Broken values In the 1964 nonfiction book , why we can’t wait , King refers back to U.S history and the American culture as a critic towards the American values America preaches but doesn’t practice . Consequently, the injustice, segregation and lack of freedom that is prominent in the “free land” contradicts the values Americans highly praises which is Democracy, written in the constitution. King uses the false imagery of America being the land of the free, opportunity and justice, as an advantage to argue that America is the land where justice, freedom and opportunity are absent, thus making America an unjust and oppressed land. Using pathos, King describes African Americans anger and hopeless in the justice system, when the ongoing …show more content…
That is why King's nonviolence was so effective because the oppressor(whites) became the bullies which went against the imagery of Blacks as "Thugs" therefore made America look not so unified to the rest of the world which only strengthen the African American movement and the views of America as the land of terror. This revolution was no joke for submission. The negros decided to no longer put up with the system taking away their god given rights as Americans, regardless the color of their skin. They decided that this delay will not be further allowed to take away the future generation, the negro child educational opportunity and moral freedom away. In 1963 king talks about the negro revolution has a moral action that seeks to better the black individual from the oppression, in justice and discrimination, and blames the law system for this uprising. King began to criticize the justice system in America stating that “any law that degrades human personality is unjust… An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself” (71) shows the hypocrisy of America and the values of justice, freedom and opportunity for all
King knew that many would criticize his actions, but it wasn't until his fellow clergymen deemed his activities to be "unwise and untimely" that King felt compelled to provide his point of view (1). In response to the comment about his protests being untimely, King passionately responded, "We have waited more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights" (2). How long is long enough? For the oppressors, there will never be a suitable time for negotiation. People will always stand idly by while their negro brothers and sisters are mistreated because they merely desire to maintain the status quo. Change is frightening. In Dr. King's words, "Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue" (2). Discussions that would have never been considered in the past were at last coming to fruition due to King's tension generating protests. The African American population will be denied their constitutional rights no
While in jail, King wrote the famous Letter From Birmingham Jail. In this letter he addressed the criticisms people had about the Civil Rights movement and what was taking place. He sheds light on the “nonviolent action” that created tension, but that needed to be done in order for change to happen. He stated that nonviolent action would create necessary tension that would make the oppressors notice. King explains that tension isn’t necessarily a bad thing and it doesn’t have to be violent; instead he believed that there was a kind of “nonviolent tension” necessary for the growth of the nation. There was already tension but it was not talked about or brought up. King explained that the way to bring this tension to the surface was through the
King uses logos to expertly define just and unjust laws, he does so multiple time offering several explanations and examples. A just law, he points out, can be unjustly applied as well. King states that an unjust law is one that is enforced on a minority group and not the majority, one that the minority group had no ability to vote for or against, and a law that promotes segregation in it application. King insists that an individual has both a right and a responsibility to break unjust laws. King clarifies the distinction he is trying to make and reassures readers that he is not calling for people to defy the law. King explains how nonviolently protesting a law while accepting the penalty openly is actually expressing a high respect for the law while advocating for change. King backs up his distinction of just and unjust laws when he notes that the laws in Nazi Germany allowed for Jewish persecution, and he would have broken those laws to support the oppressed class had he lived
King begins his response by stating “I am in Birmingham because injustice is here”. Taking a stand for the horrid crimes being committed against Black people, King repudiates the notion of an untimely act, that ultimately stands for justice (500-03, 3-13). Policeman maliciously killing, barbarous mobs, and mass poverty is the every day reality of the Negro American. Martin Luther King Jr. portrays African American suffering, while simultaneously acknowledging the solutions to that suffering. He argues that we are morally responsible to disobey unjust laws and that by taking a stance against them, we are progressing towards equality (504, 15-16).
Throughout his piece, King uses quotes said by famous historical figures to support his central claim that black oppression needs to be addressed. King quotes St. Augustine, a highly respected religious figure, “an unjust law is no law at all” in the middle of his logical reasoning about why there are laws that we should and should not obey (84). He uses St. Augustine’s words to differentiate the two types of laws, just and unjust laws. King agrees with St. Augustine’s words
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s response to a public statement of concern from multiple Southern white religious leaders entitled “Letter from Birmingham Jail” is perhaps one of the most important and influential pieces dedicated to the fight for equality written in the last one hundred years. It is striking just how much of the content within this letter continues to ring true. Numerous arguments King makes are still extremely relevant today, and it is nearly impossible to engage with and reflect on this text without drawing parallels to the current political landscape. This paper will discuss exactly how particular points
Martin Luther King uses historical examples to prove his point, using logos which most intellectuals can understand, and then uses examples for any African American can understand. In paragraph 16, King talks about St. Thomas Aquinas and his definition of an unjust law. "Any law that degrades human personality is unjust."(King, Pg.3) In Paragraph 21, "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, Pg.4) He discusses Nebuchadnezzar and how people in that time refused to obey his laws because they were unjust, just as he did in Birmingham. Socrates, the Boston tea party, early Christians who gave their lives for their religion. These historical events gave King an edge in his persuasiveness. Now he isn't just someone who has broken laws, now he is now just like all other famous ancient historical figures. However he also addresses his "Negro brothers" in paragraph 14, when he describes what its like to have to tell your children that they cant go somewhere or do something because they are black, or what it is like to watch as your family is beaten or lynched in front of your eyes. He is directing this at the
African Americans have undergone unimaginable hardships in this land and were powerless to effect change in the system with their vote. I find this to be great injustice. Another example of injustice in this reading is King’s arrest. He writes, “I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance, which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and deny citizens their First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.” As King explains how a just law can become unjust through capricious or malicious application, I find myself confused by the situation. African American citizens are struggling for the equality America was founded on, and these people are being arrested for improper parading. After exhausting many other approaches, African Americans moved to peaceful protest and even that was stifled. I find myself asking where else were they to turn, how else could they effect change, and where is their justice? Would anyone have blamed Dr. King for being angry with his situation? I doubt it. King made a wise choice to remain optimistic, to address those who questioned his motives with reverence. In fact, he defines how he will respond to his critics in the opening paragraph of his letter: “I want to try to answer your statements in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.” This statement demonstrates King’s commitment to
King’s letter he really tries to drive home the point that the African-Americans are the victims in this and they should have their basic rights. He writes “Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber” (King 4). The thought process is very logical, but it is hard for people at times to distinguish between the two. In the situation of an actually robbery, the police would not arrest someone for having their items stolen. They would do their best to find the thief and bring them to justice. The same should apply to segregation. They should be helping to bring justice for the people who have their rights stolen. Instead many see the African-Americans as the robbers. The African-Americans are fighting to their basic civil liberties and to be treated as the rest of the Americans are. The police and other people greet this with violence and throwing them in jail instead of trying to aid them. As a result, Dr. King makes sure that his protests are nonviolent on his part. In his letter he is clear that he believes “it is wrong to use immoral means to attain morals ends” (King 7). He believes that you must always have pure intentions and take the necessary positive steps to reach a positive end
Both authors expressed in their writings that the tension and resentment felt in the uncomfortable situation of 'foreign' rule could result in hate and violence. Dr. King realized that what affects someone or a group of people directly affects all citizens indirectly and he stated that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" (King). The coloured community in the United States of America were treated like outsiders and Dr. King explained in his letter that their treatment and the segregation laws that were in place were unjust. Dr. King did not advocate violence; however, he explained that "the Negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations" (King) and he suggested that if the repressed emotions were
made warnings against the assumption that racial justice would happen eventually. He also alluded to a revolution that made warnings to the nation that people should not make any underestimations of the urgency of this cause and that African Americans will not be appeased. The movement that was happening would not die down until blacks were granted equal rights to those who were white. Dr. King also insisted that the revolution must not devolve into bitterness, hatred, or violence and urged fellow African-Americans to take the high road with their struggles against injustice. Martin Luther King Jr. sought for the black community to access public spheres in ways that black people would be able to benefit politics that were inspired by freedom, justice, equality, and to bear the burden responsibility as a way of maintaining American Republic for the long term.
King differentiates between just and unjust laws, eliminating any argument as to what his letter is referring to. He quotes St. Thomas Aquinas: “An unjust law is a code that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.” By precisely defining the difference between just and unjust laws, King makes it difficult for anyone to refute his argument that segregation is not a law to be followed. King points out that while segregation may be legal, that does not necessarily mean that it is morally right. A majority of legislation passed did not include the votes of minorities, which contradicts the direct foundation of the country, as outlined by the Constitution, something that even the strongest segregationist must respect. King ends his argument with a resonating rhetorical question: “Can any law enacted under [morally wrong] conditions be considered democratically structured?” This question guides readers to the logical conclusion that with segregation, laws passed disregarding the votes of minorities, comes the fall of democracy, a fall with drastic repercussions as a country in which laws are passed to suppress minorities and benefit only the majority is no country at
To further support his analysis of the law, King states a third definition of “an unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because they did not have the unhampered right to vote” (PAR 14). This definition is given to show that there are unjust laws occurring. This implies that the white people are devaluing democracy and what it stands for. He states after that, clearly, Negroes are not allowed to vote in the state of Alabama regardless if they are the minority or not. He is stating that it is unjust for Negroes not to be able to vote. Although these statements do not directly answer the charges of the clergymen, King is building up to that answer. While defining the laws, King is focusing on what he believe is wrong and its relationship with unjust laws. King uses this technique to support breaking unjust laws to obey just laws.
In the text King uses a load of logos to appeal to his audiences logic and open their eyes to see what is really happening. In paragraphs fifteen and sixteen King begins to use logos to get his audience to begin thinking about the just and unjust laws. King says one of his most impressive statements, in my opinion, in paragraph 16,”one has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” When he states this, King is getting is audience to begin considering the laws that he is requesting them to follow and the laws that are being broken and the difference between the two. The argument that King is trying to win here is the topic that they should not be breaking laws if they are going to be asking for laws to be made and changed, he is saying that there is a difference in laws that suppress one group and allow another to flourish and laws that give everyone equal opportunity to live the American Dream. To give more backing and
King categorizes law into two types: just and unjust. He describes a just law as a “man-made code” that falls in line with moral law while an unjust law is one that deviates from moral law. King claims that just laws can uplift people while unjust ones degrade them. In stating these ideas, King provides his audience with his own definition of what laws are and what they can do. The reader can now apply this definition to attain a better understanding of King’s ideology and better connect with King’s larger purpose of the letter. King also examines laws that in method are fair but in practice are oppressive. This helps make his definition be more complete by presenting a multitude of ways a law can be unjust. He shows that laws can be unjust in writing and in application. King explains his criteria for just and unjust laws in order to move his argument forward in answering the criticisms of his fellow clergymen.