In A Letter From Birmingham Jail Martin Luther King Jr. wrote about nonviolent protest as opposed to violent protest in response to another letter, A Call for Unity. I agree with Martin Luther King Jr. in that I believe nonviolent protest is far superior to violent protest. If violent protest is used then violence will be used to battle the protestors which will cause more violence back from the protesters. This will cause a ladder of growing violence. Also, there may be many unnecessary deaths and injuries caused by the violence.
I believe that non-violent protest is more successful too. If violence is used against nonviolent protesters then most onlookers will feel either guilty or angered. This will, in effect, create more supporters of the cause that is being protested. In this case the controversy is racism. Racism still exists unfortunately, but thanks to the many nonviolent protests in the past, minorities of all cultures are protected by law and given the same rights as the White majority. Thanks to the protests, minorities such as Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, have the same rights as Whites. They no longer have to be separated because of their color or their culture. No more will they have to suffer the embarrassment of having to drink from separate fountains, work certain jobs while being denied others, or be forced to go to separate schools or churches.
I believe that the rights minorities of all races have today is all thanks to the nonviolent protesters of the Black culture and the White people who protested alongside them. Thanks to them, minorities today are legally protected from acts of hatred and racism. They are also protected from racial prejudice. Lastly they are protected from racial discrimination and from embarrassment due to being forced to be separate from the White American majority.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Acharya, Prashant: Diversity
The two letters: "A Call for Unity" and "Letters from Birmingham Jail" offer two
distinct solutions to a pressing problem of that time, 1963 to be specific. These two
letters written at the height of the racial tensions and civil rights movement divided
people roughly into two groups. One group believed that the civil disobedience
campaign of Dr. Martin Luther King was legitimate and was the right thing to do, whereas
other group strongly disagreed with this notion and thought it was morally and legally
inappropriate.
For me, Dr. King's letter was inspiring on all levels. From his choice of words to the reasoning he provided in the letter; they were all simply astounding. The letter overflowed with his vast knowledge and ideas. Take for an example: "justice too long delayed is justice denied." Dr. King has explained his ideas in a very elaborate way with many perfectly fitting examples. The letter is of the highest quality and I think it should be read by everyone to lead them to the righteous path by separating just and unjust laws and standing against the moral wrong doings in the society.
Now talking about "A Call for Unity," I can see where these clergymen are coming from and kind of understand their points of view. But I cannot in any way agree with their opinions or support them. These clergymen, in a way, wanted peace and harmony in the society but their stance on this artificial peace would have only ignited a fire of disgust and hatred leading to a violent retaliation against the status quo.
It's ethically acceptable to stand against morally unjust laws. When certain segments of the population are suppressed on the basis of the color of their skin and there are people who oppose such notions for equality, then it's a moral obligation of every citizen to join in the protest. Even if it means crossing few legal boundaries. In their letter, these clergymen talked about going to courts and using negotiations to resolve the issue at hand. But that was ridiculous because the legal system back then still saw Black people as second-class citizens and those negotiations never resulted in anything conclusive enough to not require those street demonstrations.
These kind of issues are never solved by waiting and hoping for time to bring the winds of change along. When people are deprived of their rights, it's their obligation to demand them. These two letters clashed. Just by reading them, I could vividly envision those days of struggle. Overall, these letters were definitely significant in 1963 and even today they have not lost their place.
For me, Dr. King's letter was inspiring on all levels. From his choice of words to the reasoning he provided in the letter; they were all simply astounding. The letter overflowed with his vast knowledge and ideas. Take for an example: "justice too long delayed is justice denied." Dr. King has explained his ideas in a very elaborate way with many perfectly fitting examples. The letter is of the highest quality and I think it should be read by everyone to lead them to the righteous path by separating just and unjust laws and standing against the moral wrong doings in the society.
Now talking about "A Call for Unity," I can see where these clergymen are coming from and kind of understand their points of view. But I cannot in any way agree with their opinions or support them. These clergymen, in a way, wanted peace and harmony in the society but their stance on this artificial peace would have only ignited a fire of disgust and hatred leading to a violent retaliation against the status quo.
It's ethically acceptable to stand against morally unjust laws. When certain segments of the population are suppressed on the basis of the color of their skin and there are people who oppose such notions for equality, then it's a moral obligation of every citizen to join in the protest. Even if it means crossing few legal boundaries. In their letter, these clergymen talked about going to courts and using negotiations to resolve the issue at hand. But that was ridiculous because the legal system back then still saw Black people as second-class citizens and those negotiations never resulted in anything conclusive enough to not require those street demonstrations.
These kind of issues are never solved by waiting and hoping for time to bring the winds of change along. When people are deprived of their rights, it's their obligation to demand them. These two letters clashed. Just by reading them, I could vividly envision those days of struggle. Overall, these letters were definitely significant in 1963 and even today they have not lost their place.
Sorsby, Taryn: Diversity
The purpose of "A Call For Unity" was to explain to the Black population that Whites (who supposedly agreed with their idea that segregation was wrong) believed that "outsiders" should not be the leaders of public protest, but that individuals needed to react locally. The writers felt that the demonstrations were unwise, and that though the people's plight was understandable, it was necessary for the process to slow down and be redirected.
In Martin Luther King's "Letters from Birmingham Jail," he argued that though the "outsider" comment was directed at him, being a member of our country made him local anywhere he deemed fit to be on the continent. "Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever," King reminded. He also held that while there was a need to go to authority when morals were challenged, other actions must be taken when that authority has been corrupted. To the idea that the process of desegregation needed to be tamed, Dr. King explained that there was no way that could possibly happen without negative consequences.
While in some places, racism can still be an issue, I'm glad that for the most part it has disappeared. If I'd been alive during segregation, it would've seemed wrong to me. I would have hated it, and probably spoken against it. To see in history books and documentaries the struggles that Black people went through, it almost makes me despise Whites (forgetting that I am one.) To see the first letter, and then Dr. King's reply, I have solace in the fact that Dr. King stood up for his race, and even lost his life in pursuit of that one thing that they so desperately wished for.
Freedom is a concept that we as human beings often take for granted, because we can never appreciate it the way our ancestors did. It is through struggle that freedom is achieved.
In Martin Luther King's "Letters from Birmingham Jail," he argued that though the "outsider" comment was directed at him, being a member of our country made him local anywhere he deemed fit to be on the continent. "Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever," King reminded. He also held that while there was a need to go to authority when morals were challenged, other actions must be taken when that authority has been corrupted. To the idea that the process of desegregation needed to be tamed, Dr. King explained that there was no way that could possibly happen without negative consequences.
While in some places, racism can still be an issue, I'm glad that for the most part it has disappeared. If I'd been alive during segregation, it would've seemed wrong to me. I would have hated it, and probably spoken against it. To see in history books and documentaries the struggles that Black people went through, it almost makes me despise Whites (forgetting that I am one.) To see the first letter, and then Dr. King's reply, I have solace in the fact that Dr. King stood up for his race, and even lost his life in pursuit of that one thing that they so desperately wished for.
Freedom is a concept that we as human beings often take for granted, because we can never appreciate it the way our ancestors did. It is through struggle that freedom is achieved.
Cobb, Lacey: Diversity
In the mid-1900s, the many of the Southern states experienced segregation between the White and Black races. The towns were segregated and most public places were too, including schools and restaurants. Black people, often referred to as "Negroes," weren't allowed the right to vote or to take part of any political campaign. The Blacks then began to fight for their rights, which caused many problems between them and the White people. As a result, eight clergymen wrote a letter, A Call For Unity, expressing their ideas as to why these Black people should not march up and down the streets, but instead settle their problems in the court. However, Martin Luther King Jr. strongly disagreed with their ideas as he explained in his Letter From A Birmingham Jail.
A Call For Unity, written by eight clergymen, was a letter that addressed the need for African Americans to end their public demonstrations and engage in local negotiations. The clergymen strongly urged Blacks to go to the courts to deal with their rights that were being denied. What sparked King's response, however, was not that these men had written this letter, but the fact that they referred to the demonstrations as unwise and untimely, directed by and led by outsider agitators.
While sitting in his jail cell, King replied to these men about their letter. Though he seldom replied to criticism, he thought that the clergymen were very genuine and sincere. While they thought that his actions were very unwise and untimely, King felt quite the opposite about them. The only way to solve that the problems Blacks were facing was to have direct action. He explained that although it may have seemed as though Blacks were being impatient with their hopes slow in being realized, if the same thing were to happen to White people they would want to take direct action too. He also points out that while the clergymen referred to him as an outsider, the truth was, in fact, that anyone living in the United States cannot be considered an outsider.
Like King, I too believe that his actions were all but unwise and untimely. When it comes to the unjust, someone has to take a stand and fight for what is right. King did just that, and if he had waited any longer, nothing would have happened to improve the situation affecting every Black person. Segregation is unjust; God created every man equal and therefore those black people had then right to fight for their equality.
Segregation was a big problem back in the mid-1900's and is still a problem today, although it is not nearly as bad. When reflecting on these two letters, it is obvious how simple-minded the clergymen are about the situation between the Whites and the Blacks. They see it from only their perspective and not once think about what it would be like if they were African Americans; only if they saw it from the eyes of Black people would they then realize just how wise and timely King's actions were.
A Call For Unity, written by eight clergymen, was a letter that addressed the need for African Americans to end their public demonstrations and engage in local negotiations. The clergymen strongly urged Blacks to go to the courts to deal with their rights that were being denied. What sparked King's response, however, was not that these men had written this letter, but the fact that they referred to the demonstrations as unwise and untimely, directed by and led by outsider agitators.
While sitting in his jail cell, King replied to these men about their letter. Though he seldom replied to criticism, he thought that the clergymen were very genuine and sincere. While they thought that his actions were very unwise and untimely, King felt quite the opposite about them. The only way to solve that the problems Blacks were facing was to have direct action. He explained that although it may have seemed as though Blacks were being impatient with their hopes slow in being realized, if the same thing were to happen to White people they would want to take direct action too. He also points out that while the clergymen referred to him as an outsider, the truth was, in fact, that anyone living in the United States cannot be considered an outsider.
Like King, I too believe that his actions were all but unwise and untimely. When it comes to the unjust, someone has to take a stand and fight for what is right. King did just that, and if he had waited any longer, nothing would have happened to improve the situation affecting every Black person. Segregation is unjust; God created every man equal and therefore those black people had then right to fight for their equality.
Segregation was a big problem back in the mid-1900's and is still a problem today, although it is not nearly as bad. When reflecting on these two letters, it is obvious how simple-minded the clergymen are about the situation between the Whites and the Blacks. They see it from only their perspective and not once think about what it would be like if they were African Americans; only if they saw it from the eyes of Black people would they then realize just how wise and timely King's actions were.
Curbelo, Isabella: Diversity
After reading two opposing articles, A Call for Unity and Martin Luther King Jr's A Letter From Birmingham Jail, it's clear that two completely different ideas, cultures, groups of people had opinions and saw no reason to back down from them. These oppositions were results of different regions of the United States, different backgrounds, and different moral standards. When one reads into each side, it's easy to realize why people act the way they do.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was right when he talked about the different kinds of people there are. Some people didn't want to deal with the consequences of the civil rights movement, others didn't care enough to get involved, and others actually benefited by the segregation taking place. Of course the latter group would rather continue benefiting than not.
I believe that during those hard times people had to have an altruistic perspective on life to care enough to look past themselves and onto the much greater realms of society. Those that didn't have this innate characteristic were the ones that created resistance to the movement. Even though in retrospect most feel that Martin Luther King Jr.'s words were true, at the time it's quite easy to see why most didn't. People, since the beginning of time, have been scared of change--scared of its possible outcomes on life. This time was no different. Even though some like King had a clear vision into the future and could see how humanity would benefit from this kind of change, most had a mindset that nothing good could come of treating everyone equal.
It's safe to say that society hasn't changed much. Though there are still issues of segregation in the United States, other issues have taken a greater role of importance and people still act much in the same old way. There's a sense of morality in all the issues we face as Americans today; some choose to take bold stands and change the world, while others resist because they might not benefit the way they think they should. Still, things take place and just like the segregation issues in the 50s and 60s, things are inevitably changing due to people's action and lack thereof.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was right when he talked about the different kinds of people there are. Some people didn't want to deal with the consequences of the civil rights movement, others didn't care enough to get involved, and others actually benefited by the segregation taking place. Of course the latter group would rather continue benefiting than not.
I believe that during those hard times people had to have an altruistic perspective on life to care enough to look past themselves and onto the much greater realms of society. Those that didn't have this innate characteristic were the ones that created resistance to the movement. Even though in retrospect most feel that Martin Luther King Jr.'s words were true, at the time it's quite easy to see why most didn't. People, since the beginning of time, have been scared of change--scared of its possible outcomes on life. This time was no different. Even though some like King had a clear vision into the future and could see how humanity would benefit from this kind of change, most had a mindset that nothing good could come of treating everyone equal.
It's safe to say that society hasn't changed much. Though there are still issues of segregation in the United States, other issues have taken a greater role of importance and people still act much in the same old way. There's a sense of morality in all the issues we face as Americans today; some choose to take bold stands and change the world, while others resist because they might not benefit the way they think they should. Still, things take place and just like the segregation issues in the 50s and 60s, things are inevitably changing due to people's action and lack thereof.
Emerson, Sarah: Diversity
Although the eight white clergy men's criticisms were "sincerely set forth," their inability to experience the African Americans' struggle during 1963, ultimately caused their ignorance to why the nonviolent demonstrations were needed.
The eight clergymen were natives to Birmingham, Alabama, one of the prime locations in America where Black citizens were denied their rights due to racism. I understand the point of view the clergymen had; to seek justice through the legal system instead of creating tension with demonstrations. Nevertheless, the clergymen were unaware of how deeply embedded racism was in the legal system. The court system was not going to bring change. Martin Luther King Jr. illustrates for the reader how African Americans became agonized with the legal system because they put off racial issues instead of confronting them. "Wait" became a very painful word, because after generations of patience, the word "wait" became "never." The white politicians in Birmingham ultimately didn't want the Black race to be able to exercise their rights, which resulted in their procrastination: "Justice too long delayed is justice denied." Constant rejection in the legal system called for a more direct offense to gain civil rights.
Martin Luther King Jr. was referred as an "outsider looking in" by the clergymen. Despite Luther's organization being located in Atlanta, Georgia his message was universal. I agree with his statement about how location is irrelevant: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." If these human rights organizations had not gotten involved, Birmingham's injustice would've threatened African Americans' citizenship across America. What the clergymen failed to recognize is how the generations of hardship caused the Black race to take any threat very seriously. The clergymen never had to endure the "stinging darts of segregation." Their children never had a "cloud of inferiority" fill their minds. The clergy men never had witnessed their loved ones being lynched or hurt by an angry White mob. The clergymen should not judge the organizations' tactics, because the White clergymens' opinion will always be biased. They were unable to take a walk in a black man's shoes, and cannot understand how it feels to have your freedom threatened.
The nonviolent demonstration is a effective option, and I admire whoever decided to use it. Creating a circumstance that legal action must be taken, all while maintaining one's dignity, creates a losing situation for the opponent. "The process of self purification" humbles the direct action. Martin Luther King Jr. and other activists underwent a workshop on nonviolence. They asked themselves questions like: "Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?" and "Are you able to deal the ordeal of jail?" Upholding high standards, while the white mobs responded with violence proved to the community and the nation who was in the wrong. The white clergymen may not like the tension the demonstrations caused between races in Birmingham, but they cannot argue that it is unmoral or unethical.
In conclusion, the actions of Martin Luther King Jr. were done for specific reasons. The intentions of the eight White clergymen may have been to maintain peace, but their lack of experience and knowledge about the movement caused their biased opinion.
The eight clergymen were natives to Birmingham, Alabama, one of the prime locations in America where Black citizens were denied their rights due to racism. I understand the point of view the clergymen had; to seek justice through the legal system instead of creating tension with demonstrations. Nevertheless, the clergymen were unaware of how deeply embedded racism was in the legal system. The court system was not going to bring change. Martin Luther King Jr. illustrates for the reader how African Americans became agonized with the legal system because they put off racial issues instead of confronting them. "Wait" became a very painful word, because after generations of patience, the word "wait" became "never." The white politicians in Birmingham ultimately didn't want the Black race to be able to exercise their rights, which resulted in their procrastination: "Justice too long delayed is justice denied." Constant rejection in the legal system called for a more direct offense to gain civil rights.
Martin Luther King Jr. was referred as an "outsider looking in" by the clergymen. Despite Luther's organization being located in Atlanta, Georgia his message was universal. I agree with his statement about how location is irrelevant: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." If these human rights organizations had not gotten involved, Birmingham's injustice would've threatened African Americans' citizenship across America. What the clergymen failed to recognize is how the generations of hardship caused the Black race to take any threat very seriously. The clergymen never had to endure the "stinging darts of segregation." Their children never had a "cloud of inferiority" fill their minds. The clergy men never had witnessed their loved ones being lynched or hurt by an angry White mob. The clergymen should not judge the organizations' tactics, because the White clergymens' opinion will always be biased. They were unable to take a walk in a black man's shoes, and cannot understand how it feels to have your freedom threatened.
The nonviolent demonstration is a effective option, and I admire whoever decided to use it. Creating a circumstance that legal action must be taken, all while maintaining one's dignity, creates a losing situation for the opponent. "The process of self purification" humbles the direct action. Martin Luther King Jr. and other activists underwent a workshop on nonviolence. They asked themselves questions like: "Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?" and "Are you able to deal the ordeal of jail?" Upholding high standards, while the white mobs responded with violence proved to the community and the nation who was in the wrong. The white clergymen may not like the tension the demonstrations caused between races in Birmingham, but they cannot argue that it is unmoral or unethical.
In conclusion, the actions of Martin Luther King Jr. were done for specific reasons. The intentions of the eight White clergymen may have been to maintain peace, but their lack of experience and knowledge about the movement caused their biased opinion.
Yang, Zichao: Diversity
As an international student, I am not very familiar with American history. After I read “A call for unity” and “ Aletter from Birmingham jail”, I did some background research about those articles. I know that the voice of the African-American community was muted for many years. Segregation suppressed the voice as it oppressed the community and stripped it of freedoms. But when the likes of Martin Luther King Jr. rolled around, and when African Americans gained a new sense of dignity, they decided to stand up, or, in many cases, sit down, for their right to freedom. He is more than assured of what he is arguing about. His tone is assertive. His letter projects an intransigent attitude. King was calling people to rise up from passivity and take a stand in a nonviolent manner. Compared to King, the tone of “A call for unity”, written by the eight white clergymen is much softer than King. The rationale of their article was trying to get peace and calm negotiations. Doing so might make African American people wait longer to get their rights.
Compared to the White community, the Black community was given fewer opportunities, privileges, and respect. Their voices and opinions were not heard and if they were heard, they were still ignored. However I believe everyone in this world should have equal rights, no matter whether a person is white or black or yellow. The real owners of this land are the Indians, not White people or Black people. Black people deserve same rights as what White people have. We should not divide people by color or race. Everybody has the right to live the way they want. No one wants to be treated differently from others. I believe racism is the last thing people should do while they are alive.
Compared to the White community, the Black community was given fewer opportunities, privileges, and respect. Their voices and opinions were not heard and if they were heard, they were still ignored. However I believe everyone in this world should have equal rights, no matter whether a person is white or black or yellow. The real owners of this land are the Indians, not White people or Black people. Black people deserve same rights as what White people have. We should not divide people by color or race. Everybody has the right to live the way they want. No one wants to be treated differently from others. I believe racism is the last thing people should do while they are alive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)