Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King - Essay Example

Researched Personal Argument: “Letter from Birmingham Jail” Introduction The legendary Martin Luther King wrote “the letter from Birmingham jail” in response to the clergy men’s publication which opposed his civil movement. Despite King’s letter receiving overwhelming support from the country people, it also received a few criticisms on some parts by other writers. Unlawful and untimely demonstrations are the core issues that some writers confront against King’s anti racism movements. Refutation According to Reider Para 2 he states that some weeks before King was arrested and taken to Birmingham jail, most of the “Blacks” as compared to the “Whites” had turned against him. The writer explains that King was discouraged by the fact that he being opposed by the people he was actually defending. He explains that majority of the black churches as well as the black citizens had indeed turned a deaf-ear on King. He illustrates that King’s spirit had weakened due to the negative perspective from the Blacks which was way higher than the Whites negativity. The writer notes that King became discouraged and lessened his spirit. The statement is possibly untrue because if King really felt discouraged from his race’s blind eye, he would not have supported there decries at the first instance. Secondly, King’s non violent demonstrations were staged at the Alabama’s streets which were enormously attended by the blacks’ residing in Alabama through their Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. King was also supported by followers from his founded Group by the name of Southern Christian leadership Conference (Reider Para 2). Based on Hummer Para 4 he highlights that non-violent direct-action was not the right move by King to end racism and segregation. He supports the clergymen’s principle of the observation of law, order and the outward use of common sense. Hummer notes that the King’s move was untimely and unwise based on the enactment of the new local government. The writer insists that the new local government’s system consisted of Negro leaders, therefore implying sort of a balanced system. The writer notes that King was indeed an outsider due to the presence of a judicial system which could as well solved the issue. Additionally, the plight could also have been solved by the Negro leaders who were present at the time. The writer notes that the non violent protests could have initiated hate and violence within the local communities. He continues that the matter was better off solved within the corridors of justice as opposed to the use of the streets. The society was more of religious, and therefore, the violence and hate was not acceptable in the religious and political environment that existed. The writer notes that King’s actions were extreme and therefore the acts were not legit in Birmingham’s jurisdiction. The writer’s arguments are questionable on a number of opinions. Having quoted that the move created violence and hate within the community is outwardly untrue. The Clergy were sarcastically the sadists having termed MLK as an outsider. The Clergy addressed King inappropriately because first he was a leader and had the responsibility of fighting for the people’s rights; secondly, he lived within the boundaries of the USA therefore he was an insider, and thirdly, he had showed no intension of causing civil unrest within community. Majority of the judicial system leaders consisted of the Whites and the African Americans as the minorities, which could further predict the result of the judicial system’s ruling in case he adapted the course (Hummer Para 4). Garrison Para (7) complements the clergy men’s statement when he notes that King had been requested to delay demonstrations in order to prevent disharmony that could have erupted. He notes that the clergy team also faced immense pressure from the segregationists due to the stand and support they were making in ending racism and segregations within the society. He notes that the clergy team faced intense agony and pain in the White’s pulpit. He explains that the Clergy men were severally pursuing for the racial indifferences to end, which history has not given them the rightful credit they deceived. Garrison Para (8 ) continues that the Clergy men had been posted as opposing integration while on reality they prevented deaths that could have occurred. He claims if the racism and segregation ended too fast, it could have led to loss of lives which the Clergy prevented. He argues that the Clergy had on several occasions preached sermons about social leadership which were meant to conceal racial imbalances. The clergy were strict moderates and liberals where they were interpreted wrongly because King’s letter addressed them in person. The Clergy had on some occasions met the president with the motive of ending racial segregations. At the time, the Clergy were among Birmingham’s moderate civil activists and they feared that the demonstrations could have led to violence. Furthermore, the newly formulated local government could have handled the issues successfully. The Clergy had urged King not to conduct the demonstrations and marches; illustrating that the move was untimely due to the presence of the new local government. Garrison Para 8 equates that the Clergy were cornered in the bid to conform to expectations like the African Americans were expected to conform to segregation. According to Garrison Para(9) the eight Clergy did not receive a copy of King’s letter until it was published on the magazine. He outlines that even though the letter had their names; it was primarily channeled to the Whites who were the South. The Whites were continuously suspicious of King’s tactics and occasionally questioned his leadership movement. He further concludes that the Clergy were sacrificial lambs due to King addressing and mentioning their names on his list instead of addressing the entire Christian fraternity. Based on Garrison’s argument the move was never untimely. King was tired of being told to wait for the right moment which could indeed never have happened due to the segregationists speeches. Bull Connor, the Alabama’s segregationist, publicly said that he had drawn the line in the feet of tyranny that segregation was meant to last at the time and forever. The Whites continuously told the Blacks to wait for the convenient moment which was “…until God gets ready” which expressly confirms the unintentional motive to end the autocratic government. Furthermore, the Alabama segregationist ordered the use of fire hoses and attack dogs with the sole intension of prohibiting non violent demonstrations against racism and segregation. The move was entirely timely since King knew in case the non violent demonstrations were denied; it could have led to war by the Blacks (Garrison Para 9). The Clergy also are to bear their burden having the responsibility of ending racism. In their letter “an appeal for law, order and common sense” which was sarcastic having known the social problems that existed, but still told King to use common sense and abide by the Law. The country was faced impunity namely: rampant racism especially in Alabama, police brutality, impunity in the judicial system and the existence of the unresolved and rampant bombings in the Negros houses and churches (Garrison Para 7). Counter Argument I believe King’s action of holding non violent demonstrations against racism and segregation is justified. This is because from the Alabama State segregationist, the authority had no intension of letting democracy reign. The authority kept mocking the people that democracy would never come and because the Whites termed themselves as ‘religious,” they used fighting statements depicting that God was not ready to allow it happen. However, i can term King’s action of using demonstrations and marches even though non- violent as unlawful. This is because King could have first sought Court’s intervention since a new local government had been formulated, which could mean change of past impunities. King was initially told to hold the demonstrations in order for the new government to take charge which he denounced and went ahead to hold the marches and demonstrations. The move could have been justified if he could have first reported cases to the Court’s and received a flawed judgment. The flawed judgment could have formed the basis for holding the demonstrations instead of ‘judging the book by its cover.” The Clergy are also unrealistic and dishonest, of writing the call for duty letter. The Clergy knew the social evils that present at the time despite noting that justice was in the process of being executed. They termed the anti-racism demonstrations as unwise and untimely, which in its actual look, was sarcastic. Racism and segregations were rampant and even though they claimed they were doing their part to end the inhuman vices, there was no tangible evidence from their actions. Furthermore, they were also racists having termed King as an Outsider; which could also have portrayed their perception on Blacks, and yet King was a US citizen like any other individual. Conclusion King’s efforts to end racism and segregation were truly a noble action by any other humanitarian leader. At the time, the races had different treatments not excluding amenities which could have disturbed any rightful person or leader. The Clergy’s argument on the use of the Court’s at the time could also have been questionable due to the impunity that existed. The legendary leader; Dr. King, was more civilized and sober when addressing the issues no matter severe they affected him. The contemporary leaders should embrace King’s example who tackled social evils justly and boldly without minding fame or material wealth that he could have got in case he was bribed to keep silence, which he never relented; unlike the contemporary leaders who preach water and drink wine for survival. Works cited Hummer, Jimi. Is Non-Violent Direct Action a good method to end segregation and racism? 2013. Web 4th Apr 2015 Garrison, Greg. Fifty years ago, eight clergy asked the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. to delay demonstrations. 2013. Web 4th Apr 2015 Reider, Jonathan. What Martin Luther King, Jr. did in Birmingham Jail? 2013. Web 4th Apr 2015 Read More