Critical Analysis Of Martin Luther King's Letter To Birmingham Jail

1293 Words3 Pages

Summary-Analysis Essay In Martin Luther King’s “Letter to Birmingham Jail”, he argues several themes that show the reader how society negatively acted towards inequality in race. King expresses his actions and thoughts throughout the letter. King uses violence versus nonviolence, white church vs black church, and injustice versus justice as themes to show us how he tried and how we can help end inequality. King takes on his actions not wanting what he does to be involved with violence. King describes four steps in a nonviolent campaign: “collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist, negotiation, self-purification, and direct action.” I agree with the four steps that King describes. One needs to have proof. One needs to be Then he goes on to say that they wouldn’t have praised them so much if the white people had known that the police would let their dogs bite into black people that weren’t causing any violence. Also, they wouldn’t have praised so greatly if the white people had known that the police were treating the black people as if they were violent attacking animals when they were a human being just the same as any other white person. They wouldn’t have praised the police if they had known the way they would treat the black women and the young black girls. Finally, the white community wouldn’t have praised the police if they knew that the police refused to give the black people food because they were singing together. I admire King for writing all these horrible actions by the Birmingham Police because people outside the jail need to know how repulsive, sickening the police were to the black people for doing absolutely nothing to them. The black people were fighting for equality and for the future of If everyone could see that King is right, as I do, then the white community needs to reevaluate the popular assumption that colored people aren’t equal. King’s reaction is that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. People don’t only have a legitimate reason but also a honorable responsibility to perform just law, King thinks. King also states his agreement with St. Augustine on that “an unjust law is no law at all”. When King describes the difference between a just law being “manmade code that squares with moral law or the law of God” and unjust being “a code that is out of harmony with the moral law”. I interrupted King’s comparison on just and unjust by just being what God says in the bible and unjust being the sins of your actions. King gives another example of just and unjust: “An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself.” “a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself”. When King explains it this way I don’t see it being God’s word versus sin. I see that King is saying if enough people agree than it is just and if there are a majority people that disagree then it is seen as

Open Document