Compare And Contrast Martin Luther King And Thoreau

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.

Thoreau refused to pay the poll ax because the money was being used to finance a war he was against. This war was over Texas, which was to enter the Union as a slave state. He wrote Civil Disobedience while in the Walden jail. Thoreau wrote how disappointed he was with the government by forcing him to pay a poll tax that supported a war and slavery. King would later go to jail acting on his beliefs. Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau used civil disobedience to change people’s ideas and beliefs to stop the injustice brought against them and their nation.

On April 16, 1963, from a jail in Birmingham, Alabama, Martin Luther King Jr. composed an extensive letter to eight clergymen who condemned the timing of the civil rights movement. Although the letter was addressed to these eight clergymen, the Letter from Birmingham Jail speaks to a national audience, especially King’s “Christian and Jewish brothers”(King, 29). His peaceful but firm letter serves as a remarkably persuasive voice to an immensely chaotic mess, and is seen as a major turning point in the civil rights movement. King believes that without direct action, the full rights for African Americans could never be achieved. He defends the impatience of people in the civil rights movement, upholding that without forceful

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.

Birmingham was known as one of the most racist cities in the South, but also a place where change needed to take place. King, having been arrested several times before for peaceful protest was in jail in Birmingham for violating law with public demonstrations. He discovered that his methods of bringing awareness to the matter of civil rights was under harsh scrutiny by white members of the church. During his short amount of time in jail, he responded to the criticism by writing one of the most important documents that came out of the Civil Rights movement known as “Letters from a Birmingham Jail”. In this document, King brilliantly displays his writing ability and how he strikes the heart of the nation pointing out his Christian beliefs and the words of the Bible in the fight for equality.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” collectively persuade their audiences to disobey authority when it concerns social injustice. King takes a more assertive yet respectful approach, and makes it a point to explicate the intolerable treatment that the black community had to endure under the encroachment of segregation laws. In addition, Thoreau expounds why it is so important for citizens to object and take action upon the corrupt laws that the government had imposed on the blacks, insisting that civil disobedience is a means of freedom. Both of these influential men successfully utilize occasion, purpose, tone, appeals and rhetorical strategies to

One of the two most prominent figures in literature, Henry David Thoreau and Doctor Martin Luther King Jr., have very similar but yet vastly different writing styles. Their writing styles can be shown through their most well known pieces of writing, “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King. A way to compare and contrast their styles is through their use of rhetorical devices in order to persuade their readers into viewing a particular opinion and central argument, in this case they both use pathos, the appeal through conveying emotion, in seperate ways in order to persuade readers into the similar idea of promoting civil disobedience.

In Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” and in Martin Luther King Jr’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, both address the responsibility of the individual to stand up for their beliefs and to defy any idea that goes against their consciences or their moral standards. From this defiance, Thoreau states the need for civil disobedience. King later uses this term to respond to the white moderates and to express the need for direct action, as does Thoreau. The idea of civil disobedience expressed by Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr are evident in today’s nation through their methods , however, these beliefs can be spread further as the nation progresses.

     Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau both believed that one should stand up for what he believes in, as wells as accepting the consequences for his actions. Even though they also had different views about what makes law just or unjust. First of all, Martin Luther King believed that a law that is just should be square with the moral law or the law of God. This basically means a law should pertain to the Ten Commandments according to the bible. He also thought an unjust law was one that was inflicted on to a minority who did not even have the right to vote for this law in the first place.

The purpose for Martin Luther king to write “Letter from Birmingham Jail” was to respond to white Alabama clergymen who before this had criticized his action saying they were “unwise and untimely.” These clergymen had published a criticism directed towards King’s organization and participation in his protest march against segregation in Birmingham. This letter is not intended to persuade these men towards supporting civil rights, but rather to demonstrate that there is an immediate need towards direct action, and also that they need to open their eyes and see the African American community’s suffering. King withal expounds the need for tension, though only through nonviolent means, a tension that will coerce society to confront the present convivial iniquity head on. King disapproves being called an outsider because of his belief that humanity is part an "inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny."

In “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr extensively establishes his ethos and proves his authority on the matter of racial injustice. “I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eighty-five affiliated organizations across the South, and one of them is the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights” (King 1). King was the focal point of the Civil Rights movement and continues to symbolize the equality of all races to this very day. His authority to advocate on the

Thoreau wrote that people must be willing to go to jail if they want to change a law by disobeying the law. Thoreau went to jail instead of paying for his taxes because he believed the government used the money for unjust things. This is how Henry Thoreau thinks people can change unjust laws. He thought that if people willingly would to go to jail and quit their jobs, then the revolution will take a place and reform will come. Thoreau was willing to go to jail to change unjust laws because of his conscience.

Thoreau used Civil Disobedience to question the possibility of “organizing the rights of man,” and infused its paragraphs with his fears of a systematic government that “could not be resisted or changed” (Thoreau). His fears were paralleled in King’s statement that Birmingham city officials “consistently refused to engage in good faith negotiation,” which underscored the government's inability to reform itself and showed how African American lives would be affected if action was not taken in a timely manner. Change, King continued, would only be sustained if southern governments willed themselves to converse in “monologue rather than dialogue” (King). This deliberate juxtaposition helped mold his argument that negotiation was not feasible due to the one-sidedness of the conversation about race. His subsequent conclusion was that taking direct action was simply a “moral responsibility” that African Americans should pursue

Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. both attempt to argue for the rights to disobey authority if there is social injustice. Thoreau analyzes the duty and responsibility of citizens to protest and take action against corrupt laws of the government. Likewise, King conveys to his audience that the laws of the government against blacks are intolerable and that civil disobedience should be used as an instrument of freedom. They both effectively illustrate their philosophy that civil disobedience is a necessity, and the similarities and differences of these two essays are portrayed through their occasion, audience, purpose, speaker, tone, appeals, and rhetorical strategies.