Analysis Of Henry David Thoreau 's Letter From Birmingham Jail

In paragraph 40 Thoreau qualifies his argument by stating his beliefs, indicating it by saying “I” throughout the paragraph. Thoreau states that he does not want to make himself seem as if he is on a higher pedestal because of his beliefs, “I do not wish to split hairs”( Thoreau 953). He uses this strategy to display that he is not a rebel out to make trouble but a normal person who is doing his responsibility as an American resident. Thoreau expresses his credibility to prove and persuade the audience that they too, like normal people can speak and act against the unjust government.

The essay “Letter From Birmingham Jail” written by Martin Luther King Jr., and “Civil disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau have much in common. They both talk about what to do under circumstances when laws are unjust. Although they do have many things in common they do also have several differences: one major one being how the time difference has an impact on the subject. Both of these essays written by two notable figures in society shed a different light on their stance in politics, and shows the reader that you can do things to fight for what you believe in.

Thoreau and King use many similar strategies in their writings. One uses these strategies to make their piece more effective. King 's persuasive letter to the clergyman, Letter from Birmingham Jail was far more effective than Thoreau’s Lecture On the Duty of Civil Disobedience directed towards americans ready to change things, and here is why. King’s article was more effective because he strives towards tugging on the audience 's heartstrings rather than the logical side, his repetition proved to be more effective, he has a unique organizational structure, King stays more on topic, and was more passionate about his disquisition.

The fight for civil rights and freedom is a reoccurring subject that has appeared throughout American history. Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail” were written over one hundred years apart. Although they are set in different time periods, they discuss the rights the American people should have, while also criticizing the people with superior power in the government. Thoreau’s aggressive writing style and King’s peaceful, calm style help to deliver their messages. Not only their writing style but also their emotional appeals, tone, and other rhetorical strategies help to give their audience a sense of the social issues they are disagreeing strongly with.

In “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. resolutely responds to eight clergymen who question his methods of protest against segregation in Birmingham, Alabama. Specifically, in paragraphs 12-14, Dr. King explains why his protests are indeed being done in a timely manner to obtain the “constitutional and God-given rights” (A Portable Anthology, page 207) that Africans have been restricted of for over 340 years. Dr. King’s argument, combined with his strategic use of rhetorical devices to enhance it, helps create a palpable feeling of understanding that captivates the audience into seeing America through his vision.

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

In the pieces Henry David Thoreau “Civil Disobedience” and Martin Luther King Jr. “Letter From Birmingham Jail” both analyze civil disobedience through their own experiences on the way that were runned. They both not only analyze but seem to question whether to trust who can run the government with the governments true intentions being questionable. In Thoreau “Civil Disobedience” he questions the morals of how the government sees its people, to them only having us being seen as machines they can just control which is crossing between ruling and being unjust. In MLK’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail” he also explores and questions on not how the city or ‘government’ is ran, but rather the men who run it, using the experiences that he himself along with his fellow community have gone through from the segregation of the clergyman and the states. Civil disobedience is seen as a way to go against the government, a way to voice out the people’s opinion for a call of change. An idea that is still used today which has developed the nation into what we are now, a nation that states their beliefs for the whole world to see and know.

Both “On the duty of Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King,Jr., respond to the relationship between the government and its people. They both address the same topics, yet they approach it using different methods. Thoreau and King add first-hand experiences from their lives as well as cries for the resolution of nationwide racial discrimination within their writings. They also use their writings to speak their concerns to different audiences.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a key figure in the civil rights movements that took place in the 1950s and 1960s. The “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” is an open letter written by King defending nonviolent resistance against racism. The letter argued that people have a moral responsibility to break unjust and unethical laws. The letter also stresses themes of unity among brothers in order to overcome racism. I will argue in support of King’s stance that citizens are morally justified in breaking unjust laws and that openly and responsibly opposing unjust laws is itself a duty of every citizen.

To be able to counterattack, one must know where the attack is coming from, hence analyzing the audience. By doing so, King is able to address his audience appropriately. In the preface, the

King demonstrates how his peaceful, non-violent protests do not advocate violence, which is exactly what the clergymen feared from Malcolm. Kings intensity and magnitude of his statements show that he believes both paths he mentions are wrong, as he states, “I have tried to stand between these two forces.” King attempts to stay between the extremes and remind people that he is the middle ground. King emphasizes that he is not an extremist, rather, he is a moderate attempting to find the most favorable solution to both his and the clergymen’s problems. In conclusion, King juxtaposes these two extremist views in order to demonstrate how his practical and non-violent protests should be encouraged.

In 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr. was thrown into jail due to participating in non-violent protests against racism and segregation in the city of Birmingham. There, he wrote the famous “Letter from the Birmingham Jail,” which became one of the most important letters in history of the American civil rights movement (Colaiaco 1). The open letter covered many points to King’s arguments for why the marches, protests, and other non-violent actions were necessary and justifiable. James Colaiaco analyzes the key components to the letter and the different ways Martin Luther King, Jr. used literary devices to form a well written argument.

In paragraphs 12-14 of “Letter From Birmingham Jail”, Dr. King begins addressing the clergymen’s belief that the peaceful demonstrations conducted by him and his associates were untimely. King starts answering questions frequently heard by opposing or moderate forces, as well as essentially denouncing the resistance to desegregation. King then introduced the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed; concluding that the oppressor is not inclined to act on things that do not directly affect them. Therefore, providing a platform of his argument as to why blacks could no longer wait to be given their basic human rights. Action needed to take place because fair treatment was no longer a hope to be given, it had to be taken.

In Martin Luther King’s essay “Letter to Birmingham Jail”, he discusses racial injustice and peaceful protest. He talks on how brutal negroes were treated in jail and by policemen. King was jailed for parading around without a permit. In Henry David Thoreau’s essay “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau spoke on the unjust government, nonviolent revolt, and against slavery. Thoreau went to jail for not paying his poll taxes because he refuses to align himself with the state. These essays show some similarities and differences that I want to bring to light. Two similarities that I found are that they both advocated for civil disobedience and they were willing to break the law if necessary. A difference that I discovered, was that in the two essays Thoreau and King focus on different issues for some matters.