Will Sherman

AP Lang
Period 1 Mrs. Kaplan
5/3/15
Enacting Reform Through Indirect Rebuttal: MLKs Historic Letter
In April of 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. was thrown into jail in Birmingham, Alabama
for leading and participating in non-violent protests that caused disturbance in the southern
community. Eight Alabama Clergymen took it upon themselves to write an open letter to Dr.
King, in which they addressed their concerns regarding how he and his supporters were
attempting to enact change- primarily how it was unwise and untimely. In response, King
wrote his own open letter defending his cause and justifying his actions by addressing each one
of the Clergymens arguments and refuting; countering their argument that his disruptive actions
were unnecessary and unwarranted. Dr. King also explains why supporters of the civil rights
movement must demonstrate if they want to create change. In paragraphs 5-11 of his response,
A Letter From Birmingham Jail, King justifies his demonstrations as a necessary evil for the
country to eventually achieve equality by listing the necessary steps to pursue reform, explaining
the futility and seemingly endless waiting Black leaders have faced thus far, and suggesting that
the creation of tension is a positive in the long run because it demands immediate response.
MLK lists the necessary steps that need to be taken when pursuing nonviolent campaign
and describes how his lack of success at each step has led him to his current situation. This
reinforces the length of the time period activists have already waited and shows that the position
he is in was not his first choice, but is the only course of action that will yield results. King
counters the clergymens assertion that he must enact change through alternate methods by

explaining how In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps, and that civil rights
activists have already addressed collection of facts, negotiation; self purification, and now
they must try direct action [6]. In using process analysis to eliminate the alternate methods of
protesting, King successfully justifies his current actions and portrays the clergymen as ignorant
of the civil rights campaign, which gives his position credibility and down plays his critics. King
then intimates that there have been more unsolved bombing of Negro homes and churches in
Birmingham than in any other city [7]. The image King paints in the mind of the public is one
of African American suffering, especially is southern towns like Birmingham, while civil rights
activists are practicing primary steps in nonviolent campaigning. This imagery and specificity
suggests that the clergymen are wrong in implying their community does not need Dr. Kings
help and emphasizes how the black communities can wait no longer for change. Continuing and
specifying his argument that other forms of protest have not worked, King describes how Negro
leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the latter consistently refused to engage in
good faith negotiations [7]. King refutes the clergymens primary alternative to achieve his goal
of equality through negotiation by simply stating they have already tried and it has not worked.
This renders king credible and enhances his ethos because he has prepared for and can reply to
every thing opposes think he should do differently and explain why they have or will not work,
which strengthens his argument and diffuses the argument of those who challenge his actions. By
listing directly the steps he has taken that have produced unsatisfactory results, MLK builds his
ethos and furthers his nonviolent campaigns legitimacy, which will allow him to achieve
equality quickly and more easily.
King expands his position on activists failure in attempting negotiate for reform due to
white leaders refusal to cooperate by elucidating in detail what they have faced and the

excruciating time period in which they have waited for inadequate results. Dr. King
exasperatedly explains how after relying on white men of power to help blacks achieve equality,
we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise [7]. By associating community
leaders with broken promises and failure to act, Not only does King further his point that reform
through negotiation is not possible, he also criticizes the Clergymen- who are powerful leaders in
Birmingham as well-for not acting and condemning Kings attempts to create a just society. This
blame he places partly on them depresses their opinion, which backs the integrity of their entire
argument and allows King to eliminate the premise on which his actions have been critiqued.
Broadening his argument to include the entire civil rights movement, King explains how as in
so many past experiences, our hopes had been blasted[8]. Relating their current situation to
events that have transpired in the past suggests there is a pattern of unacceptable results in
pursuing change through negotiation and that the trend of failure will continue unless they
change the means by which they are protesting. King backs this argument that blacks must take
an offensive approach to achieving equality by stating that their direct action program could be
delayed no longer [9]. Implying that the attempts through negotiation that have not yet failed
are still waiting to be recognized, Kings simple statement emphasizes again how he and other
African Americans have waited long enough, which validates his desire and decision to pursue
protests. In describing the trouble and wait he and his supporters have met through trying to
negotiate with white leaders, King warrants his decisions to the clergymen and shows the public
how the only viable option for those pressing for reform is to straightforwardly address the
source of the issue and pursue direct action.
After repudiating their inclination to negotiate for change, King addresses the
Clergymens fear of tension and suggests through continuous counterargument how their feelings

towards action are misplaced and that tension is the only true way to foster equality. King
explains that despite the clergymens assumption, the purpose of action is not to create an
uncomfortable situation for the sake of annoyance, but rather to create such a crisis and tension
that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue [10].
King redefines tension to suggest that while it may be create uncomfortable situations, it truly a
good thing because it is the only way to promote pure change, which justifies his repeated
attempts to create such a tension in Birmingham. Again, King parallels his situation with past
occurrences when he explains how Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the
mind, and that we must see the need for this kind of tension [10]. Through historical allusion
and comparison to a prominent and well-respected figurehead, King reinforces his credibility and
promotes his methods for implementing reform, and permits him to appeal to a larger audience
and gain more support for his campaign. MLK broadens his argument away from Birmingham
momentarily with this newfound support to insinuate that if we as a society can rise from the
dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood,
we will know true equality and experience absolute peace [10]. By juxtaposing the light and
darkness and associating each with the different sides of the civil rights movement, King creates
a subconscious argument in which racism is an innate negative that is made from evil and
equality is a shinning light that will lead humanity to purification. This connection allows Dr.
King to build himself in the mind of the public and also prompts those who want to see these
bright lights that lead the way to a better future to advocate for direct action and the creation of
tension, which will make reform possible. In countering the Clergymens distaste for tension and
change in their community, King builds the need for tension as a necessity in the eyes of the
public, making the men seem foolish and fueling his quest to achieve equality.

In justifying the actions that the clergymen criticize him for, King builds his ethos and
argument while pointing out the ignorance and foolishness of the clergymens assertions. This
allows King to gain support from the public and to eliminate the major objections his critics have
when evaluating his choices. By explaining himself and gaining this credibility, King is able to
more successfully argue his case against the clergymen and more easily bring forth equality to
society; which is the overall goal of the letter and his campaign in the civil rights movement.