Compare Civil Disobedience And Martin Luther King

The year of 2017 has been one of the most politically heated and controversial years of the twenty-first century. We are facing issues as to whether we, the people, should be legally allowed to change gender, required to be open to homosexuality, or in the case of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., have the absolute freedom of speech; Should we be allowed to act with our feelings, and be required to be sensitive to the emotions of others even if it might be a limitation of our first amendment? Or should we abide by the same book of ethical and legal code we have kept since our country’s birth. Racism has plagued America for centuries, and we still have the question of, “have we moved on”?

The American duty requires to use voices, symbols, strength, and intelligence to unite and prosper against an unjust authority. Recently, different organizations continue to express their wants and changes to the government through peaceful protests. Civil disobedience strives to develop in America, however improvement continues to happen. The advantageous duty conveys civil disobedience. With Henry David Thoreau’s pivoting piece about individualism and protesting, Martin Luther King Jr.’s letter towards equal rights and rebellion, the developing civil disobedience continues to fulfill the American society.

A similarity in both the essays is that both Martin Luther King jr. and Henry David Thoreau advocated civil disobedience. King mentions in “letter from Birmingham Jail”, “Over the last few years I have consistently preached that nonviolence demands that the means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek”. King states in his letter how important it is to peacefully protest and not violently retaliate. Thoreau also stated how he did not desire to fight or be superior to his neighbors. In “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau revealed, “ I do not wish to quarrel with any man or nation. I do not wish to split hairs, to make fine distinctions, or set myself up as better than my neighbors”. These humble man only care to change racial injustice and inequality, so that the world can evolve to a place where everyone is equal.

Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were very significant during the Civil Rights Movement. Both were excellent speakers and shared one goal but had two different ways of resolving it. Martin Luther King Jr. chose to resolve the issues by using non-violence to create equality amongst all races to accomplish the goal. Malcolm X also wanted to decrease discrimination and get of segregation but by using another tactic to successfully accomplish the similar goal. The backgrounds of both men were one of the main driven forces behind the ways they executed their plans to rise above the various mistreatments. Martin Luther King Jr. was a more pronounced orator, a more refined leader, and overall saw the larger picture than Malcolm X.

Henry David Thoreau wrote Civil Disobedience, which is about him trying to persuade citizens that their obligation is to contravene and correct the unfair laws of the government. Thoreau begins Civil Disobedience with the view point “That government is best which governs least”

In the modern age of America, there are many people who have read and abided by the beliefs of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is a philosophy created by Henry Thoreau that states one must not conform to certain laws for a variety of reasons, which was also an ideology utilized by Martin Luther King Jr. The world has witnessed many acts of disobedience from the masses, and have thus portrayed the idea that this belief still operates successfully. The ideology that surrounds civil disobedience also strongly influences the individual in a particular society, which also depicts the principles of this belief have adjusted to the modern world. In the new age of America, the beliefs of Thoreau and King are still prevalent and found in society due to the influence it has on movement that brings change; thus, illustrating that American citizens commonly refer and utilize this belief.

The fight for civil rights and freedom is a reoccurring subject that has appeared throughout American history. Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail” were written over one hundred years apart. Although they are set in different time periods, they discuss the rights the American people should have, while also criticizing the people with superior power in the government. Thoreau’s aggressive writing style and King’s peaceful, calm style help to deliver their messages. Not only their writing style but also their emotional appeals, tone, and other rhetorical strategies help to give their audience a sense of the social issues they are disagreeing strongly with.

The two essays, "Civil Disobedience," by Henry David Thoreau, and "Letter From a Birmingham Jail," by Martin Luther King, Jr., effectively illustrate the authors' opinions of justice. Each author has his main point; Thoreau, in dealing with justice as it relates to government, asks for "not at once no government, but at once a better government. King contends that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Both essays offer a complete argument for justice, but, given the conditions, King's essay remains more effective, in that its persuasive techniques have more practical application. Both essays extensively implement both

     Any one can say that a law is unfair and unjust. However, who is really willing to accept the consequences for going against an unjust law? Is breaking this law really worth the punishment? The government is the one to decide whether a law is reasonable, but what if a member of the public believes that a law is not? Should he rebel against this law? Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. answered yes to this question and believed that one should speak out against an injustice. They both believed that government had many flaws. Even though they shared many beliefs in many of the same subjects concerning Civil Disobedience, they had many different

One of the most evident differences between the two papers is the way they are written. Dr. King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” is undoubtedly much easier to follow and understand compared to Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience.” King’s tone is very calm and respectful, which is expected as he is a minister and advocate, compared to Thoreau, who sounds disgusted, judgmental, and angry at the government; this is important because if King’s tone was more like Thoreau’s he may have been unable to explain the importance of civil disobedience to his audience. In addition, King alludes to the bible and history and provides examples of events that have occurred in order to get his point across whereas Thoreau only uses his personal experience and forces his ideas on his audience. One such example is when King is explaining the difference between just and unjust laws as he writes, “An unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because it did not have the unhampered right to vote. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up the segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout the state of Alabama all types of conniving methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties without a single Negro registered to vote, despite the fact

Both “On the duty of Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King,Jr., respond to the relationship between the government and its people. They both address the same topics, yet they approach it using different methods. Thoreau and King add first-hand experiences from their lives as well as cries for the resolution of nationwide racial discrimination within their writings. They also use their writings to speak their concerns to different audiences.

Henry David Thoreau was an American writer and protester, who wrote the influential essay “Civil Disobedience”. In his essay, he advocates for citizens to protest against government actions that they deem unjust and to stand up for one’s rights, putting morals before law,

As an admirer of Gandhi, Dr. King sought to emulate the philosophy of nonviolence in his campaign against bus segregation in Montgomery. The resounding success of this campaign led Dr. King to believe in the power of Gandhian philosophy in the African-American struggle for equal rights. Dr. King saw parallels between the Indian fight for independence from the British Raj and the racial problems persistent in the South. The Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru expressed his interest in meeting Dr. King during a visit to New York in 1956. Three years later, Dr. King received a letter from Nehru welcoming him to India.

When John F. Kennedy said, “those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable,” there were many people who agreed and disagreed with his statement. I agree with John F. Kennedy because if people/leaders are not willing to protest peacefully, it is because they are asking for violence. Mahatma Gandhi was a leader who hindered the process of violent revolutions by starting his own peaceful revolution using civil disobedience and leading a nation to do the same. Similarly, Martin Luther King Jr. was an activist fighting for equality, freedom and brotherhood between white and black communities. Although both Gandhi and MLK fought for civil rights, freedom of oppression,