preview

Civil Disobedience Vs Mlk

Decent Essays

Our lives are made up of the choices we make and things we believe in. Some people are quiet bystanders that sit back and watch the world fall, however, some use their voice to act on what they believe. After all, you do have to be the change you wish to see in the world. Martin Luther King Jr. was an activist for the equal rights of blacks and whites. Henry David Thoreau is mostly known as a tax resister and abolitionist who wrote to defy the government. In both literary pieces, King and Thoreau are concerned and disagree with the governments policies and ideals. “Duty of Civil Disobedience” and “The Letter from Birmingham Jail”, differ from one another due to their different audiences and how Thoreau speaks with more logos and factual evidence, …show more content…

Considering that fact that King and Thoreau are considered “extremist” in their beliefs, it does not come as a shock that both spent time in jail, even though their actions were not intended to harm anyone, promote violence, or cause vandalism. They fight against laws and acts that they believe society should do without. They see flaws in the government system that are corrupt and do something to change them, using their internal morals as some kind of “right” to disobey authority. Thoreau and MLK choose to obey the laws that they agree with, but when it comes to what is good and not good for the people, they rebel against what they view as unjust. Both Thoreau and King took action against the corruptness of the laws. MLK fought for civil rights and equality for black African Americans as he goes against slavery and segregation. However, Thoreau is also anti government slavery and segregation laws when he argued that whenever there were unjust laws, individuals should declare independence. Because MLK is fighting for a minorities rights, King states “unjust law is a power the majority compel the minority to obey” This is interpreted to mean that whoever is in power and is currently reigning supreme, has power over the lesser minority; obviously referring to the black and white population. Thoreau clearly states his argument when he says, “If on honest man, …show more content…

They have different claims that are indented for a different audience. MLK preaches to a small group of clergy men while Thoreau has directed his work to the general audience of the American Population. Thoreau sees the flaws of the whole system of the government and criticizes the unjust or wrongful laws within it as a whole. King is responding in criticism for why he is in the jail and the importance of Civil Rights. 
 In conclusion, both literary pieces share similarities in their classical arguments. They have similar statements that appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos. Their claims they included aphorisms that were both different and similar because of the varying audience groups. King has an emotional appeal to the audience because he is black himself, speaking for a black movement. Thoreau uses his education and knowledge to his benefit when he focuses on making a more factual and logistical appeal. King and Thoreau have both established ethos but the stronger of the two is King who is a member of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, appealing to his audience ethnologically. Both Thoreau and MLK have what they believe to be right and just and support their opinions with appealing claims. Thoreau speaks with more logos and factual evidence, and King appeals to the audience using pathos. They are similar pieces because of the alikeness in their classical arguments due

Get Access