Both Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. define the profound difference between just and unjust in their writings, “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” and “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.” While the two men have a different sound throughout each of their own pieces, there is much that they agree upon about civil disobedience once clearly thought out and read. With that being said, this paper will, respectively, discuss the general content of both writings, as well as the prominent similarities and differences noticeable in the two pieces. An example of political/cultural problems the United States is facing today that emulate civil disobedience will also be presented that link to both pieces. Towards the end of this paper, I intend
…show more content…
Thoreau and King’s writings were both written during different time periods. In fact, King wrote his letter a whopping 114 years after Thoreau’s piece. Therefore, they present somewhat different issues happening in society. For example, Thoreau was upset with the government and President Polk’s involvement with the Mexican American War. On the other hand, King was disappointed with the church, the “white moderate”, and segregation happening all over the United States. While Thoreau was opposed to President Polk’s willingness to expand slavery throughout America, he never stood against segregation like King. During Thoreau’s lifetime, African Americans didn’t even have rights, therefore, segregation wasn’t a problem Thoreau had to witness. Another difference between the two pieces is that their ideas about the government and how it should function doesn’t align. Thoreau believed that government was almost like a burden to people, and that people ought to govern themselves. King thought government was necessary. He just didn’t like that the government wasn’t governing people in what he thought to be morally …show more content…
However, there is one particular writing that I have become especially fond of. Perhaps it is simply the way in which the author writes! I do feel that Martin Luther King’s, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, is far most persuasive than “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience”. The emotional appeal that King uses in his letter truly tugs at the audience’s heart. Persuasion drives from emotion, and you can tell that King put a lot into making sure the letter stood for something meaningful. He gets descriptive! In one paragraph he reads to the clergymen, “I doubt that you would so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes.” It is sentences like this that capture the reader’s attention, and persuades the audience to keep reading, simply because of the emotional appeal they get from it. Although I liked King’s letter best when compared to Thoreau’s piece, Thoreau did have rather intriguing ideas in his writing that I found interesting. Overall, both pieces were powerful and still connect to society today. It is inevitable that civil disobedience will almost always
Thoreau and King’s writings were both written during different time periods. In fact, King wrote his letter a whopping 114 years after Thoreau’s piece. Therefore, they present somewhat different issues happening in society. For example, Thoreau was upset with the government and President Polk’s involvement with the Mexican American War. On the other hand, King was disappointed with the church, the “white moderate”, and segregation happening all over the United States. While Thoreau was opposed to President Polk’s willingness to expand slavery throughout America, he never stood against segregation like King. During Thoreau’s lifetime, African Americans didn’t even have rights, therefore, segregation wasn’t a problem Thoreau had to witness. Another difference between the two pieces is that their ideas about the government and how it should function doesn’t align. Thoreau believed that government was almost like a burden to people, and that people ought to govern themselves. King thought government was necessary. He just didn’t like that the government wasn’t governing people in what he thought to be morally …show more content…
However, there is one particular writing that I have become especially fond of. Perhaps it is simply the way in which the author writes! I do feel that Martin Luther King’s, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, is far most persuasive than “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience”. The emotional appeal that King uses in his letter truly tugs at the audience’s heart. Persuasion drives from emotion, and you can tell that King put a lot into making sure the letter stood for something meaningful. He gets descriptive! In one paragraph he reads to the clergymen, “I doubt that you would so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes.” It is sentences like this that capture the reader’s attention, and persuades the audience to keep reading, simply because of the emotional appeal they get from it. Although I liked King’s letter best when compared to Thoreau’s piece, Thoreau did have rather intriguing ideas in his writing that I found interesting. Overall, both pieces were powerful and still connect to society today. It is inevitable that civil disobedience will almost always