Letter Presenting Argument or Civil Disobedience

 
Letter Presenting Argument or Civil Disobedience
Dear Mr Brown,
	I am writing this letter as a response to your questions on why I engaged in civil disobedience, instead of seeking negotiations. My people have been discriminated in different aspects of life such as employment, civil rights in courts, and attendance to the public facilities. The government has not been willing to negotiate for our rights, freedom and justice. As a result, I led demonstrations and civil disobedience across the nation, seeking to compel the government to change the laws that are oppressive to my people. Civil disobedience certainly is the conscious and on purpose disobeying of a law to move forward a moral principle or change government policy. I will relate my response to that of Martin Luther, "Letter from Birmingham Jail", which was a form of response to "A Call for Unity" which was done by the eight white clergymen. Martin Luther King Jr. did not usually respond to criticism against his work as he saw it as a form of destruction from his focus of doing constructive things (Martin Luther King Jr. Research and education institute par1). However, he decided to respond to Call for Unity, and the main reasons as to why he took his time to respond was due to the letters and unjust proposals from the clergymen that allowed him to present his rebuttal. I am writing this as a response, to inform you that the demonstrations I led were essential to the attainment of our freedom and justice. 
	I believe that the segregation of the black people and denial of the freedoms such as the freedom to vote is an act of gross injustice. According to Martin Luther King’s view point of civil rights, as presented in his “Letter from Birmingham City Jail”, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere (Martin Luther King Jr. Research and education institute par1). I would like to compare my view of civil disobedience by connecting it to the tale of Christians, who were enthusiastic to face hungry lions. The intent of this letter is civil disobedience, where I will develops the notion that the demonstrations I led were inevitable and essential.
	I have a feeling that social disobedience is a tool that the citizens can use to make the government change the oppressive laws. The leaders like Martin Luther King saw Civil Disobedience as a means to bring peace and put into practice their policies against the rebel government. As a result, he was involved in the leadership of demonstrations, which called for the black people to be accorded their rights and a pace in the society. His was a direct action and his critics asked why he could not have chosen negotiation as it was a peaceful path. Martin Luther King Jr., argued by saying that his path was meant to help people rise from dark depths of racism and prejudice to majestic heights of brotherhood, and understanding. The common argument made by King in his letter is that in order for Blacks to obtain their rights, they must exercise non-violent resistance (Dear 1). More specially, King claims that they must demand that they acquire their rights, and he utters that with time, the non-violent resistance will make conditions, which will compel whites to negotiate. In this argument, I recognizes the importance of negotiations as a peaceful means of solving problems. However, the years of slavery and discrimination had been emotional for the black people and my direct approach through demonstrations was a means of opening the negotiation doors.
	Martin Luther King is patently right, since if one practices civil disobedience and proves that they are dedicated to their cause then there voice will be heard. I believe that the oppressor could not freely give freedom; hence, he conducted the mass demonstrations against unjust laws and the segregation of the black people. The blacks have been segregated and denied access to public facilities, due to the color of their skin, which I have been against in all his demonstrations and campaigns. The term civil disobedience has been a success in the past as well, where Mahatma Gandhi developed the practice of peaceful civil disobedience, which in the end forced Great Britain to grant independence to India in 1947 (Dear 1). According to me, the “Ghandian” peaceful civil disobedience as an effective means of bringing about social change. I am willing to use this strategy to bring just as he believed that the law is meant to create justice in a country. However, if the law is oppressive to a certain group of people in such a way as denying them the right to vote, then it is oppressive.
	In conclusion, civil disobedience is at times justified and has been applied in different cases to attain freedom and equal rights for the people. The application of civil disobedience usually happen, when a government appears to be unjust to some of its residents. In a case like this, the citizens takes it upon themselves to simply reject obeying the law and ultimately start to distance themselves from their government in a variety of ways. Though in some cases, it might take time for those in power to accept and fulfill the demands of the citizens, civil disobedience has been an effective tool in pushing for a change of governments and laws.

Works Cited
Dear S.J., John. "King's 'Letter from Birmingham Jail' still challenges us | National Catholic 	Reporter." 	National Catholic Reporter | Home | National Catholic Reporter. The 	National Catholic Reporter 	Publishing Company, 11 Jan. 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2012.
Martin Luther King Jr. Research and education institute. "King Institute Resources." King 	Institute Home. N.p., 16 Apr. 1963. Web. 13 Dec. 2012. .