More handpicked essays just for you.
Differences between henry thoreau and martin luther king jr
Differences between henry thoreau and martin luther king jr
The effects of civil disobedience
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
"...A little rebellion now and then is a good thing...It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government." Thomas JeffersonThoreau, a transcendentalist from the mid 19th century and Martin Luther King Jr., the Civil Rights movement leader of a century later both believed the necessity of medicine for government. Although they showed disagreement of opinion on issues regarding voting, both writers agreed on the necessity to reform the government and the means of accomplishing it. In King's Letter from Birmingham Jail and Thoreau's Civil Disobedience, both agreed on injustice of majority to rule over minority, both resisted the government passively, and both wanted a better government immediately.The majority is not necessarily right, but they have always been the ones in power because they are the strongest and the most influential. Therefore, all the laws are written by the majority, almost all are in favor of the majority, and all are enforced by the majority. According to King, a law drafted by the majority is only just when the minority are willing to follow it. He wrote "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" (2:475).
In other words, if a law denies the right of the minority or is inflicted upon the minority by force, then it is not a just law. Similar opinions are shared by Thoreau, when he writes "But a government in which the majority r...
on ways to be civil but disobedient, they have opposite ways of convicing you. Dr.
Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, in “Civil Disobedience” and “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” respectively, both conjure a definitive argument on the rights of insubordination during specified epochs of societal injustice. Thoreau, in his enduring contemplation of life and its purpose, insightfully analyzes the conflicting relationship between the government and the people it governs. He considerately evokes the notion that the majority of people are restrained by the government and society from making decisions with consideration of their conscience and that people need to overcome the reign of the government to realize their own ethics and morals. King, in accordance, eloquently and passionately contends the injustice presented in the unfair treatment of and the discriminatory attitude towards Blacks. Even though, Thoreau successfully accentuates his main concerns in his argument, his effectiveness in persuasion—appeals, conclusion, and practical application—pales in comparison to that of King’s.
Mahatma Gandhi, a prominent leader in the independence movement of India once said, “Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state becomes lawless and corrupt.”(brainyquotes.com) Gandhi states that protest and civil disobedience are necessary when the authority becomes unscrupulous. This correlates to “Declaration of Independence,” by Thomas Jefferson; “Civil Disobedience,” by Henry David Thoreau; and “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” by Martin Luther King Jr., because all three leaders felt that civil disobedience was important to help protest against an unjust ruling. Jefferson stood up to the injustice of the king by writing the Declaration of Independence and urged others to stand up for the independence of America. Thoreau exemplified
During the time of Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr., freedom for African-Americans was relative terminology in the fact that one was during slavery and the other during the Civil Rights era. “Civil Disobedience,” written by Thoreau, analyzes the duty and responsibility of citizens to protest and take action against such corrupt laws and other acts of the government. Likewise, King conveys to his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” audience that the laws of the government against blacks are intolerable and that civil disobedience should be used as an instrument of freedom. Both writers display effective usage of the pathos and ethos appeal as means to persuade their audience of their cause and meaning behind their writing, although King proves to be more successful in his execution.
King’s ability to organize factions into a force that was unaffected by violence greatly contributed to the success of the Civil Rights Movement. In a letter he wrote from a Birmingham jail, King describes the four steps to non-violent protest. The first step is “collection of the facts to determine whether an injustice exists.” This relates to Thoreau’s critique of an unjust government. Thoreau believed that every machine had friction, yet “when the friction comes to having a machine.let us not have such a machine any longer.
I decided to compare between the views of Dr. Martin Luther King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” and Lao Tzu’s “Living Water.” First, I summarize the texts of both Dr. King and Lao Tzu. Next, I compare their views on the basis for the good life.
was the master of generating widespread support for the Civil Rights movement. It was his words in this letter that persuaded many, even those not of his race. However, King repeatedly states that he was immensely disappointed by those who did not take a direct stand against wrongdoings:“Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea” ( 970). King believed that the only way to combat the injustices of the world was for everyone to join forces and speak together so that everyone’s voice can be heard, not stand alone as an “outside agitator” that the government can easily ignore or quell. If social change is a necessary action, than people should not act as if they are the sole person to make a difference, as King said, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly” (970). Every injustice in the world affects every person; if people do not take a stand together, then it will continue to tear apart society; people cannot just stand idly by and call out grievances every once in a while. Injustice is “like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light” (King 974). If people just continue to pick at an issue, then it will only become worse. However, if they open it wide
Civil Disobedience makes governments more accountable for their actions and has been an important catalyst for overcoming unpopular government policies. To voice his disgust with slavery, in 1849 Henry David Thoreau published his essay, Civil Disobedience, arguing that citizens must not allow their government to override their principles and have a civic duty to prevent their government from using unjust means to ends. The basis for Thoreau’s monumental essay was his refusal to pay a poll tax, which subsequently landed him a night in county jail. In his passage: “If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go; perchance it will wear smooth—certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine...
Throughout modern American culture certain laws passed by the majority have been considered unjust by a wise minority. However, with the logical and emotional appeal of hard fought battles, voices have been heard, and the minds of the majority can sometimes be converted to see the truth. Thoreau, after spending a night in jail and seeing the truth hidden behind the propaganda of the majority, became convinced that he could no longer accept his government’s behavior of passing laws that benefit the majority with degrading the minority. It’s quite ironic that by the government imprisoning Thoreau he became freer then ever before. He was able to see how the government turned peaceably inclined men into controllable machines. Thoreau saw how the government dealt with its citizens as only a body, while completely disregarding the sense, intellect, and moral beliefs of its people. In his essay “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau stated that “a government ruled by majority in all cases cannot be based on justice.” He further believed that “under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also prison.” This point made by Thoreau can be seen as the truth throughout history. A just man never sits by quietly watching the majority degrade the minority to suit their own immoral purposes. Like Thoreau, another just man who stood out from the quiet minority was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. King was, as well, willing to suffer for his views to put an end to racial segregation, and was arrested on numerous occasions for holding strong in his believes and spreading his message throughout the minds of all God’s children. King often cited conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and disobeying unjust ones. In an essay written by King titled “A letter from Birmingham Jail,” King clearly defines the interpretation of the differerence between the two kinds of laws. “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. This is a difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal.” To further understand this King quotes from St. Augustine himself who once stated “any law that uplifts human personality is just.
Civil Disobedience occurs when an individual or group of people are in violation of the law rather than a refusal of the system as a whole. There is evidence of civil disobedience dating back to the era after Jesus was born. Jesus followers broke the laws that went against their faith. An example of this is in Acts 4:19-20,”God told the church to preach the gospel, so they defied orders to keep quiet about Jesus,” In my opinion civil disobedience will always be needed in the world. The ability to identify with yourself and knowing right from wrong helps to explain my opinion. Often in society when civil
Both Thoreau and Emerson argue that asserting one’s opinions is crucial to attaining a better society. Emerson decries the danger of societal conformity and challenges the reader to “speak what you think now in hard words” in order to remedy it (Emerson 367). Likewise, Thoreau speculates that if “every man make known what kind of government would command his respect” it would be “one step toward obtaining it” (Thoreau 381). With these remarkably similar statements, both transcendentalists appeal to the reader’s patriotism by using language evocative of the agitated and outraged colonial Americans who demanded the people’s voice be heard in government. Although published roughly a half century later, “Self-Reliance” and “Civil Disobedience” mirror the sentiments of famous Revolution-era leaders such as Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry.
Thoreau espouses that the democratic party listens to and answers the majority, which are the desires of the most powerful group. The problem with this is that the most virtuous or thoughtful group is left aside because the government only pays attention to what the strongest group says. A government functioning on this principle cannot be based on justice, because the ideas of what is right and wrong is decided by the majority, not by conscience. Thoreau writes, "Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men first, and subjects afterward. (p.178 para. 4)" He claims that it is more important for people to develop a respect for the right, instead of having a respect for the law, for it is people’s duty to do what is right.
Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau each write exemplary persuasive essays that depict social injustice and discuss civil disobedience, which is the refusal to comply with the law in order to prove a point. In his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King speaks to a specific audience: the African Americans, and discusses why he feels they should bring an end to segregation. Thoreau on the other hand, in “Civil Disobedience,” speaks to a broader, non-addressed audience as he largely expresses his feelings towards what he feels is an unjust government. Both essays however, focus on the mutual topics of morality and justice and use these topics to inform and motivate their audience to, at times, defy the government in order to establish the necessary justice.
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attentions than the others are neglected; ergo, some individuals aim to change that. The principles of civil disobedience, which are advocated in both “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. to the society, is present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose.
The ideas of King are very similar to the ideas of Thoreau. Moreover, the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” shows that King, read the writings of many famous people. From these two reasons, King had probably read “Civil Disobedience” as an important document regarding justice and injustice. Therefore, the positions of the two writers are very close, and they cite conscience as a guide to obeying just laws.