In “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” Martin Luther King Jr. addresses eight of the most respected clergymen in Alabama about their inaction and failure to support a movement that they should. King also points out that the white moderate, who say that they agree with him, have become too comfortable in the current system and because of that do not truly want the change that they call for. One of King’s biggest grievance with the white moderate and clergymen that he addresses is that they are not willing to stand up against an unjust law. To make this point clear he compares the unjust laws that they are unwilling to break to those of Adolf Hitler. King mentions “that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal’”, but if he “had lived in
…show more content…
He agrees that negotiation would be the best option, but then points out that “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” (King Jr. 2). When saying this, he is making an argument for direct action, but that is not his main point. This statement proves to the clergymen and white moderate that they cannot wait for a more peaceful time so that they can negotiate, but that direct action is needed now to create tension that will force the negotiations to happen. This proves that King’s main argument is that direct action is needed …show more content…
He repeats the idea that they can no longer wait for the right time to act or negotiate. By repeating this idea, he creates a sense of urgency with the reader that makes them feel as if they cannot wait any longer. A common counter argument that he hears is that equality and freedom will come eventually if they wait. King does a good job of proving this wrong when he says, “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed” (King Jr. 2). Since his intended audience is a part of the “oppressor” this point should make them realize that they will not want to give up the power that they have, so when they say that freedom and equality will come later on they are lying. They have become too comfortable in the current system which gives them the power, and by telling the “oppressed” that they should just wait is extending the amount of time that they can enjoy their power. They are saying that equality and freedom will come tomorrow, but when tomorrow comes it is still today. Unless they take action now, rather than waiting for a better time, equality and freedom will never
He agrees that negotiation would be the best option, but then points out that “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” (King Jr. 2). When saying this, he is making an argument for direct action, but that is not his main point. This statement proves to the clergymen and white moderate that they cannot wait for a more peaceful time so that they can negotiate, but that direct action is needed now to create tension that will force the negotiations to happen. This proves that King’s main argument is that direct action is needed …show more content…
He repeats the idea that they can no longer wait for the right time to act or negotiate. By repeating this idea, he creates a sense of urgency with the reader that makes them feel as if they cannot wait any longer. A common counter argument that he hears is that equality and freedom will come eventually if they wait. King does a good job of proving this wrong when he says, “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed” (King Jr. 2). Since his intended audience is a part of the “oppressor” this point should make them realize that they will not want to give up the power that they have, so when they say that freedom and equality will come later on they are lying. They have become too comfortable in the current system which gives them the power, and by telling the “oppressed” that they should just wait is extending the amount of time that they can enjoy their power. They are saying that equality and freedom will come tomorrow, but when tomorrow comes it is still today. Unless they take action now, rather than waiting for a better time, equality and freedom will never