Summary Of Letter From Birmingham Jail

In “Letters from Birmingham Jail”, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr answers the clergymen's criticisms in a calm and collected way, acknowledging them and providing insight into his ideas rather than attacking and criticizing. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr begins this letter by addressing his audience, the clergymen, as “My Dear Fellow Clergymen.” This automatically shows that King is taking a more friendly, sincere approach to this rather than a confrontational approach. He is attempting to make them listen and agree with him and his ideas, not give them a reason to completely disregard what he is saying. Throughout the whole letter, King addresses the clergymen’s complaints and criticizes them, without directly attacking and accusing them. King starts

This is a more powerful way of gaining the audience’s attention, rather than attacking them and forcing his ideas towards them. He continues to explain that all the necessary steps to end injustice nonviolently have already been taken in Birmingham and have not worked. This continues to draws out the shock and pity from the audience.

King uses many historical people as back up for the use of his method of civil disobedience. He mentions Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. King says, “It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meschah, and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake.” (paragraph 21)These are all religious figures. By including this sort of evidence, King is adding reliable sources to prove he is correct. This also builds up Kings ethos by proving his knowledge on this

He says, “We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did to Germany was ‘legal’ and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was ‘illegal’. It was ‘illegal’ to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.” He is using this allusion in hopes that the clergymen will understand his idea that just because something is legal does not mean it is the right thing to do morally, and just because something is illegal does not mean it is morally wrong. This reaches the audience directly because if they cannot relate to what is currently happening, blacks being oppressed and segregated, maybe they can relate to another similar situation. He also states that if he “lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.” His implied attack here is that the clergymen are avoiding taking action towards supporting the black men. Once again, he is using the feeling of guilt to attempt to persuade his