the court case that the Supreme Court ruled the school cancel apartheid. He mentioned historical documents and Bible to tell people that it is reasonable to contrary to the injustice laws. Along with authoritative testimony, King effectively strengthened his credibility.

To sum up, King wrote this letter for advocating equality, he used many rhetorical elements to strengthen his thesis and make his argument more persuasive. He provided many facts in this letter, such as negotiation is ineffective, it can make racial discrimination disappear. The merchants and government didn’t follow their promise. There is no answer for waiting, the only way can change this situation is by initiating demonstrations. He used adequate evidence to strengthen his argument, as well as through making the common grounds to move his audience.

Letter To Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr.: Analysis

“Letter to Birmingham Jail” was written by Martin Luther King Jr. in 1963 in order to address several clergymen who had criticized Dr. King’s, as well as his supporters’ actions and protests. These clergymen, 8 in number, have also criticized the actions of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). While in jail, Martin Luther King Jr. expressed discontentment concerning such critiques and desired to address these concerns with an appropriate mechanism through this letter. He was disappointed in the unnecessary problems this seemed to be creating since he was using a nonviolent way of coping with this problem instead of rebelling. The letter became well known and read by many, motivating him to revise and update it in one of his books, Why We Can’t-Wait. He was put in prison for opposing the way black people were treated where he lived in Birmingham, Alabama. Many people who supported and went along with what he was doing have also had to experience penalties.

Martin Luther King Jr. has efficiently and evidently established ethos throughout this letter. Dr. King is known for being an intelligent African American who is able to reason educationally. The fact that he was a priest in the past has helped lead his supporters to trust and follow his paths. In the letter, he explains the different ways his organization uses nonviolent protests and events. He explained how he and his supporters share these events. An example of one would be the mayoral election. As Dr. King states, “Then it occurred to us that the March election was ahead, and so we speedily decided to postpone action until after election day.” and “This reveals that we did not move irresponsibly into direct action.” (MLK, paragraph 9). He used these quotes to defend his team’s timing of their actions since the clergymen claimed the timing was not the best. Dr. King has also related current problems with the church and his religious beliefs.

Dr. King was intelligent when writing the extendedly long sentence in paragraph 14. This very intriguing sentence has impacted me emotionally because of the way the problem during that time was taken into different perspectives. I got to almost feel like I’m experiencing the feeling of being in African American’s place during this time. Even though I have been educated about racism, discrimination, and abuse in history for as long as I can remember, this opened up my eyes to something I could’ve never realized on my own. He formatted the situation in a way to impact anyone who reads it emotionally by building an emotional connection between the people that mean the most to you. And by doing this, he has impacted me by sharing his and other African American families’ perspectives and experiences, since I would have no idea what it would be like to be in their shoes. It terrifies me to even imagine what life would be like as a colored person during this time. Racial discrimination should never have existed, ever. This sentence helped me realize just how cruel the world really is. Ruthless, absurd, and idiotic would all be perfect ways to describe a racist person, in my opinion. I feel very sorry for people who have ever experienced racial discrimination ever, whether in history or more recently. The quote “We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights.” (MLK, paragraph 14) remains as evidence for African American’s extended torture and misery.

There are many times where Martin Luther King Jr successfully used figurative language in the appropriate times to enhance the reader’s perspective of the situation. One of these instances being in the quote “If this philosophy had not emerged, I am convinced that by now many streets of the South would be flowing with floods of blood.” (MLK, paragraph 22) This hyperbole was stated to explain the dramatic effects of racial injustice and violence to bring up how inhuman the actions of white people were during that time. It also states that even when people would fight and blood will be poured out, the streets and roads wouldn’t actually overflow with blood. This is to dramatize what was happening about white people killing black people so much that it became a common occurrence.

I think that this letter gives me indescribable feelings and thoughts. It conveys emotions I’m not used to experiencing. By the time I was done reading the letter, I became very sorry for African Americans during that time, since they are people also and are like everyone else. Nothing makes them different in any way and seeing them being treated worse than animals hurts my heart. Martin Luther King Jr. did a really good job of conveying emotions to whoever the readers were. I would not be able to imagine living in fear like they did. I firmly believe that black people in all of history were magnificent, brave, and courageous during times when it was impossible to be. I am proud to know that America has mostly moved on from violent acts against African Americans. But what still bothers me is the fact that racism is still happening on a daily basis. I feel that this needs to stop right now. People need to mature and realize that everyone is human. This letter humiliated me in a way and made me recognize and appreciate the rights and freedom that I have.

In summary, I can conclude that this letter has and still is extremely motivating and powerful. It shows the courage of black people in history. I found it amazing and shocking that instead of rebelling violently, they decided to turn their right cheek when the whites hit their left, as the Bible says. No matter what, not once did they lose hope and courage. They never gave up. I aspire to be as brave and influential as black people during this historical event. By that, I mean that I would love to influence people’s lives in the most positive way possible, as did Martin Luther King Jr. He deserves all the love and respect in the world for him sacrificing himself for his own people. He is a true hero. In the future, I hope people realize that being racist is idiotic and childish and will stop being racist toward anyone, no matter who it is.

The Aristotelian Appeals In Letter From Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr.

Over the course of Letter from Birmingham Jail (1963), the author, Martin Luther King Jnr., makes extended allusions to multiple philosophers, among them theologizer and Athenian. His comparison would appear to point that he shares an associate affinity with them. However, the clarity with that he makes his arguments and therefore the dedication to one premise strikes most powerfully of philosopher. even as Kant’s work of art, Critique of Pure Reason, tried to utterly upend an antecedently accepted mode of thought, therefore additionally was King’s work dedicated to one objective: the protection of direct action as a type of protest specified the Civil Rights Movement may continue in uncompromised kind. Despite this singularity of purpose, the complexness of the case meant that a lot of nuanced response to the statement A entail Unity, as printed by eight Alabama Clergymen, was necessary. during this method, King’s letter actually served a fourfold purpose: to ascertain himself as a legitimate authority within the eyes of his audience, to indicate the trials of the black in America, to justify his cause, and to argue the need for immediate action.

In Martin Luther King Jnr.’s letter, written to the Clergymen from Birmingham jail, he uses the rhetorical charm of the attribute to ascertain his believability on the topic of racialism and injustice. He starts off the letter with “My pricey Fellow Clergymen”. By his spoken language, he’s swing himself on a similar “level” because the clergymen, causing the message that he’s no but them and that they are not any higher than him. He then goes on to mention, “I am here as a result of I even have structure ties here. however a lot of primarily, I’m in Birmingham as a result of injustice is here”. he’s telling them that he has believability on the matter of injustice, not as a result of he’s the recipient of white privilege, however as a result of he’s well researched on the topic. King says, “I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a corporation operative in each southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. we’ve some 85 related to organizations across the South, and one of all them is that the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. Frequently, we tend to share employees, academic, and money resources with our affiliates.” the aim of the introduction is to ascertain his believability as a member of America. he’s proving to them that he contains even as an abundant intellect on the topic of injustice and racialism, if no more. Martin Luther King Jr. then appeals to pathos by showing the trials his individuals have more established. He will this by victimization lines like, “When you’ve got seen vicious mobs kill your mothers and fathers at the can and drown your sisters and brothers at whim.”, and “when you’ve got seen hate-filled law officer curse, kick, and even kill your black brothers and sisters.” In these lines, he’s victimization incendiary language like “vicious mobs” and correspondence like “lynch your mothers and fathers at the can and drown your sisters and brothers at whim” by victimization this sort of language and structure King is creating you envision and feel what he had to envision his friends and family bear in that adversity. Throughout the complete paragraph victimization this sort of structure and tons of images the audience starts to feel what it might prefer to be in King’s position and feel the pain and troubles he had to travel through. it’s a very associated emotional paragraph, and victimization this feeling at the start of his letter captures the eye of his audience. this can be specifically what King needed so as to create the audience feel the sturdy feeling and pain he felt, and persuade you to stay reading the letter to listen to what he should say concerning these outrage of acts, show you positive ways in which to alter them, and justify his reason for penning this letter in response to the clergymen.

Martin Luther King then takings to justify his cause for protest and establishes reasons for the advancement of civil rights. Specifically, he will therefore by raising doubts concerning the which means of a “just law” and mentioning specific examples within which laws were unfair and unjust. King says, “We ought to always remember that everything Adolf Hitler did in FRG was ‘legal’ and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in the European nation was ‘illegal.’ it absolutely was ‘illegal’ to assist and luxury a Jew in Hitler’s FRG. Even so, I’m positive that, had I lived in FRG at the time, I might have been power-assisted and comfortable my Judaic brothers.” Here he establishes a strong example of associate unjust law (how it absolutely was dirty to assist a Judaic person in FRG throughout Hitler’s rule) and the way he would have reacted to that (giving aid to his “Jewish brothers”). This tosses the ball back to the clergymen’s court – implying that they ought to have confidence in what they might have done. it’s assumed that nearly as good Christians, they might have given aid to somebody in would like. He attracts a correlation to the atrocities committed against the Jews to the atrocities committed against African Americans in America – tho’ on a far smaller scale, the things may be thought of similar, with unjust laws conveyance concerning violence and deaths. King forces the clergymen to have confidence in the virtuously correct course of action. Martin Luther King then justifies his fight for associate “extremist” cause by providing specific samples of different historical “extremist” causes that really caused changes for the higher. He says, “Was not Hebrew associate extremist for love… wasn’t Amos associate extremist for justice.. wasn’t Paul associate extremist for the Christian gospel… wasn’t Martin Luther associate extremist… and John Bunyan… and Abraham Lincoln… and Jefferson.” King’s charm to logos during this quote is incredibly effective as a result of its effect on his target audience– white preachers. By mentioning vital historical and spiritual figures like Word, Martin Luther, and Jefferson, King makes a clear purpose that if those individuals were doing the correct factor, he is too. This charm to logos proves traditionally that “extremist” cases aren’t continuously wrong, and may cause positive, abundant required amendment.

King once more uses pathos so as to charm the human emotions, therefore, inciting the clergymen and voters alike to require action and finish the oppressive burden of racism and hate. King describes his disappointment within the church, “The judgment of God is upon the church as ne’er before. If today’s church doesn’t recapture the killing spirit of the first church, it’ll lose its believability, forfeit the loyalty of millions, associated be discharged as an irrelevant social club with no which means for the 20th century” (King). Here, King conveys a way of panic and urgency to the audience by suggesting that the once almighty Church may falter while not changes in spirit and behavior by individuals. The phrase “judgment of God” is related to worry of the facility of God, in relevance biblical stories involving consequences of God’s disapproval, inflicting the audience to feel fearful (an impact of pathos) and to feel a desire to alter so as to avoid God’s wrath. Also, by concerning the Church as “an irrelevant social club,” King disrespects the Church to convey his purpose and demonstrate the long run of the Church if individuals aren’t to require action. line of work the Church “an irrelevant social club” will anger the clergymen and different readers, forcing the clergymen to comprehend that if they’re irritated by a rude reference currently, then they need to take action to forestall such disrespect. Also, the “If . . . then” statement is a good methodology at presenting a thought and so presenting the consequence. Another effective method King appeals to pathos whereas emphasizing the necessity for urgency is by conveyance his audience into the letter by the utilization of person. within the letter, King offers his opinion on the praise that some were giving the Birmingham force by directly addressing them with what he saw within the state of affairs. He says “I doubt that you just would therefore quickly counseled the policemen if you were to watch their ugly and bestial treatment. . . if you were to look at them push previous Negro ladies and young Negro women. . .if you were to envision them slap and kick. . . refuse to allow US food as a result of we tend to needed to sing our grace along.”(King) This emotional and descriptive narrative combined with the utilization of the person “you” have a really sturdy impact. He uses his personal experiences from his state of affairs to make a copy of his argument and show the brutality of the force. King uses anaphora within the multiple uses of the phrases “I doubt that you just. . .” and “if you were to envision. . .” to confront the audiences’ perception and gift his analysis. the general tone of the last section is incredibly emotional and he urges the readers of the letter to adopt a similar sense of concern.

Throughout his Letter from Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. establishes himself as a legitimate authority within the eyes of his audience, shows the trials his individuals have more established, justifies his cause and argues the need for immediate action. By victimization spiritual examples that charm onto his audience, the preachers, he tries to realize their support and decriminalize his course of action. King additionally alludes to the examples from several philosophers and saints, together with Athenian and Aquinus. the general urgency and entail action within the letter is emphatic by his sturdy appeals to pathos. His representational process, personal experiences, and appeals to attribute and logos throughout build a powerful, well-rounded argument. He effectively demonstrates the impact of the trials the African yank individuals have more established and proves that what they’re fighting for could be a simple cause on each legal and ethical ground. By inspiring sympathy through sturdy emotional appeals, King brings hope for a positive amendment – that the white clergymen reading his letter can begin to know the superjacent downside and work for amendment. that’s the final word goal – to cause a higher world for those underneath abuse and build associate equal, simply future for America as an entire.

Plato’s Critos’. Martin Luther King Jr.’s A Letter From Birmingham Jail

In this paper, I will argue that the views and arguments of Martin Luther King on disobeying unjust laws were more persuasive than the ideas that Plato presents through the words of Socrates in Crito. Laws in certain societies are more suitable for some citizens, but for other parts of society, they are found to be unjust. In the time periods of Plato and Martin Luther King, this was exactly the case, as the divides amongst people allowed there to be an uncertainty of the law. Plato’s beliefs were merely based on the events that affected Socrates, who simply believed in always obeying the law. Opposed to Martin Luther King, who in the Birmingham Jail defends his position on breaking unjust laws, even outlining when it is acceptable to do so.

Plato translates the events that happened after the trial of Socrates (Apology) titling this work Crito, in this work we see Crito coming to break Socrates out of prison. Socrates was just given the verdict of death by the jury and Crito wanted him to escape the prison so he would not be killed, ultimately choosing death (Discussion & Lecture 2/5-2/7). Plato’s description of these events shows Socrates and his will to follow the rules that he had been following for his whole life. Plato’s beliefs on unjust laws were that one should not act unjustly in the event of being a victim of any unjust treatment or punishment. Socrates, also thought that escaping the prison would violate his duty towards one’s creators, subverting the rule of law (Lecture 2/5). Socrates understood that there was a need for changes in Athens’ government, but he didn’t want to turn his beliefs into action, which would discredit all of the work he had done before. In Crito, Plato writes “Whereas you, above all other Athenians, seemed to be so fond of the State, or, in other words, of us her laws” (Crito 13), depicting why breaking the unjust laws was so hard for Socrates at a time where all eyes were upon him. This quote also shows how Athens was ruled, once born in the state it was hard to leave its grip, more importantly, its laws. The environment that Athens created ultimately sets the tone for how the laws should be followed in the future. In Athens, you were born into a social standard, and changing that title was hard to do once you grew up, once again representing the grip the law had on the people.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail is a deep look into the reality of the racial inequality that the United States was facing in the 1960s. King directs this letter to his clergymen that were a part of the non-violent march that took place in Birmingham, Alabama. This march is completely justified now but back then it was not so popular as African Americans in the United States were widely oppressed for the last century, if not more. In the letter, King responds to a comment, this comment comes from someone who thought the actions that King took weren’t right. The comment was about how the event was perceived by those that lived in Alabama, he was being described as “unwise and untimely” (King 1). Also, saying that he was an outsider who doesn’t belong in this part of Alabama, and overall what he was doing was incorrect. He responds back to these comments by saying he was not there to cause trouble, but because of the racism that many African American folks faced in the South, and that it was time for him to step up and face these unjust laws. Every law that King broke the support behind it was incredible, demonstrations like hunger strikes, blockades, marches, and sit-ins were all non-violent protests for a cause no one wanted to step up for. Another belief of King is that there are two types of laws, “there are just laws, and there are unjust laws” (King 3). Once again proving how some laws are meant to be followed, but the world they faced then allowed them to differentiate the ones that were wrong. He goes onto define what a just law is, and how the idea compares against unjust laws that are directed towards African Americans. The letter that Martin Luther King wrote from prison really represents his nature, and how willing he was to get the job done regardless of the side effects and noise around him.

As for perspectives and which one was the most persuasive, I once again have to say that King’s beliefs on unjust laws were more persuasive than that of Plato in Crito. When you compare both of the circumstances and what world they both lived in King had more of a reason to speak out and disobey laws compared to Plato. The reason why Plato’s idea seemed so hesitant with disobeying the laws stems from how the Athenian government was run, and how the people were treated. In contrast, during King’s time the United States government didn’t know how to react towards the peaceful movements for African American rights, this allowed King to continue supporting the acts of disobeying unjust laws. King’s perspective and argument were fit better for today’s society and how we interpret laws. The beliefs that Plato shares from Socrates were also the same beliefs that all of Athens had at that time, making it seem like the laws were good for all, but they turned on him. If you take a look at King’s story, you see how he traveled and took in ideas from others to make his beliefs against unjust laws believable and most importantly he was able to create a following. Socrates offered all of his knowledge and beliefs to the Athenian people, and in return, he got a decision from those same people to be killed for his actions.

In our world today we see laws being broken on a daily basis, regardless of what scale these laws are held to. An example from class is emergency contraceptives, and how the right to access this medicine can be denied based on someone else’s belief. Even though this is depicting a different scenario, we can compare this idea to Plato’s argument in Crito. The arguments in Crito stemmed from the influence of the laws on each other’s lives, similarly, someone can deny the request to contraceptives because of their religious or moral beliefs. We don’t all have to agree with people’s beliefs, this is because not all of us have received the same interpretation of the laws. Often times we interpret laws as to what they mean for us, overshadowing the people that these laws can possibly harm. Recently the state of Alabama presented the law of taking away all types of emergency contraceptives, including birth control and abortions. This is a scary sight to see, almost the majority of the country is against laws of this nature, but in Alabama, this law seems to be a popular belief amongst the residents of the state. Whether this is right or wrong is up to the government of the state of Alabama, who is still considering the law. Another example that we discussed in the lecture was how someone disagreed with baking a wedding cake for a gay couple’s marriage. Even though I personally think that this is incorrect, the person who said no to making the cake had disagreements with the idea of the marriage, including the law allowing them to get married. This example shows how one can disobey laws that he personally thinks are unjust similar to the idea of the emergency contraceptive, but this is on a smaller scale. The idea of disobeying this law is dependent on what beliefs you hold as a human being, and what beliefs you grew up learning as your morals. If either of these traits of yourself is affected by the laws, then they can be considered unjust for you. For others, however, who don’t have this as one of their beliefs can choose to agree with the law as much as they want, and nothing could come in the way of that.

The arguments for both sides are accurate to their own time period, but Martin Luther King was the one who stood up against the unjust laws. Along with that, he was able to make a stand on racial segregation, instead of folding and obeying the laws like Socrates. Even though Plato’s words were not his own, the ideas and beliefs represent a time in our world where laws were a new sort of living. People were told how to live, disregarding basic human necessities of free will but they had no idea about this since they were just obeying their government’s laws. After examining both perspectives of Plato, and Martin Luther King the time period affects their ideology and work more than their ideas themselves. But the persuasiveness and work of Martin Luther King goes unmatched, regardless of what century these events took place.

The Nature And Importance Of Living In Socrates’ The Apology And Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s Letter From Birmingham Jail

Do you tend to think critically about who you are and what is your purpose? How would your life be if you never questioned anything, never wondered about things or asked “why?” Sometimes we don’t even recognize that each and every day we are living the examined life. This lifestyle enables us to make informed decisions about our lives, which most of us do each and every day. In doing this we are ultimately determining what actions we can take each day to become successful. Socrates tells us that “The unexamined life is not worth living” (Apology, p 12). Socrates and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. teaches us the nature and importance of living the examined life through their several actions and proposals.

Socrates, the founder of western philosophy, taught the “father of philosophy,” whom we know as Plato. Socrates invented the Socratic Method, as an approach to examining your life. Through dialogue, he investigated the ideas purported by individuals. In these conversations, it was not about what these people had done but why, understanding our reasoning behind our actions, rather than just allowing someone else’s false understanding of us affect our lives. Why is this important? Socrates believes that “the examined life is a central explanation of what makes it a virtuous life” (IvyPanda, p. 1). In order to live a “virtuous” life, we have to be wise in our decision making, wisdom being reflective to our life’s actions. We must question ourselves on what it means to live a good life and how we should go about our life journey. If we do not live an examined life, according to Socrates, we will be dumbfounded of how to live a “virtuous” life.

In Socrates, “The Apology,” he demonstrates how the examined life calls us to be honest and think critically, even at the greatest cost. In his case, the greatest cost was the death penalty and he knew anything he said in that moment would not free him from this punishment. The Athenian’s accused Socrates of “corrupting the young” of Athens (Apology, p. 5). They also put him on trial for not “believe(ing) in the gods in whom the city believes in,” but challenges them in their knowledge of the gods***. He forces them to think critically in what they are claiming as a crime. Point after point, Socrates continues to efficiently fight the accusations against him, but is still found guilty. He had rather die than give up his philosophical mindset and live in silence. This is the way Socrates calls us to live our lives. Throughout “The Apology,” he uses his philosophical approach from beginning to end, constantly examining the jury and, in a way, forcing them to examine their own thought processes.

The “nonviolent direct-action program” was put into place by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1963, as a way to encourage a change in unjust laws. King describes the nonviolent direct-action method as a way “to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension as a part of the work of the nonviolent resister” (Letter from Birmingham Jail, p. 2). He relates his definition of “tension” to how Socrates called society to break away from falsities by creating “tension” in our minds. In the same way, King wants strain in society that will allow men, like himself, to escape constant signs of “prejudice and racism” and instead recognize how others think and the importance of fellowship (Letter from Birmingham Jail, p.2). Through this proposal, King wanted to put this unjust lifestyle on the forefront, so the issue can no longer be ignored. For some, it might have made them uncomfortable to recognize the oppression of Black citizens forcibly through King’s letter.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. lived an examined life, which is evident through his Letter from Birmingham Jail, which he wrote after being imprisoned in Birmingham, Alabama. In his letter, he is speaking directly to the clergymen, one of his opening points reminding us that we are all American citizens, no matter what our racial background is. He wants the clergymen to not be upset about the demonstrations he was arrested for, but understand the meaning behind them and how the Black community has no choice but to be upset. King places an emphasis on “negotiation” as one of four basic steps in a nonviolent campaign (Letter from Birmingham Jail, p. 2). He agrees with them in their “call for negotiation,” highlighting the fact that the South has been composed of more “monologue(s) rather than dialogue(s)” (Letter from Birmingham Jail, p.2). This is one of his sole purposes of the nonviolent direct-action program, presented as a way for them to “negotiate” or work through their differences in a way that is just rather than unjust.

Both King and Socrates were imprisoned for standing up for things that the people surrounding them did not agree with. In Kings speech, he asks many questions forcing his readers to think critically which is what the examined life calls us to do. In a similar way, Socrates constantly asks questions in his dialogues to challenge his accusers. They both use the idea of examined life to advocate against unjust laws that they felt were a disadvantage to their societies. Socrates served as an inspiration to King in his efforts to fight for his cause and what he believed in. They both were intentional and efficient in the things they said in these sources that we read. They constantly examined their lives, distinguishing right from wrong, what it meant to live virtuously, what it meant to think critically and challenging people to try to understand your way of thinking instead of allowing them to have the incorrect view of your thought processes, which was the case for both advocates.

In present day, I believe living the examined life is extremely relevant. Even without realizing, we all live this way in our day to day lives. As college students, we are enrolled in classes constantly attaining wisdom and intellectual humility. It is important that we examine ourselves to become successful and in order to do so, we have to first know ourselves and understand our beliefs. Also, we should remain present and attentive at all times, so that we are not caught by surprise with the thing’s life may throw our way. We also have to be open to the views and mindsets of others. These are all things that, in my understanding, play a huge role in living the examined life that Socrates and King calls us to live. This is why I believe it is an important concept and using the above points, we are destined for success.

The Idea Of Civil Disobedience In Letter From Birmingham Jail And Crito

In this paper, I will argue that Martin Luther King’s claim concerning civil disobedience as expressed in Letter from Birmingham Jail is more persuasive than that of Plato’s claim concerning obedience to the law in Crito. Specifically, I will argue that King’s claims are more persuasive because they take a more realistic and practical approach compared to Plato’s claims, which contain inconsistencies and rely on assumptions that may not always be true. To accomplish this, I will first provide an exposition of Plato’s claims in Crito as conveyed through Socrates, followed by an exposition of King’s claims in Letter from Birmingham Jail. I will then evaluate how King’s arguments are more realistic in instances where Plato’s arguments are inconsistent and rely on idealistic assumptions. Finally, I will evaluate the hard case of lawbreaking and a gay wedding marriage consider to further strengthen my claim.

In Plato’s Crito, a dialogue between Socrates and his old friend Crito reveals Socrates’ belief that all laws, whether just or unjust, should never be broken. Days from execution after being convicted of impiety and corrupting the youth by the people of Athens, Socrates is visited in his jail cell by Crito, who attempts to convince Socrates to escape the city and certain death. The resulting conversation enabled Socrates to develop an argument for his refusal to escape prison, despite his belief that the jury’s decision was unjust. Specifically, Socrates argued that ‘one should never do a wrong,’ suggesting that despite being wronged by the law, he did not have the authority to wrong the law in return (Plato 49b). Socrates proposed that escaping would ‘destroy’ the rule of law and the state itself through nullification of the court’s decision (Plato 50b). Through his personification of the laws, Socrates submitted that the laws played a role in his life similar to that of a parent, for they had birthed, nurtured, educated, and molded him into the person he became (Plato 51d). Since it would be unjust to disobey one’s parents, Socrates argued, it would, therefore, be unjust to wrong the law. Furthermore, Socrates argued that one should always fulfill a just agreement. In this regard, Socrates believed he entered into a voluntary and just agreement with the city to respect its laws and decisions. By staying in the city and thereby submitting to the agreement, Socrates agreed to either obey the law or persuade it (Plato 51b). Therefore, escaping would violate a voluntary agreement and thus would be unjust. Ultimately, despite Socrates and Crito’s agreement that Socrates had been wronged in his conviction, they still concluded that it would be unjust to escape (and break the law in doing so) for it would wrong one’s parents and violate a just agreement.

In ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail,’ Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) argued that unjust laws should be broken. Imprisoned at a Birmingham jail for his leadership in non-violent protests against racial segregation, MLK wrote the letter as a justification for his involvement in civil disobedience. To King, civil disobedience was the non-violent refusal to obey unjust laws, while still being able to accept and ‘endure the ordeals of jail’ and other potential penalties (King 2). King proposed that in practicing civil disobedience, one could ‘create such a crisis and establish such a creative tension’ that establishments were forced to examine and confront the injustices dramatized in doing so (King 2). While King recognized that breaking the law could lead to anarchy, he suggested that doing so through civil disobedience could promote true justice. The difference between simply breaking the law and practicing civil disobedience King argued, was the type of law being broke; namely, whether the broken law was just or not. Accordingly, MLK claimed unjust laws, those that were ‘out of harmony with the moral law,’ were the target of civil disobedience (King 3). Thus, since King was able to claim segregation as ‘morally wrong and sinful,’ he suggested breaking the law of segregation through civil disobedience was the morally responsible action to take (King 3).

I found King’s arguments more persuasive because instead of presuming idealistically that all laws were perfect, he took a more realistic approach in contending that there are, in fact, unjust laws and not simply unjust applications of laws. Socrates argued that one should always follow obedience to the law because the laws are similar to parents in that they are responsible for one’s upbringing. Prior to this conclusion, Socrates asserted that ‘one should never do a wrong,’ even in return for being wronged oneself (Plato 49b). While both of these assertions seem practical on the surface, careful evaluation yields potential problems. For example, if a particular law promoted the wronging of another, an inconsistency would arise. For this line of reasoning to hold, it would need to presume that no law would instruct one to wrong another or that while laws could be applied unjustly, they were themselves just. I found this presumption to be idealistic because, in reality, laws are not always perfect and just. Segregation, for example, demonstrates the idealistic nature of this assumption. Since ‘segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality,’ the very nature of a law enacting segregation wrongs another (King 3). Thus, if one was to follow the reasoning laid out by Socrates, one would need to obey the law of segregation while still refusing to wrong another. Herein laws the inconsistency and moral dilemma in Socrates’ reasoning; it would be impossible to avoid the wronging of the oppressed people while still obeying the law of segregation. In this sense, one would have to choose whether it was more wrong to disobey an unjust law or to follow a law that morally wronged another. King was more persuasive in his argument because he understood that realistically there are laws that ‘square with the moral law’ and laws that do not (King 3).

I found King’s argument more persuasive because it demonstrated that some unjust laws cannot be changed legally and that civil disobedience offers a realistic method for changing an unjust law. In Crito, Socrates claimed that since he ‘never left the city’ throughout his life and took advantage of the city’s benefits in doing so, he entered into a just agreement to either obey the law or attempt to change it (Plato 52b). In this argument, Socrates made an assumption; that it is possible to ‘persuade’ unjust laws legally (Plato 52a). I found this presumption to be idealistic. In some cases, it may be not possible to change unjust laws without breaking the law. The Jim Crow south exemplified this aspect. For example, King asserted that African Americans in Birmingham ‘did not have the unhampered right to vote,’ suggesting rigged elections prevented them from operating through legal channels in order to change the law (King 3). Therefore, Socrates’ claim that one must either obey or persuade a law is idealistic as it assumes there is always a possibility to change a law without breaking it. On the other hand, the argument for civil disobedience presented by MLK is realistic for it shows that in some cases, the legal opportunity to change an unjust law is unavailable. Due to this, I found King’s argument more persuasive because it demonstrates how creating tension through civil disobedience may be ‘the only alternative’ to change an unjust law (King 1).

Through his argument, King persuaded me that civil disobedience can benefit the rule of the law instead of degrading it, as proposed by Socrates. As mentioned previously, Socrates proposed that escaping and breaking the law in doing so would undoubtedly harm justice. I found this to be a slippery slope argument in assuming that disobedience to any law(s) would subvert the rule of law and eventually result in a form of anarchy. For such a state of disorder to occur, there would need to be a continuous pattern of lawlessness and lack of enforcement. While I agree that breaking most laws can lead to a lack of respect for the law, I believe it is unreasonable to suggest that breaking any law would lead to the destruction of the law. In fact, I believe MLK successfully shows that in some cases, breaking the law can lead to greater justice. Specifically, King’s argument is persuasive in that it explains that breaking an unjust law through civil disobedience is ‘necessary for growth’ of the moral law (King 2). As King proclaimed, ‘injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,’ implying that obeying an immoral law brings more harm to justice than breaking it (King 1). In this sense, I agree with King that obeying an unjust law would promote immorality and allow injustice to flourish, which would harm the law more than breaking it.

Some may argue that my claim concerning King’s argument as more persuasive is simplistic. They would suggest that my reasoning is flawed because I only considered civil disobedience due to segregation: an easy case to be persuaded about. Therefore, I will briefly consider the hard case of a gay marriage wedding consider in order to further straighten my claim. In this case, we will imagine that a gay couple has attempted to eat a meal at a local restaurant but were denied from doing so because the owner, a highly religious person, believed gay relationships were immoral. Skeptics to my claim would ask, ‘Would you support even this type of civil disobedience?’

References

  1. Plato ‘Crito’ The Trial and Death of Socrates. Third Edition. Trans. GMA Grube and John M. Cooper. Hackett Publishing. 2000.
  2. King, Martin Luther ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’. PHIL 100 Course Reader. 2020.

Rhetorical Question in ‘The Letter from Birmingham Jail’: Analytical Essay

The Letter from Birmingham Jail was written by Martin Luther King Jr. In 1963 while King was in jail for protesting. King says that we’re responsible for justice across the nation. When unfair laws are written and people suffer as a consequence, by non-violently ignoring them, it is appropriate to protest such laws, even though the resulting unrest is inconvenient for some people. King says in his letter that the time is always now for justice, and there’s no good reason to wait for the right thing to be done by someone else. The author makes people feel like they should stand up and act on these unjust laws by asking rhetorical questions, appealing to their emotions, and referencing historical events and people.

The first device that King uses to help you understand his main idea is asking the reader rhetorical questions. The rhetorical questions are a part of logos and they help the reader understand the author’s point. King uses Rhetorical questions in his letter to present the arguments of his opposition and to suggest specific actions to his audience. King uses a rhetorical question when he asks, “Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches, and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?”, these emotional and logical appeals help connect King’s letter to his audience, making it clearer and easier to understand, as well as giving it purpose and illustrating how it is logically sound. In response to criticism from white clergymen, numerous other rhetorical questions help the author present new subjects he discusses. To explain how activists think and make readers understand the reasoning behind the protests, King uses rhetorical questions.

The next device that King uses to help you understand his main idea is appealing to your emotions. The emotional appeal is a part of pathos and it helps the reader understand the author’s point. The text contains several times where the author makes his points more complex and appealing using descriptive and metaphorical words. King uses emotional appeal and a metaphor when he exclaims, “…when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society…”, this quote shows us that King uses metaphors to appeal to our emotions. King uses the metaphor of his Black brothers in a cage of poverty to make us feel the emotion and understand the main purpose of this letter better. Appealing to emotions is one of the best ways to get people to understand and support your argument in an essay.

The final device that King uses to help you understand his main idea is referencing historical events and people. Talking about historical events and people establishes ethos and helps readers understand the author’s main purpose. When he draws correlations between his acts as a civil rights leader and the actions of religious or historical figures that have changed culture, he uses analogies in the letter. In the letter King mentions, “Just as the prophets of the eighth century B.C. left their villages and carried their ‘thus saith the Lord’ far beyond the boundaries of their hometowns, and just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco Roman world, so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own hometown.”, King makes a good argument for his cause by making this comparison and encourages his readers to consider carefully their perception of a criminal and terrorist. King borrows from the ethos of these figures to gain credibility in front of his readers. King was a Baptist preacher who was influenced by moral ideology to use non-violent methods in the civil rights movement, and it is not very surprising that his letter is full of religious references.

By posing rhetorical questions, appealing to feelings, and citing historical events and figures, Martin Luther King Jr. makes people feel like they should stand up and act on these unjust laws. King uses ethos, pathos, and logos to help us understand these unjust laws against African Americans. King makes the argument that these unjust laws should not be waited on to be fixed by someone else, but the time is now for justice. Martin Luther King Jr. Was a great public speaker, the best civil rights activist, and a beautiful writer who stood up against unjust rules and laws and he will be known as one of the most important men in United States history.

Metaphors in Letter From Birmingham Jail: Critical Analysis Essay

Near the beginning of the civil rights movement in America on April 12th,1963, eight clergymen announced that Dr. Martin Luther King’s protests in the streets should end because they promoted “hatred and violence”. In Martin Luther King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” he emphasizes that he has a duty to fight for justice without the use of violence. King uses rhetorical appeals, provides examples and personal anecdotes, and strong use of literary devices. King successfully conveys his message to his fellow clergymen and the people of the United States that they should have known better than addressing criticism against him.

King begins by presenting his audience with the use of appeal to logic, King’s introduction of the letter is the first instance of the use of ethos. He mentions that he is president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, which was an organization that has been operating in every southern state. As he uses the word “president” it meant as he had a status already ahead of him and that he was taking authority as a leader with great desires and with great powers. King makes referrals to himself, for example, he mentions Apostle Paul who was a great leader that many people have considered to be the most important person after Jesus in Christianity. King also specifies the personality of Jesus Christ himself in his letter. Furthermore, he persuades his audience that he wants to make a huge change overall. This change is big enough to make it into history books and influencing enough to get recognized by the people.

Dr. King is also able to pull the reader’s attention by describing the discrimination and terror that he vividly experienced during his stay in Birmingham. As King states “There can be no gainsaying the fact that racial injustice engulfs the community… its ugly record of brutality is widely known.” This means that there could not be a clearer picture than the one it’s already presenting, the Negro community is experiencing unfair treatment not only in court but in the streets as well. As we know, during this period the organization of the Ku Klux Klan referred to as the “KKK” terrified the African American community by brutally beating and killing those that came in their way or would even be in the wrong time and wrong place. They had not self-remorse and punished children, women, and men. As he goes on, there was a quote that outstood “Many streets in the south would, convinced flowing with blood.” This also gives the audience another representation of the streets and foreshadows how the streets would be with a violent protest, if there is no action done with avoiding this cause then a great risk of harm can be brought to the people. King presenting his understanding of ideas is important because it gives his audience his perspective on what is occurring in depth with his own personal experiences which in this case would benefit his claim and strengthens it for the purpose of eliminating the violence and creating a more peaceful community.

To strengthen his argument, King uses a great number of rhetorical devices in his letter. Dr. King includes metaphors in his letter when he says he sees “twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society.”. This metaphor provides a picture in the audience’s mind of the maltreatment 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 isn’t a way for this action to stop without someone agreeing with the way King sees the situation and the other African Americans. Also, by saying they are trapped in a tight cage without air in it and barely any space within, it symbolizes the blacks being animals without any rights. King also used a quote that Jesus himself said which was “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” This means, to not get even or mad at those that want to see you fail, but instead appreciate them let them be the reason you are succeeding. 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 how they would treat people unfairly due to color. He felt as if he hadn’t stood up for his people no one else would either. Through his use of metaphors and quotes, the audience has a better understanding of Dr. King’s argument and supports his goal.

King establishes himself as a man with trustworthiness and proved to be an incredible image to those that looked up to him. He wants his readers to know that the change he’s bringing is not for a short-term period, but a longer one. Also, King uses emotional appeals to reflect on human rights and mentions the time he spent time in the Birmingham Jail which showed he was desperate to be there. King uses a great amount of logos to justify how the government was set up. Without his use of rhetorical devices, his audience would not be able to truly see the argument he was trying to provide, and this would have just made the civil rights movement as successful and stand out as it ended up being.

Essay Summary of ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’

My name is Martin Luther King Jr, I am a civil rights activist and am against segregation. During the Birmingham campaign, my role was president of the SCLC (Southern Christian Leadership Center), and was also known as the ‘face of the movement’. I strongly believe that I, and all African Americans, should be entitled to the same freedom and rights as the white people of the United States.

The first reason I am opposed to segregation is that I am African American and have personally experienced racism and segregation. When I was six years old, one of my white classmates announced that his parents would no longer allow him to play with me since he was now attending a segregated school. Segregation has been extremely detrimental to education. For example, 9-year-old Linda Brown was refused an education in a desegregated school in 1951 because of her African-American race. Before starting college, I spent the summer on a tobacco farm in Connecticut, where I encountered my first ‘out of the norm’ segregation standards. This experience stunned me because I was surprised at how the two different races of black and white people merged in comparison to what I was used to in the South. It was my usual, and seeing it be so different further fueled my rage against racial segregation as a whole. While still in Connecticut, I remember a part of the letter I had written to my parents saying, ”On our way here we saw some things that I had never anticipated to see. There was no discrimination after we crossed through Washington, and the white people here seemed kind. We can go anywhere and sit anywhere we want without being separated.’ In the letter, I was saying how shocked I was at the difference in treatment of black people from the North compared to the South. African Americans and whites were able to attend the same church. I never even thought that a person of my race was able to eat out anywhere because this is what I was used to. The second reason I am against segregation is that it is against the Bible and my faith. I am a catholic baptist minister and believe in the subject of equality of all kinds. In my essay, while wrestling with the roles of religion in a modern segregated society named ‘science and religion’ I stated that, “Religion is the response to the human need for hope and certitude. One is an outreach for mastery, the other for perfection. Both are man-made and like man himself, are hedged about with limitations. Neither science nor religion, by itself, is sufficient for man.” My meaning behind this essay was that I believe that all people, no matter what race they are, deserve to be treated fairly as we are all the same by science which is closely related to my belief in Christian faith and guidance by the Bible. As Paul Tillich has said, sin is separation. As I addressed in my letter from Birmingham Jail, “Is not segregation an existential expression of man’s tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness?” I feel as if there is injustice in Birmingham, and I feel compelled to carry the ‘gospel of freedom’ beyond my hometown.

An action I took during the Birmingham Campaign was my letter from Birmingham Jail. In April 1963, I was arrested for violating a state court order by leading a movement of black demonstrators without a permit, demanding a boycott of white-owned institutions and the acknowledgment and liberation of African Americans’ rights. On April 16, 1963, I wrote this letter in response to white clergymen telling me that the timing of the demonstration was ‘unwise and untimely.’ The first reason I took this action was that I believe protests and civil disobedience are vital, as I also discussed in my letter. Protests can never be ‘well timed,’ especially for something as serious as Black Civil Rights. I stated that while it can be hard for whites to see, blacks cannot put up with this any longer and it is not untimely as we can not wait any longer. The second reason I took this action was because African Americans have been waiting for constitutional and God-given rights such as the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments for over 340 years. My response to criticism and my nonviolent methods were described in a letter I wrote saying, ‘Human rights do not depend on the decision of a human agency’. We have gone through decades of suffering, and being constantly abused and treated like animals and it is time to put an end to this. We have been told to always wait, which usually means never. No change has been made by waiting and if we wanted fair treatment then we had to act now. The struggle against segregation cannot be confined to a courtroom, as it creates nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth. Since the Albany protest which began on November 17th, 1961 was a failure, I wasn’t going to give up and stop there. I had to keep going otherwise no change would ever be made. I also discussed how the campaign wouldn’t have had to happen if whites were willing to negotiate without action, however, they weren’t, meaning we as black people needed to take action for the opportunity of negotiation to arise. We haven’t made a single gain in the past without pressure, therefore this is the way to create that necessary pressure and tension.