Similarities Between Martin Luther King Jr And Nietzsche

Instead of locking the concept of militarism to a government based subject, Martin Luther King Junior viewed all forms of violence as forms of militarism. Fortunately, this topic not only affects our community but also every other community in America. To help end Militarism in America, we can look to allocate more money into topics such as social uplift instead of building up arms and troops. The King always believed that instead of physical war, you must conduct a mental war, where love is always the winner. We can look to solve our problems through reconciliation with other countries minimizing casualties on both sides and building stronger foreign national bonds. By depending on forms of nonviolence, we move one step closer to the idea of a true Beloved Community. Now on to the final step of the

In this life, many hope for peace, but not many try to achieve it. According to Martin Luther King Jr’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, there are many ways to achieve this, but the best possible course of action would be through nonviolent direct action, which includes but is not limited to: peaceful protest, sit-ins and civil disobedience. In King’s letter, he proclaims his reasoning behind nonviolent direct action, including: the concept that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (par. 4), extremism can be used positively (par. 22), and the fact that “oppressed people will not stay oppressed forever” (par. 24). King uses literary devices including ethos, logos, and pathos to prove and reaffirm that which he is trying to convey.

This investigation will answer the question “To what extent did Martin Luther King’s and Malcolm X’s ideas converge during the last period of their lives?”. This is a significant question because it deals with two iconic figures of the Civil Rights Movement who have come to represent opposite approaches to emancipation. Thus, whether they had actually come closer in terms of their ideas may throw a whole different light on the way we tend to understand them.

In his essay “The Moral Equivalent of War”, William James discusses the presence of war and militarism in society. It argues that in order for military feelings to be abdicated, a substitute must be introduced. The author supports this central point through historical evidence and reasoning.

never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their adulthood and robbed of their

Martin Luther and Martin Luther King Jr. are incredible individuals in the history of the world. And both have contributed a significant amount of knowledge and influence that have changed the lives of many individuals, and even today is being studied and researched. These two great individuals have more in common than many people know, and that resides in their names respectively. Martin Luther King Jr.’s birth name was Michael and not Martin. His father Martin Sr. traveled to Germany and was inspired by Martin Luther and his philosophies and teachings. He was inspired so much that he adopted his moniker of “Martin Luther”.

Thesis: Actions, beliefs, and patience are characteristics that are comparable in both the lives of Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela.

In the 1950s and 1960s both Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr were very prominent and influential men. These men were both the voices of Black America at the time, but they had different messages to send. Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr had opposing philosophies on topics such as integration, religion, and defense tactics; however, they still shared some similarities.

As both understood the evil of oppression, King and Gandhi conveys that violence could not be used as the measure to achieve equality in their movements. Nonviolence was utilized by both King and Gandhi to bring focus to their oppressors evil actions and show the society that justice can be earned without violence. King used nonviolence as a weapon to stop racism, segregation, and injustice toward African American in the United States. King did a non-violent campaign in Birmingham, as King stated, "four basic steps: (1) collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive; (2) negotiation; (3) self-purification; and (4) direct action" (p.234). King believes, the tension created by direct action is the answer to receiving results. Negotiation is an ultimately more humane approach but allows less results. King concluded that direct action would create chaos that would open the door for negotiation. Similarly, Gandhi revealed a method of direct

To begin with, we must use nonviolence to achieve freedom based on the article "Letter from Birmingham Jail" King argued "my friend I must say to you that we have not me a civil right without determine a nonviolent pressure" this demonstrates that king wants to achieve freedom in a nonviolent manner. In addition King states "actually we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is

During the Civil rights era, there were two men’s names heard very often. Even though these two men were both leaders of the same cause, they had different opinions on what the African American community had to do in order to be treated equally. Malcom X and Martin Luther King Jr. were both great leaders with different philosophies.

Whether or not you agree with their views, both Friedrich Nietzsche and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. were great, highly influential men. Their views, though radically different, impacted the world in the greatest of ways, altering history for many nations. While Nietzsche, a German philosopher from the 1800s, spoke from a materialistic point of view, believing that there is no god and that all that exists is matter, King, a civil rights activist of the 1900s, spoke from the belief in transcendence, that there is indeed a god, and that he exists in a divine realm outside of this universe. But not only do these men differ in their backgrounds and religious beliefs, they differ radically in how they believe society should function. In Nietzsche’s writings, he promoted a system that emphasizes will to power. He believed that an aristocracy was the basis for a great society. King, on the other hand, promoted a system of equality and justice. He thought all men were created equal, and that society should reflect that belief. The writings of these men have come to be studied by people everywhere. They are so influential, in fact, that one of them played an incredible role in getting our society to the point that it is today.

War is a human endeavor. Humanity continually pursues solutions to counter evolving threats with the end of preserving power while also enabling peace. Civilizations resort to war to maintain their perception of this equilibrium. Defined threats and adversaries have changed throughout history, however, the essence of human nature and the base concept of conflict itself have not. Carl von Clausewitz’s theories on warfare capture the relationship between humanity and its application of war, remaining relevant in today’s era through their pensive explanations of timeless philosophical principles regarding the concept of war. These theories regarding war in politics, the key factors affecting war, and the extent that war is applied are inherently interconnected, providing insight on the relationships between humanity and its application of war.

Both Obama and King talk about war but they have different opinions on it and how it is used. King says “I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction.” This shows how he believes that humans don’t always have to end up killing each other. There has to be a stop to the ‘militaristic’ stairway. A ground level to the fire escape of a hotel.

Both advocates for truth, argued that non-violence is the best means to obtain what is searched for. Gandhi believed that in order to be able to change one's environment, then the first step to take is to change the individual. For example, if the individual is violent and his only means to fixing issues is through violence and terror, then the problem is still there, but now it is hidden temporary. On the other hand if the person is open-minded and willing to accept other views, then a compromise can occur. When people are finally accepted, then that is where people finally realize that they are all human beings and can live happily with each other through compromise. King's argument was that once the individual stops looking at issues of