Defending Injustice
Injustice is an issue constantly seen throughout history and continues to occur in modern day society. The beings who establish these injustices in the law, have remained in power, but now it is up to the citizens to create a change that succeeds, and influences those to come. Many people stood for the idea of what makes a law just and unjust, including the most familiar like Martin Luther King and Thoreau. These men obtained similar ideas of moral right in a society and how to confront their situations successfully. Thoreau an American transcendentalist philosopher, and King an African American activist; both about 114 years apart, with the same mentality on related issues. In both “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” and “On …show more content…
In this case King,” In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action” ( King 2). King believes in fast acting peaceful protest, after his attempts to negotiate fail. His form of direct action includes sit ins and marches, to produce a broad statement to the public eye. Before taking direct action, they must prepare by resisting to anything that comes their way. Thoreau’s method consist of, “I saw, that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was a still more difficult one to climb or break through before they could get as free as I was” (Thoreau 9). Thoreau 's experience in not paying taxes, he felt liberated from his conscience. His approach in making a change for just reasons happens at a slower pace, yet effective influencing generations. He mentions, quietly declaring war with the State on his part, because he does not obey the law by not providing to pay his taxes. Thoreau defends what he strongly believes in by not supporting the government. King and Thoreau, both addressed as “ disturbers of the peace” for embracing the truth and going against the injustice caused by the law, that is anything, but just to their …show more content…
Thoreau appears more critical because he is a white educated man that has never been discriminated as King has for being a man of color. When, “ they have never received any encouragement from me, and they never will” (Thoreau 13). He directly states this towards the government, his opinion says true about the State. This comes from his transcendentalist mindset in non conformity, self reliance, and free taught. As an individual he feels confined to do by his believes, In other words what is of true importance to oneself. In contrast King approaches the government in a more constructive and critical manner because being an educated man of color during this hour he was treated like the rest of his brothers, otherwise he would not be taken into consideration. This is demonstrated, “ But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain and to deny citizens the First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest” (King 5). King calls out the clergymen to point out how these amendments embedded in the constitution by the Bill of Rights made to protect the individuals, and how they are manipulated. Even Though, the freedom to protest and form assembly exists, the government finds a way to overpower it with a false
Injustice is an issue constantly seen throughout history and continues to occur in modern day society. The beings who establish these injustices in the law, have remained in power, but now it is up to the citizens to create a change that succeeds, and influences those to come. Many people stood for the idea of what makes a law just and unjust, including the most familiar like Martin Luther King and Thoreau. These men obtained similar ideas of moral right in a society and how to confront their situations successfully. Thoreau an American transcendentalist philosopher, and King an African American activist; both about 114 years apart, with the same mentality on related issues. In both “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” and “On …show more content…
In this case King,” In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action” ( King 2). King believes in fast acting peaceful protest, after his attempts to negotiate fail. His form of direct action includes sit ins and marches, to produce a broad statement to the public eye. Before taking direct action, they must prepare by resisting to anything that comes their way. Thoreau’s method consist of, “I saw, that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was a still more difficult one to climb or break through before they could get as free as I was” (Thoreau 9). Thoreau 's experience in not paying taxes, he felt liberated from his conscience. His approach in making a change for just reasons happens at a slower pace, yet effective influencing generations. He mentions, quietly declaring war with the State on his part, because he does not obey the law by not providing to pay his taxes. Thoreau defends what he strongly believes in by not supporting the government. King and Thoreau, both addressed as “ disturbers of the peace” for embracing the truth and going against the injustice caused by the law, that is anything, but just to their …show more content…
Thoreau appears more critical because he is a white educated man that has never been discriminated as King has for being a man of color. When, “ they have never received any encouragement from me, and they never will” (Thoreau 13). He directly states this towards the government, his opinion says true about the State. This comes from his transcendentalist mindset in non conformity, self reliance, and free taught. As an individual he feels confined to do by his believes, In other words what is of true importance to oneself. In contrast King approaches the government in a more constructive and critical manner because being an educated man of color during this hour he was treated like the rest of his brothers, otherwise he would not be taken into consideration. This is demonstrated, “ But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain and to deny citizens the First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest” (King 5). King calls out the clergymen to point out how these amendments embedded in the constitution by the Bill of Rights made to protect the individuals, and how they are manipulated. Even Though, the freedom to protest and form assembly exists, the government finds a way to overpower it with a false