Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience and Martin Luther King's Letter from Birmingham Jail

In Thoreau’s continuing effort to describe the context for citizen rebellion, he beseeches how irrelevant public opinion is if it is not acted on. “How can a man be satisfied to entertain an opinion merely, and enjoy it? Is there any enjoyment in it, if his opinion is that he is aggrieved?” (Thoreau). This question develops a sense of urgency that unless an opinion is acted on, first, there will be a complete absence of realistic results, but second, it simply exacerbates the issue that citizen opinion is against. To an extent, opinions are worthless if there is no motivation behind them, and Thoreau makes this very clear within his essay to assist the exigence behind his straightforward tone.

In Martin Luther King’s essay “Letter to Birmingham Jail”, he discusses racial injustice and peaceful protest. He talks on how brutal negroes were treated in jail and by policemen. King was jailed for parading around without a permit. In Henry David Thoreau’s essay “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau spoke on the unjust government, nonviolent revolt, and against slavery. Thoreau went to jail for not paying his poll taxes because he refuses to align himself with the state. These essays show some similarities and differences that I want to bring to light. Two similarities that I found are that they both advocated for civil disobedience and they were willing to break the law if necessary. A difference that I discovered, was that in the two essays Thoreau and King focus on different issues for some matters.

    Thoreau seems to be a very educated political thinker. He can be very stubborn but humble when it comes to his beliefs, “I have contemplated the imprisonment of the offender, rather than the seizure of his goods -- though both will serve the same purpose -- because they who assert the purest right, and consequently are most dangerous to a corrupt state… ”(Thoreau 24. 218). Thoreau has lived in the woods for over six years, without paying state taxes. When the police officer asked him to pay, the non-violently compiled and spent a day in jail. Thoreau did not want to fund the American Mexican war through taxes and believed that people shouldn't be forced to do what they don't think is right. He is also a very optimistic person and believes that the people themselves should be good people, live good lives and therefore we wouldn't need as many laws, “when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.” (1. 210). Thoreau believes that the government is doing the best when doing the least, “I heartily accept the motto, -- “That government is best which governs least” …” (1. 210). Although Thoreau might have an unpopular opinion, he sticks with his beliefs throughout this essay. As he presents his opinion, he does it in the most classy yet confident arguments. He had the thought of the people in mind while writing, showing his good intentions of improving our government.

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

Thoreau is basically rallying for the absence of government in the lives of the citizens. He believed that everyone should govern himself. He also believed that no one should have to ride on the shoulders of the government, but instead rely on himself. He thought people should treat other people the way they wanted to be treated, and follow the natural laws of society. Martin Luther King Jr. believed there should be laws or it would be total anarchy. Thoreau believed that without the

Henry David Thoreau in his speech-turned-essay, Civil Disobedience, makes the case for individuals to be self-sufficient and independent. Thoreau’s purpose is to illustrate the importance of those qualities in everyday life and how someone should always keep these unwavering principles throughout their existence. Utilizing diction, imagery and syntax, Thoreau adopts a forthright tone to invoke independent thinking, action, and self-contemplation in the American populace.

Today I will be comparing Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau and The Letter from a Birmingham Jail by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr and taking a closer look at their rhetorical devices and strategy’s. In Civil disobedience by Henry David Thoreau shows us the need to prioritize some one’s wellbeing over what the law says. American laws are criticized mostly over slavery and the Mexican-American war. In Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” was written in response to a letter written by clergymen criticizing the actions of Dr. King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) during their protests in Birmingham, Alabama.

Thoreau compares the government to a political machine while King just talks about social injustice and if

Firstly, Thoreau and King thought some parts of the government was corrupt, unjust and unfair henceforth they need to be changed. These changes to government needed to be done immediately. For example, they agreed on the injustice of majority rule because the minority rule had absolutely no say in anything. The

Henry David Thoreau is the author of “Civil Disobedience” and is part of the force that sparked a resistance towards the government in the U.S.A.. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was an activist in the Civil Rights Movement. Both of these inspirational figures have had a deep effect on American society. As Thoreau’s and King’s difference in time periods and circumstances are demonstrated throughout the articles, the comparison in their purpose and methods can also be applied in a modern society.

Martin Luther King and Henry Thoreau both were interested by the idea of civil rights. In “Civil Disobedience” and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” the authors raise different issues to transmit their views on injustice in government. Among these issues the idea of unjust laws and obeying or fighting them is crucially important. This topic is important because unjust laws deprive a freedom of individual or a society, which might lead to disobedience and chaos in the society. Both authors mention that individuals should protest laws if they are unjust, but they both see the problem from different angle. This essay will analyze the views of Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau to fight unjust laws. It will claim that the way King wants to

Both Martin Luther King Jr. and Thoreau were inspirational individuals in the fight for civil rights. Each had a different situation in which they fought for civil rights, Thoreau focused on the wrong the government was denning civil rights. Whereas Martin Luther King Jr. fought for the civil equality rights of the black individuals. On another note, they also shared quite a few ideas about civil rights. Despite what differences they endured and what their ideas were both fought for the same cause of civil rights of individuals. They both believed civil rights should be an equal right for each individual to enjoy. The civil rights movements have been a large factor in the progression of our world, and both these men played large role one learned from the other a bit while teaching others how to fight for their civil rights.

Nowadays, it is often ambiguous where to set the limit between good moral values and effective government. The United States has spent centuries perfecting and building a righteous structure of government, yet it still has defects, such as unjust laws. For that reason, it is one of the most important matters discussed in American history and philosophy. American citizens expect the authority to work “for the good of the people” and “follow in everything the general will”, however, it was not always the case, according to influential American authors and civil rights activists Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau. Although both of their works were written over a century apart, one cannot deny the fact that both of them successfully and nonviolently converted their ideology into action using different methods of civil disobedience. Their goal was to fight for a better just system of law and restore faith in humanity. Despite their different perspectives, they both wanted to eradicate social injustice and argued that people must disobey the authority and take action against an unjust government. Both Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and Henry David Thoreau’s “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” share similar passion and attitudes on the philosophy of civil disobedience and also emphasize its importance, however, their differences are efficiently portrayed through their sense of tone, purpose, and rhetorical strategies. While both of the

The opening section communicates Thoreau's apparently libertarian political sentiments‹ the thought that the best type of government is one which practices the slightest power and control over its people. Thoreau pushes this line of speculation to its consistent point of confinement by imagining a general public in which government is dispensed with inside and out in light of the fact that men have the ability to act naturally controlling and free. The suggested disintegration of the State is as much a declaration of Thoreau's idealism‹a utopic vision that can't be reasonably achieved‹as it is the hypothetical endpoint of the way social orders create and advance.