Dr. King\'s Letter From Birmingham

Dr. King's Letter from Birmingham Jail

During his extraordinary career, Martin Luther King addressed not only the needs of his negro audience, but also communicated effectively with his opposition in order to make his message of equality and tolerance even more effective. Furthermore, his iconic strategy of non-violent protest created a platform of effectiveness that would not otherwise have been possible. In his "Letter From Birmingham Jail," he uses this platform to argue against his opponents, a group of eight clergymen who considered his non-violent protests in appropriate in the context of a "peaceful" city. Dr. King's letter is also effective in terms of acknowledging the viewpoints advanced by the clergymen and attempting to respond to each on the terms they were delivered to him. Martin Luther's rhetorical power, then, lies in his ability to identify with his audience, acknowledge the opposing viewpoint, and in responding to these viewpoints in a rational and logical manner.

Dr. King's letter opens with a paragraph that acknowledges the position of his opponents. Rather than placing himself in a directly opposing position to them, he professes a sense of identification by referring to them as his "fellow clergymen." As such, the author uses the similarities between himself and his audience rather than their differences to start the communication process. By doing this, he provides a platform in which communication, rather than fighting, can take place.

It is from this introductory platform that Dr. King then structures his rhetoric in terms of the opposing arguments advanced by the clergymen. What makes this strategy powerful is that Martin Luther King does not directly oppose his critics. Instead, he carefully considers their arguments and replies by an equally carefully considered opposing argument.

In summary, Martin Luther King replies to his critics by making the strongest case possible for his non-violent protests and the reasons behind these. He notes that the recognition of African-Americans as part of a sociological structure that is primarily equal among the races is not only sociologically viable and morally required, but also religiously sound. Indeed, he spends a large portion of his writing in providing religious grounds for his arguments. Considering his audience, this is perhaps Dr. King's strongest rhetorical device.

When more specifically regarding the author's consideration of opposing viewpoints, it becomes clear that he names the opposing argument followed by a response. One notable example of this is the claim that Dr. King and his followers are "outsiders coming in." To this, Dr. King replies that his presence in Birmingham is the result of an invitation from his peers. Since he was invited, his presence cannot be considered that of an outsider.

Another interesting example is the claim that Dr. King's protests, although peaceful, instigate violence. This claim solicits a rhetorically rich response; Dr. King begins a series of parallels by starting each sentence with the phrase "Isn't this…" by posing these as questions, the author solicits critical thinking. Again, this is a clever use of rhetoric to solicit a thoughtful response rather than direct opposition.

Furthermore the rhetoric here is rich in symbolism. Dr. King draws parallels between the response of violence to his peaceful protests and other great personalities whose commitment to justice, truth, and love also had unintended and unfortunate consequences. Personalities like Socrates and Jesus, for example, could not be expected to deny their truth for fear of public reaction. Dr. King makes this argument even stronger by also drawing the parallel between himself and the completely innocent person, whose possession of money resulted in the evil of theft. By drawing these parallels, Dr. King points out that an argument regarding the actions of others cannot be used to condemn those who protest peacefully. Dr. King and his followers are innocent of the crime of violence. Dr. King's argument is therefore that they cannot be held accountable for the violence committed by others, who are neither followers of his, nor affiliated with his cause.

Dr. King further substantiates his arguments by comparing himself to religious figures, and most notably to figures from the Christian religion, such as the Apostle Paul and Jesus Christ. These comparisons are particularly powerful, as they represent a symbolism with which the clergymen would be able to identify.

One example is Dr. King's use of the concept of extremism in comparing himself to Jesus. At first, he admits disappointment at the label of extremism, especially as this is a paradigm he had attempted to avoid throughout his protest action. However, he considers Christ's nature as an "extremist for love" and draws satisfaction from the comparison. He also uses other figures in this comparison, with the prophet Amos being an extremist for justice and Paul being an extremist for the Gospel. To make this comparison even more powerful for his intended audience, King uses texts from the Bible to substantiate these points.