Differences Between Jefferson And Martin Luther King

Jefferson and King: Advocates for Change In their respective eras, both Thomas Jefferson and Martin Luther King Jr. advocated for change in their societies through direct action. However, they had different visions of how to take action. Both urged that in order to make this change, unjust laws needed to be broken and the subsequent consequences must be faced. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson intended to force the separation of the colonies from Great Britain and create a free country. In the Letter from Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. illustrated the need for change in a segregated society and that this change can be facilitated through “nonviolent campaign.” Although the two authors pushed for change through breaking

The Declaration of Independence pushes for change through the more violent means of war. Through the separation of the colonies from Great Britain, Jefferson calls for the establishment of a new government that will secure the rights of the people. He states that when a government begins to impede the peoples’ rights, “it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future society. (Jefferson 42). Jefferson’s diction alludes to a more violent solution to the problem. In contrast, in the Letter from Birmingham Jail, King petitions for society and the government to change through more peaceful means. King and his follower’s push for change through nonviolent direct action such as sit-ins, marches, and boycotts. He claims, “nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue” (King 48). King wants to create tension and stress within the community so that the white man can no longer ignore the issue. He believes this this tension will lead to negotiations and change to end the segregation that he is

In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson describes an unjust law as one that violates a person’s “inalienable rights.” These rights include, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (Jefferson 42). If a government acts in violation of these rights, “it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it” (Jefferson 42). Jefferson encourages his readers to stand up to the government when it comes to the protection of individual rights. In the Letter from Birmingham Jail, King tells people to disregard sinful laws and those that violate moral rules of Christianity as it is our responsibility to not only obey just laws but to disobey unjust laws (King 51). Although their actions may have been seen as “illegal” at the time, they were justified and appropriate for the situation. He refers to St. Thomas Aquinas to define an unjust law as “any law that degrades human personality” (King 51). This is similar to Jefferson’s argument for protection of inalienable rights because these rights help to protect human