“Letter from Birmingham Jail” Primary Source Analysis Martin Luther King, Jr. seldom had time to answer his critics. But on April 16, 1963, he was confined to the Birmingham jail, imprisoned for participating in civil rights demonstrations. “Alone for days in the dull monotony of a narrow jail cell,” King pondered a letter titled A Call for Unity that fellow clergymen had published pressing him to drop his crusade of nonviolent resistance and to leave the battle for racial equality to the courts. Within that document, King’s fellow clergymen caste him as an ‘outsider’ and ‘extremist’ interfering with life in the City of Birmingham. They criticize his use of direct action, instead advocating for negotiation; they criticize the fact that King
…show more content…
King likens himself to the Apostle Paul to dismiss the clergymen’s claim that an outsider has no say in Birmingham. He states that “just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ…so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own home town.” Letter from Birmingham Jail (1963): 2. By citing Paul as an outsider, he shows the fallacy in the clergymen’s argument. By likening himself to Paul, he shows that a man within their shared faith was an outsider, and that it played no part in his role as a courier of the gospel. King also relates himself to Jesus Christ, who like King was an “extremist for love” and “creative extremist” Ibid., 13. By comparing himself to Jesus Christ, King negates the clergymen’s criticism of him as an extremist. These two emotional appeals to faith, show the reader that they must side with King, as they would have sided with Paul, an outsider, and Jesus Christ, an …show more content…
King uses logical appeals very effectively to establish an educated, legalistic tone and to reject his colleagues disdaining sentiments. In paragraph six, Dr. King states “In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: (1) Collection of the facts… (2) Negotiation. (3) Self-purification and (4) Direct Action.” Ibid., 2. By systematically breaking down the steps he and his followers have taken, he negates the clergymen’s argument that negotiation is a better route than direct action. Dr. King explains that direct action establishes a non-violent, creative tension to force negotiations, and thereby validates his pro-direct action position. In that same vein, the clergymen “deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham.” Ibid., 2. King states that it is unfortunate that these demonstrations are taking place, but that “it is even more unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.” Ibid., 2. By using this logical appeal, King demonstrates that the clergymen should not be condemning the effects, but rather blaming the triggers of the discontentment within the black community. The final criticism King faces is over his “willingness to break laws.” Ibid., 7. After accepting this valid concern, King quickly launches into several paragraphs in defense of lawbreaking as a moral action, established on the notion that there are just laws and there are unjust laws. King’s litmus test for that difference is whether a law
King likens himself to the Apostle Paul to dismiss the clergymen’s claim that an outsider has no say in Birmingham. He states that “just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ…so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own home town.” Letter from Birmingham Jail (1963): 2. By citing Paul as an outsider, he shows the fallacy in the clergymen’s argument. By likening himself to Paul, he shows that a man within their shared faith was an outsider, and that it played no part in his role as a courier of the gospel. King also relates himself to Jesus Christ, who like King was an “extremist for love” and “creative extremist” Ibid., 13. By comparing himself to Jesus Christ, King negates the clergymen’s criticism of him as an extremist. These two emotional appeals to faith, show the reader that they must side with King, as they would have sided with Paul, an outsider, and Jesus Christ, an …show more content…
King uses logical appeals very effectively to establish an educated, legalistic tone and to reject his colleagues disdaining sentiments. In paragraph six, Dr. King states “In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: (1) Collection of the facts… (2) Negotiation. (3) Self-purification and (4) Direct Action.” Ibid., 2. By systematically breaking down the steps he and his followers have taken, he negates the clergymen’s argument that negotiation is a better route than direct action. Dr. King explains that direct action establishes a non-violent, creative tension to force negotiations, and thereby validates his pro-direct action position. In that same vein, the clergymen “deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham.” Ibid., 2. King states that it is unfortunate that these demonstrations are taking place, but that “it is even more unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.” Ibid., 2. By using this logical appeal, King demonstrates that the clergymen should not be condemning the effects, but rather blaming the triggers of the discontentment within the black community. The final criticism King faces is over his “willingness to break laws.” Ibid., 7. After accepting this valid concern, King quickly launches into several paragraphs in defense of lawbreaking as a moral action, established on the notion that there are just laws and there are unjust laws. King’s litmus test for that difference is whether a law