1.2: Dr. Martin Luther King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail"

My Dear Fellow Clergymen,
While confined here in the Birmingham City Jail, I came across your recent statement calling our
present activities “unwise and untimely.” Seldom, if ever, do I pause to answer criticism of my work
and ideas … But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and your criticisms are sincerely
set forth, I would like to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable
terms.

I think I should give the reason for my being in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the
argument of “outsiders coming in.” I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern
Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every Southern state with
headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some 85 affiliate organizations all across the South …
Several months ago our local affiliate here in Birmingham invited us to be on call to engage in a
nonviolent direct action program if such were deemed necessary. We readily consented…
But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the prophets of the eighth
century B.C. left their villages and carried their “thus saith the Lord” far beyond the boundaries of
their home towns, and just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of
Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco-Roman world, so am I. compelled to carry the gospel of
freedom beyond my own home town. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call
for aid.

Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in
Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to
justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment
of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with
the narrow, provincial “outside agitator” idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never
be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds…

In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: 1) collection of the facts to determine
whether injustices are alive; 2) negotiation; 3) self-purification; and 4) direct action. We have gone
through all of these steps in Birmingham … Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly
segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of police brutality is known in every section of
the country. Its unjust treatment of Negroes in the courts is a notorious reality. There have been
more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any city in this
nation. These are the hard, brutal, and unbelievable facts. On the basis of these conditions Negro
leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the political leaders consistently refused to
engage in good faith negotiation.2

Then came the opportunity last September to talk with some of the leaders of the economic
community. In these negotiating sessions certain promises were made by the merchants—such as
the promise to remove the humiliating racial signs from the stores. On the basis of these promises
Reverend Shuttlesworth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights
agreed to call a moratorium on any type of demonstrations. As the weeks and months unfolded we
realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. The signs remained. As in so many
experiences in the past, we were confronted with blasted hopes, and the dark shadow of a deep
disappointment settled upon us. So we had no alternative except that of preparing for direct action,
whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of
the local and national community. We were not unmindful of the difficulties involved. So we
decided to go through the process of self-purification. We started having workshops on nonviolence
and repeatedly asked ourselves the questions, “are you able to accept the blows without
retaliating?” “Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail?” …

You may well ask, “Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches, etc.? Isn’t negotiation a better path?”
You are exactly right in your call for negotiation. Indeed, this is the purpose of direct action.
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. … Just as
S ocr ate s felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from
the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective
appraisal, we must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society
that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of
understanding and brotherhood. …

My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without legal and
nonviolent pressure. History is the long and tragic story of the fact that privileged groups seldom
give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and give up their unjust
posture; but as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups are more immoral than individuals.
We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it
must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly I have never yet engaged in a direct action movement
that was “well timed,” according to the timetable of those who have not suffered unduly from the
disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every
Negro with a piercing familiarity. This “wait” has almost always meant “never.” It has been a
tranquilizing Thalidomide, relieving the emotional stress for a moment, only to give birth to an ill-
formed infant of frustration. We must come to see with the distinguished jurist of yesterday that
“justice too long delayed is justice denied.” We have waited for more than 340 years for our
constitutional and God-given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed
toward the goal of political independence, and we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward the
gaining of a cup of coffee at a lunch counter.

Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say wait. But
when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and
brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, brutalize, and even kill your
black brothers and sisters with impunity; when you see the vast majority of your 20 million3
Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when
you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your
six-year-old daughter why she can’t go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised
on television, and see the tears welling up in her little eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed
to colored children, and see the depressing clouds of inferiority begin to form in her little mental
sky, and see her begin to distort her little personality by unconsciously developing a bitterness
toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five-year-old son who is asking in
agonizing pathos: “Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?” when you take a
cross country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of
your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by
nagging signs reading “white” men and “colored” when your first name becomes “nigger” and your
middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and when
your wife and mother are never given the respected title of “Mrs.” when you are harried by day and
haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tip-toe stance, never quite
knowing what to expect next, and plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are
forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodiness”—then you will understand why we find it
difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer
willing to be plunged into an abyss of injustice where they experience the bleakness of corroding
despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.

You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate
concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing
segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to
break laws. One may won ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?”
The answer lies in the fact that there fire two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the Brat to
advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws.
Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine
that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or
unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust
law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas
Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law
that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All
segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distort the soul and damages the personality. It
gives the segreg ator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority.
Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an “I-it”
relationship for an “I-thou” relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things.
Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally
wrong and awful…

I hope you are able to ace the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading
or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks
an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that4
an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and who willingly accepts the
penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in
reality expressing the highest respect for law.

Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in
the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground
that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were
willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to
certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because
Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a
massive act of civil disobedience.

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the
Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in
Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in German at the time, I would have aided and
comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles
dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s
antireligious laws.

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess
that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have
almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride
toward freedom is not the White citizens’ “Councilor” or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white
moderate who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the
absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says “I agree
with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direst action” who
paternistically feels that he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth
of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.” Shallow
understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from
people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. …
You spoke of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow
clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist. I started thinking about the
fact that I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of
complacency made up of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, have been so
completely drained of self-respect and a sense of “somebodiness” that they have adjusted to
segregation, and a few Negroes in the middle class who, because of a degree of academic and
economic security, and at points they profit from segregation, have unconsciously become
insensitive to the problems of the masses. The other force is one of bitterness and hatred and comes
perilously close to advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that
are springing up over the nation, the largest and best known being Elijah Muhammad’s Muslim
movement. This movement is nourished by the contemporary frustration over the continued
existence of racial discrimination. It is made up of people who have lost faith in America, who have
absolutely repudiated Christianity, and who have concluded that the white man in an incurable
“de5

The Negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations. He has to get them out. So let him
march sometime; let him have his prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; understand why he must have
sit-ins and freedom rides. If his repressed emotions do not come out in these nonviolent ways, they
will come out in ominous expressions of violence. This is not a threat; it is a fact of history. So I have
not said to my people, “Get rid of your discontent.” But I have tried to say that this normal and
healthy discontent can be channeled through the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. …
In spite of my shattered dreams of the past, I came to Birmingham with the hope that the white
religious leadership in the community would see the justice of our cause and, with deep moral
concern, serve as the channel through which our just grievances could get to the power structure. I
had hoped that each of you would understand. But again I have been disappointed.
I have heard numerous religious leaders of the South call upon their worshippers to comply with a
desegregation decision because it is the law, but I have longed to hear white ministers declare:
“Follow this decree because integration is morally right and the Negro is your brother.” In the midst
of blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro, I have watched white churchmen stand on the
sideline and merely mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. In the midst of a
mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, I have heard so many ministers
say, “Those are social issues with which the Gospel has no real concern,” and I have watched so
many churches commit themselves to a completely other-worldly religion which made a strange
distinction between body and soul, the sacred and the secular. …

I hope this letter finds you strong in the faith. I also hope that circumstances will soon make it
possible for me to meet each of you, not as an integrationist or a civil rights leader, but as a fellow
clergyman and a Christian brother. Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon
pass away and the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear-drenched communities
and in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our
great nation with all of their scintillating beauty.

Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood,

M. L. King, Jr.

Source: TeachingAmericanHistory.org a project of the Ashbrook Center at Ashland University
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/l...ham-city-jail/