MLK vs. Clergymen
The Civil Rights movement was a seminal and pivotal moment in the history of the United States. To be honest, it is one of two huge shifts in the treatment and rights of African-Americans, with the other being the abolition of slavery in the 1860’s. Roughly a century later is the time period where the letters traded back and forth between Martin Luther King Jr. and certain clergymen can be seen. Indeed, some clergymen in Alabama sent a letter to Dr. King in April of 1963. King responded to the letter in kind, from jail, a scant four days later. It is important to analyze what is being said in these letters, how it is being said, why it is being said and the overall rhetoric, tone and ethics that belie the two letters. While there are at least some failings in both letters, Dr. King clearly has the moral and ethical high ground when comparing the two parties that were exchanging letters.
Analysis
The crux of the clergymen letter is that Dr. King is working against “common sense” and “law and order” when it comes to his statements, actions and efforts (TIU). The clergymen go on to say that King is inciting unrest even as his protesting actions are generally peaceful and non-violent. The clergymen actively insist that King urge his fellow “Negros” to withdraw support from the protests and uproar so that peace can be restored (TIU). The letter is not entirely one-sided against Dr. King. Indeed, the letter urges that the police and citizenry exterior of the protests remain calm and not respond improperly to the demonstrations and other efforts related to the civil rights movement that King was championing (TIU).
King’s response is bold yet calm at the same time. Indeed, he notes that he rarely responds to the criticism that is lobbed his way. However, he adds that he feels compelled to respond given the tone, verbiage and assertions in the letter. What follows is a point-by-point rebuttal to what King feels is wrong with the logic of the letter that the clergymen offered. His basic premise...
Works Cited
TIU. "Alabama clergymen’s letter to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr." moodle.tiu.edu. n.p., 2018.
Web. 26 Feb. 2018.
John Locke's social theory not only permits disobedience but also a revolution if the State violates its side of the contract. Martin Luther King, Jr. says that civil disobedience derives from the natural law tradition in that an unjust law is not a law but a perversion of it. He, therefore, sees consenting to obey laws as not extending or including unjust laws. At present, a new and different form
Civil Disobedience The concept of "Civil Disobedience" was first put forward by the American author, Henry David Thoreau in his famous essay "Civil Disobedience" initially published in 1849 as "Resistance to Civil Government." Although Thoreau's essay had little impact in the nineteenth century, his ideas about civil disobedience were put into practice in the twentieth century by leaders such as Mohandas Ghandhi during India's struggle for independence and by Martin Luther
Civil Disobedience The Trial of Socrates The Athenians suffered a crushing defeat in 404 B.C.E. with the end of the Peloponnesian War. A Spartan occupation force controlled the city, and instituted the rule of the Thirty Tyrants to replace Athenian democracy. While a form of democracy was reinstated it lacked the acceptance of ideas and freedom of speech that had been such an integral part of Athenian society (Rogers). In Athens at this
Civil Disobedience: Thoreau's research on civil disobedience puts it as the refusal by the citizens to obey laws or even pay taxes in a country. The end result of the disobedience is normally war, especially when the citizens want to take laws into their hands. The decision by citizens to take the law into their hands forces the government to act forcefully, which results in the war. However, when proper procedures
Regardless, to condemn Brown to death in Thoreau's view demoted the far greater human destruction of life via the institution of enslavement Brown attempted to end. This does not seem so much to be a contradiction or a defense of violence but a tempering of the anger that Brown created in the hearts of many Americans, and an attempt to put the violent acts of Brown in the context
3). For both Thoreau and King, the matter of unjust laws was urgent. In his speech delivered during the March on Washington, King stated, "It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality," ("I Have a Dream"). A century earlier, Thoreau advocated the
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now