Compare And Contrast King And Obama

Lastly, King appeals to character as well as establishing his creditability. For starters, the the vocabulary King chose to use shows that he is educated and possesses the knowledge to respond to the clergymen. King also informed the clergymen that he had previous experience in conducting and participating in non-violent campaigns. This provides credibility because it showed that he had prior knowledge of the behavior and purpose of those participating, while also addressing that past campaigns have always been “untimely”, but with desired outcome. The last and most obvious proof of credibility, is that King was a black man that faced the same adversities that he referred to in the last paragraph of this section. The example being of having to personally tell his daughter why she could not be allowed to go to a public amusement park because she was black and looked at as less than.

First of all, King makes his point clear by appealing to the reader’s common sense, beliefs and values (logos). He does this by using specific examples of logos such being anecdotes and facts and data. An anecdote is basically a short story. He uses an anecdote by saying: “Watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same schools.” (King paragraph 2) The reason for this being an example would be because Negroes and white boys are dying, thus demonstrating that we as a nation, are falling apart from the inside. The second of example he uses in this article is facts and data. He states that in 1957 when a group formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, they chose their motto: “To save the

Thesis: King brilliantly applies rhetorical strategies such as pathos, logos and ethos that are crucial in successfully influencing detractors of his philosophical views on civil disobedience.

King uses irony, by giving examples of him using peaceful actions that were condemned anyway because they were said to ?precipitate violence?. He went on to say, ?Isn?t that like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated in the evil act of robbery??(King 563). Dr. King also realizes that the white moderates are mostly religious. He reminds them ?Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability, it comes through tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God??(King 563). Again, he urges the audience to get up and become active, and that there will be no change without their action.

He talked about racism, a non-violent approach, freedom and what should be demanded by the government. King showed these topics go hand in hand and you can't talk about one without bringing up another. Like explaining racism and all the things happening to his brothers and sisters it was almost inevitable that he mentioned how him and followers were able to used a peaceful protest to make a statement against violence, instead of reacting out of emotions with violence. King then talked about freedom should be granted, no matter the race. King thought that nobody should stand for being the last to receive what’s technically was theirs when it came to freedom, he believed we shouldn’t wait for the government, but demand freedom from the government.“Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds”(King page 1). He felt that living in the USA, freedom is

The type of logic King uses arent numbers or precentages but simple logic everyone should be able to relate as a fact. King states in his speech “ I have told them that Movotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask-and rightly so- what about vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasnt using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted.” King relates the violent protests used by African Americans to the violence and force the United States uses in war to create the changes

The strategies that King Jr. elucidates within this document to achieve these objectives are manifold. On the one hand he calls for peaceful, non-violent tactics most noticeably in the form of civic demonstrations in which he and his adherents readily accept any violence their actions might produce without resorting to violence themselves. Violence is one of the five forms of social oppression

When King gets up there to speak, he knows that he is fighting and uphill battle and the only way to persevere is with the power of numbers. King does what not many can do through the power of speech, he makes a nation realize that there is know true constraint holding them back from making change for the better of their great nation. King uses multiple metaphors in his speech to connect with the audience and create and emotional bond, one that they can relate to, a bond that unifies the masses to feel and understand what King is

Martin Luther King, Jr., uses pathos, ethos, and logos in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” An example of pathos, is when King talks about a little girl seeing an advertisement for an amusement park. She cries when her dad tells her that she is not allowed to go to the amusement park, due to the fact that colored people are not allowed in there. This shows that even children where not spared from racism. One way King uses ethos, is how he quotes multiple historical figures in his letter in order to point out that being an extremists does not necessarily evil.

     Furthermore, he gave addition reason of why he was speaking out. He say, “As I walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems…. But they asked-and rightly so- what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn’t using massing doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted.” King was the messenger of peace and if he had not spoken against the tragedy of Vietnam, some people might have called a hypocrite, who is the preacher of peace and does not address the greatest example of violence. He wanted people to remember him not as a hypocrite. Furthermore, King’s conscious would not forgive him if he had not spoken for the suffering people of Vietnam.

King demonstrates how his peaceful, non-violent protests do not advocate violence, which is exactly what the clergymen feared from Malcolm. Kings intensity and magnitude of his statements show that he believes both paths he mentions are wrong, as he states, “I have tried to stand between these two forces.” King attempts to stay between the extremes and remind people that he is the middle ground. King emphasizes that he is not an extremist, rather, he is a moderate attempting to find the most favorable solution to both his and the clergymen’s problems. In conclusion, King juxtaposes these two extremist views in order to demonstrate how his practical and non-violent protests should be encouraged.

Another style King presented quite well was ethos, which is his credibility on his speech. Of course he portrayed this effectively because he himself is an African American, and he knows exactly what kind of segregation and discrimination his black brothers are experiencing. King gives an example by saying, "We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities…as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one." He goes on to say, "Some of you have come fresh from narrow cells…from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality." Not a day would go by that somewhere a black person was treated unequally because of the color of his skin. Martin Luther King addressed to the people such real

King brings in examples from his religion to further his argument that one must oppose unjust laws using nonviolent direct action. King is accused of being an extremist, to which he responds: “Will we be extremists for hate or for love?” (King 26). A bold statement, phrasing action as having two distinct sides. King strongly disavows the white moderate who stands to the side and waits for justice to come with time, instead of fighting for justice in the moment. He is quick to refer to the Bible when addressing the clergymen: “Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel?” (King 25). Using a rhetorical question with a biblical reference to make those who consider him an extremist, rethink if being an extremist is such an ill position to be in. He continues to use biblical imagery to support his point, citing that he is an extremist for love as so many were before him, including several prominent figures from Christianity. Even Jesus Christ, he states “was an extremist for love, truth and goodness” (King 26). By using this symbolism King is able to converse with his fellow clergymen in a way that is familiar to them all, pointing out the flaws in their

Barack Obama and Martin Luther King Jr. are both very influential African American leaders. Both have had an extremely positive impact on America, especially for the African American community. Obama spoke out about the past struggles, struggles of today, and what can be done to resolve these struggles for African American children in particular during his speech at the NAACP Centennial Convention in 2009. In King’s speech “I Have a Dream” given back in 1963, he spoke about the change that we need and how he believes we can get there. Obama and King’s use of repetition, analogies, and ethos determines the impact they are leaving on their audience. Although Obama gave a strong powerful speech, King used those rhetorical devices more effectively to leave an impact on his audience.

King uses a “peace and love” style of protest. The letter which king wrote (King) defends his strategy to a nonviolent resistance to racism. He answers the forces of hatred with nonviolent resistance in the pursuit of what he called the "beloved community." (Kasson). He also insisted that nonviolent direct resistance was not a surrender but a “spiritually strenuous confrontation of injustice and oppression”. In this process, however, protesters aimed not "to defeat or humiliate their opponents, but to win their friendship and understanding." As King tirelessly insisted, "The end is redemption and reconciliation. The aftermath of nonviolence is the creation of the beloved community, while the aftermath of violence is tragic bitterness”. “I want you to love our enemies. Be good to them. Love them and let them know you love them. For what we are doing is right. What we are doing is just. And God is with us" (Kasson). By using an approach of