“Letter from a Birmingham Jail” Dr. Martin Luther

In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail Dr. Martin Luther world-beater Jr. challenges the conceptualize nonions of his fellow clergymen and argues that in evaluator anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. (King, 1963). Dr. King had been chastised by a chip of clergy in Birmingham as an alfresco agitator stirring up trouble in their city. Early on, he exempted his idea that no citizen of the United States can be considered an agitator when protesting or acting with regard to something else mishap with the countrys borders. Furthermore, King argues that what happens in Birmingham affects Atlanta and Washington, D.C. and New York City. In many ways, he was rivalry the idea of globalization and world conscious long before they became buzz words and the way of the world. King argued that as a member of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference he had no natural selection other than to fight for social justice throughout the South.After justifying himself to the other clergy, King explains why the demonstrations for which he was arrested are taking place in Birmingham. In gentle rebuke, he points out that the clergymen have condemned the conditions that resulted because of the protest notwithstanding have never taken time to rebuke the conditions that required the demonstrations take place. Birmingham is probably the most well behaved segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of brutality is widely known. Negroes have undergo grossly unjust treatment in the courts. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in the nation. These are the hard, brutal facts of the case, King wrote (King 1963).Despite those conditions, leaders at bottom the African American community approached city leaders attempting to find a path to social justice via the equity. They were humored and strung along by the establishment, but never did the city try to make any good faith effort to try to change th e conditions. And, at the time of Kings letter, being born(p) an African American in atomic number 13 in general and Birmingham in particular virtually guaranteed a lack of rights. Then, last September, came the opportunity to talk with leaders of Birminghams economic community. In the course of the talkss, certain promises were make by the merchants for example, to remove the stores humiliating racial signs. On the basis of these promises, the Reverend Fred Shuttles worth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights nursed to a moratorium on all demonstrations. As the weeks and months went by, we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. A few signs, briefly removed, returned the others remained. (King, 1963).The signs were the overt racism inherent in Birmingham, but the root in the region went much deeper. African Americans were consistently denied the right to vote, sometimes to the point that in counties where the volume of the populat ion was black, not a single African American was registered to vote. King argues clearly that these maneuvers to h hoar volume back from racial par were often being done at heart the confines of the fair play and that was a problem in and of it.He further argues that taking direct fill will spur the community toward negotiation and an effort to change. 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 loose. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. (King, 1963) If no action is taken, King agues, then the status quo does not change. People are not prompted to change, or even to negotiate for improvement if there is no nerve impulse for their effort.The purpose of our direct-action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the entry to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negoti ation. Too long has our beloved South tear been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue. (King, 1963). It is all important(predicate) to note that throughout his call to action, King reiterates that the direct actions should be non-violent designed to make people disquieting and disrupt daily routines, not aggressive or threatening.He services complaints that the protest came too soon after a city election for the newly elected government to have any impact on the old ways. The problem with waiting for someone to take action is that you are always waiting and nothing changes. The alone answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded or so as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we sprightliness that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor. will bring the millennium to Birmingham.While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle someone than Mr. Connor, they are both seg regationists, dedicated to maintenance of the status quo. (King, 1963). King points to the emerging nations of the world, able to fight for their license from colonial oppressors and get it, and then remarks at the horse and buggy pace the United States is making within her own borders to promote equality (King, 1963). Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging grisly of segregation to say, Wait.(King, 1963)He justifies his actions in terms of the law. This is perhaps the most powerful of Kings arguments outside the I Have a Dream speech. It sets the tone for his later work and justifies the Civil Rights Movement in one fell swoop. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Courts decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws.One may won ask How can you instigate breaking some laws and obeying others? The answer lies in the fact that there fire two types of laws just and unjust. I would be the Brat to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral right to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that an unjust law is no law at all (King, 1963).In this short passage, King makes an eloquent and absolute plea for civil disobedience and encourages people to take the action needed to make a balance with regard to changing the law. His argument is that sometimes the law is simply so unjust that if a someone does not take radical action to change the law, he is fighting injustice.The idea that a law could be justly applied but be inherently unjust was illogical, he argued. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a nonage group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is residue 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. This is sameness made legal. (King, 1963).He further argues that the type of civil disobedience he is recommending was first practiced in biblical times by Shadrach and his compatriots when they faced the lions den rather than renouncing their faith. He then goes on to chastise the church leadership for their inaction and lack of support for the African American community. Let me take note of my other major disappointment. I have been so greatly disappointed with the white church and its leadership. (King, 1963). He argues that the church should in supporting core Christian values work toward the development of equality for all people and that in failing to do so they have ignored their Christian duty.Kings letter was intend as an answer to critics, a response to those who did not understand the reality of the Southern African American and the way that they were being discriminated against. Instead, it served as an strategy for social justice and for achieving equal ity. By detailing how and why people of color and white Americans should stand in concert to fight for equality, he took the effort for equality out of the streets and back alleys to the headlines.His definitions regarding an unjust law made the difference philosophically and religiously for many people. Many people who had previously considered themselves good people suddenly erect that they could no longer hide behind the legality of the situation. Instead, King forced them to take the issue of equality to heart and think of it from their conscious and not just from the law. They were no longer able to argue that it was clear by the law so that must make it right. King found the right words to explain that equality was everyones responsibility and that unless people were willing to work for justice, no one would have it.Thesis In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. challenges the preconceived notions of his fellow clergymen and argues that injustice anyw here is a threat to justice everywhere. (King, 1963OutlineLetter from a Birmingham JailI. Summary and historical contextII. Why Birmingham?a. Worst racism in the Southb. Negotiation failedc. New leadership might mean an opportunity for change.III. Why direct action?a. Civil disobedience draws attentionb. Unjust laws should not be obeyedc. Christian history of actionIV. ConclusionKings letter was intended as an answer to critics, a reply to those who did not understand the reality of the Southern African American and the way that they were being discriminated against. Instead, it served as an outline for social justice and for achieving equality.