Comparison Of Letter From Birmingham Jail And Malcolm X

Civil disobedience is a non-violent act of protest or resistance against unjust actions from the government. This form of collective action is based on the belief that individuals have the right and duty to challenge the authority if it acts against the interest of the people. In recognition of this, prominent figures of the Civil Rights movement often discussed civil disobedience; eventually debating on the justification of violent disobedience. In this essay, I will examine the arguments presented by Martin Luther King Jr. in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and Malcolm X in “The Ballot or Bullet” to recognize the various usage of civil disobedience; ultimately, evaluating the moral justifiability of using violence as a means of promoting

Despite this opposition, King's message of nonviolent resistance prevailed and became a blueprint for social change in the United States. As shown from current day, nonviolent resistance was more effective in bringing about lasting social change. His stance was targeted towards the hypocrisy of White Americans, who did not have a significant opinion on the civil rights movement, and the oppressed Black Americans. His argument was able to create a disruption in the status quo and force those in power to address the underlying issue. However, it was also during this period King’s ideas were often questioned by those following behind him as many protestors questioned if such passive disobedience would achieve their goals of

While controversial, these ideas were deeply principled and reflected Malcolm X's commitment to defending the rights and dignity of African Americans. Martin Luther King Jr., on the other hand, believed in the power of nonviolent resistance as a means of achieving civil rights. King understood that nonviolent resistance could be a slow and difficult process, requiring patience, strategy, and a strong commitment to nonviolence. Which causes him to fall into pragmatism. Iy contrast, Malcolm X's belief of self-defense and the use of violence when necessary was often seen as more confrontational and less pragmatic. Thus, while both Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. were deeply principled in their beliefs about how to achieve civil rights, Malcolm X's philosophy was often seen as more radical and confrontational, while King's philosophy was seen as more pragmatic and strategic focused more on the fact of the matter than any instantaneous