Timothy Vu
1
Timothy Vu
Professor Gomez
English 1A
25 June 2010
Prompt 1 Draft
Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi had powerful impacts in history. King created a mark
in U.S history with his strength rising against segregation and Gandhi left his mark by stopping
an entire war. One thing they have in common; nonviolence. Both historic heroes are greatly
known for their nonviolent acts that changed history forever. In these stories and letters, we
begin to understand more in depth the similarities and minor differences between these heroes.
Although Martin Luther King Jr. was more extreme about nonviolence than Gandhi, King was
more extreme in his letters and words than Gandhi’s responses to people’s questions and
criticisms.
Gandhi was a great man, worldly known for stopping an entire war with his nonviolent
acts. The world may believe that Gandhi could be the most peaceful person to have lived, but his
nonviolent decisions were not as powerful as King’s. “It is any day better to use brute force than
to betray cowardice” (458), King would not accept this type of behavior. King believes that there
should not be any retaliation or anything involving violence at all in any situation. Gandhi’s
nonviolence only has a certain extent which is; when you are doing the right thing by being
nonviolent and when you are being a coward for not doing the right thing.
Timothy Vu
2
“So we decided to go through a process of self-purification. We started having workshops
on nonviolence and repeatedly asked ourselves the questions, Are you able to accept blows
without retaliating?” (474). King had a whole new level of nonviolence to where he would make
sure each person who would protest with him would not use any violence for any reason at
anytime. King did not have a boundary to where violence was acceptable, although his words
were extreme and powerful, King would never allow any harm be done whatsoever.
King and Gandhi had very similar ideas; nonviolence, peace, and equality (although
Gandhi had a wider scale than King). Something else they had in common was the disapproval
of being a coward. “The man who takes advantage of the killing is a coward. He can never
expect to know true nonviolence” (450), the understanding Gandhi would rather have one choose
to act upon violence rather than nonviolently being a coward. It looks as if it were a disgraceful
act to be cowardly in any situation.
King would agree with Gandhi that being a coward is worse than being a violent person,
“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 presence of justice” (478).
King isn’t directly pointing it out, but he has more respect towards the Ku Klux Klan rather than
the white moderate because at least the Klan is standing for what they believe in rather than
being idle on a historical event of this scale. Being cowardly is something that isn’t allowed to
the eyes of King and Gandhi, it shows negligence.
“Whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used
his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and fended me, I told him that I was his
duty to defend me even by using violence” (454), it is not that Gandhi believes that violence is
Timothy Vu
3
the first choice. Gandhi believes that violence should be the answer instead of choosing decision
of acting or being a coward. Gandhi constantly uses his son as an example of expressing his
negativity towards being a coward; “it would be a sign of cowardice if you ran way or did
nothing to protect me. If you could not protect me by taking danger upon yourself, you should
undoubtedly do so by attacking the other man” (458), Gandhi insists to his son that no matter
what. The son shouldn’t be afraid to defend his own father against danger, even if it will involve
retribution/violence.
Gandhi has an elegant way of being a writer/philosopher than King. Gandhi responds to
criticism politely and respectfully, as for King; he may seem to respond politely, but subliminally
attacks the white moderate and/or the churches. King responds to everyone’s criticism with; “I’m
afraid that it is much too long to take your precious time. I can assure you that it would have
been much shorter if I had been writing from a comfortable desk, but what else is there to do
when you are alone for days in the dull monotony of a narrow jail cell….” (485). It may seem
that he is simply apologizing for his extensive letters, but he is subliminally taking attacks
towards everyone. King is in jail for standing up for something that is outrages as for the white
moderates and church leaders stand idly doing absolutely nothing to help.
King’s cerebral messages are not Gandhi’s way of reacting to the judgment given to him.
Gandhi gives many philosophical answers that express a great deal of emotion yet not offending
any of the people, he believes in more to have a Satyagraha (“insistence on truth, and force
derivable from such insistence”) (447) rather than releasing angry assaults. “I have never killed a
snake before or after receiving that letter” (451), Gandhi reads poems that have messages given
to people and instead of responding to it with a powerful message. Gandhi takes it as an advice
and uses it as a part of his life.
Timothy Vu
4
Two of the most historical people known to nearly everyone in the world, written in the
history books. King and Gandhi showed that nonviolence could change problematic situations
rather than using violence to solve it. They both show very similar goals, but you can see they
both approach differently with their opinions on certain boundaries and also their way of
receiving criticism. Although Martin Luther King Jr. was more extreme about nonviolence than
Gandhi, King was more extreme in his letters and words than Gandhi’s responses to people’s
questions and criticisms.